4.7 Article

High glycemic index and glycemic load are associated with moderately increased cancer risk

Journal

MOLECULAR NUTRITION & FOOD RESEARCH
Volume 59, Issue 7, Pages 1384-1394

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mnfr.201400594

Keywords

Cancer; Diet; Glycemic index; Glycemic load; Risk

Funding

  1. Italian Foundation for Cancer Research (FIRC)
  2. Italian Ministry of Health, General Directorate of European and International Relations
  3. FIRC
  4. Fondazione Umberto Veronesi
  5. Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro Funding Source: Custom

Ask authors/readers for more resources

ScopeTo obtain an up-to-date quantification of the association between dietary glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) and the risk of cancer. Methods and resultsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies updated to January 2015. Summary relative risks (RRs) were derived using random effects models. Seventy-five reports were evaluated in the systematic review (147090 cases), and 72 were included in the meta-analyses by cancer site. Considering hormone-related cancers, summary RRs comparing the highest versus the lowest GI and GL intake were, respectively, 1.05 and 1.07 for breast, 1.13 and 1.17 for endometrial, 1.11 and 1.19 for ovarian, and 1.06 and 1.04 for prostate cancers. Considering digestive-tract cancers, summary RRs for GI and GL were, respectively, 1.46 and 1.25 for esophageal (squamous cell carcinoma), 1.17 and 1.10 for stomach, 1.16 (significant) and 1.10 for colorectal, 1.11 and 1.14 for liver, and 1.10 and 1.01 for pancreatic cancers. In most of these meta-analyses, significant heterogeneity among studies was observed. In subgroup analyses, case-control studies and studies from Europe tended to estimate higher RRs. ConclusionHigh-GI and high-GL diets are related to moderately increased risk of cancer at several common sites.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available