ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: There remain inconclusive findings from previous observational epidemiological studies on whether consumption of artificially sweetened soft drinks (ASSD) increases the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) cancer. We investigated the associations between the consumption of ASSD and the risk of GI cancer using a meta-analysis. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. SETTING: PubMed and EMBASE were searched using keywords until May 2020 to identify observational epidemiological studies on the association between the consumption of ASSD and the risk of GI cancer. SUBJECTS: Twenty-one case-control studies and seventeen cohort studies with 12 397 cancer cases and 2 474 452 controls. RESULTS: In the random-effects meta-analysis of all the studies, consumption of ASSD was not significantly associated with the risk of overall GI cancer (OR/relative risk (RR), 1·02; 95 % CI, 0·92, 1·14). There was no significant association between the consumption of ASSD and the risk of overall GI cancer in the subgroup meta-analyses by study design (case-control studies: OR, 0·95; 95 % CI, 0·82, 1·11; cohort studies: RR, 1·14; 95 % CI, 0·97, 1·33). In the subgroup meta-analysis by type of cancer, consumption of ASSD was significantly associated with the increased risk of liver cancer (OR/RR, 1·28; 95 % CI, 1·03, 1·58). CONCLUSIONS: The current meta-analysis of observational epidemiological studies suggests that overall, there is no significant association between the consumption of ASSD and the risk of GI cancer.
Subject(s)
Gastrointestinal Neoplasms , Sweetening Agents , Carbonated Beverages/adverse effects , Cohort Studies , Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/chemically induced , Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/etiology , Humans , Observational Studies as Topic , Risk Factors , Sweetening Agents/adverse effectsABSTRACT
Background: Research into aetiologies and prevention of the commonest cancers and implementation of primary and secondary prevention can reduce cancer risk and improve quality of life. Moreover, monitoring the prevalence of cancer risk factors in a specific population helps guide cancer prevention and early detection efforts and national cancer control programming. Objective: This article aims to provide the scope and findings of cancer risk studies conducted in Uganda to guide researchers, health-care professionals, and policymakers. Methods: Between November 2019 to January 2020, we searched peer-reviewed published articles in Pubmed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library (Cochrane central register of controlled trials-CENTRAL). We followed the recommendation of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses - the PRISMA. The primary focus was to identify cancer risk and prevention studies conducted in Uganda and published in peer-reviewed journals from January 2000 and January 2020. We used key Boolean search terms with their associated database strings. Results: We identified 416 articles, screened 269 non-duplicate articles and obtained 77 full-text articles for review. Out of the 77 studies, we identified one (1%) randomized trial, two (2.5%) retrospective cohort studies and 14 (18%) case-control studies, 46 (60%) cross-sectional studies, five (6.4%) ecological studies, three panel studies (4%) and six (8%) qualitative studies. Cervical cancer was the most studied type of cancer in Uganda (23.4%, n = 18 studies), followed by lymphomas - both Hodgkin and Non-Hodgkin sub-types (20.7%), n = 16 studies) and breast cancer (15.6%, n = 12 studies). In lymphoma studies, Burkitt lymphoma was the most studied type of lymphoma (76%, n = 13 studies). The studies concentrated on specific cancer risk awareness, risk perceptions, attitudes, uptake of screening, uptake of human papillomavirus vaccination, the prevalence of some of the known cancer risk factors and obstacles to accessing screening services. Conclusion: The unmet need for comprehensive cancer risk and prevention studies is enormous in Uganda. Future studies need to comprehensively investigate the known and putative cancer risk factors and prioritize the application of the higher-hierarchy evidence-generating epidemiological studies to guide planning of the national cancer control program.
