SynthesisJournal of food science2026
Ultra-Processed Food Consumption and Cancer Risk: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.
Synthesis in Journal of food science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Evidence on the association between ultra-processed food (UPF) consumption and cancer risk is inconsistent, and systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) are fragmented across different cancer types and study populations. A comprehensive synthesis is needed to evaluate the robustness of the evidence. We therefore conducted an umbrella review (UR) of SRs and MAs to synthesize the available evidence on the association between UPF consumption and the risk of various cancers. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched from inception to January 15, 2026. Seven MAs and one SR were included. The methodological quality of the included reviews was assessed using AMSTAR 2, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE framework. UPF consumption may be associated with increased risks of overall cancer, colorectal cancer, breast cancer, and gastric cancer. Subgroup analyses indicated that age, region, dietary assessment methods, and study design may contribute to differences in the observed associations. According to the GRADE assessment, two associations were rated as low certainty, while eight were rated as very low certainty. The AMSTAR 2 assessment showed that three reviews were of low methodological quality and four were of very low quality. Overall, this umbrella review suggests that UPF consumption may be associated with an increased risk of several cancers, although the overall certainty of the evidence remains low. Further high-quality prospective studies using standardized methods to assess UPF consumption are needed to strengthen the evidence base and inform public health recommendations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.