A review of nearly 2 million participants links higher red meat intake to pancreatic cancer risk, while the processed-meat result remains uncertain, according to a July 22 report.
A systematic review and meta-analysis published in Frontiers in Nutrition found that higher red meat consumption was associated with a modestly higher risk of pancreatic cancer. However, processed meat intake showed no statistically significant association. The analysis included 16 articles with a total of 1,959,527 participants and 8,856 pancreatic cancer cases.
Pancreatic cancer is described as an aggressive malignancy with poor prognosis. It accounts for approximately 3% of all cancer cases and is the sixth leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Reducing exposure to modifiable risk factors such as obesity, smoking, and dietary habits is considered important for prevention.
The researchers from Shenzhen University Medical School conducted their analysis by searching databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science for studies published up to April 13. Their findings indicated that the highest intake of red meat was linked to a 16% higher risk compared with the lowest intake. Each additional 100 grams per day was associated with a further 10% increase in risk. No statistically significant link was observed between processed meat consumption and pancreatic cancer.
The study noted that all included research was observational in nature; therefore, causation could not be established between red meat consumption and pancreatic cancer development. The authors cautioned that findings regarding processed meats should be interpreted carefully due to substantial variation across studies and low precision in pooled estimates.
Variation by geographic region may influence results due to differences in cooking practices or dietary patterns. While some regional diets include more fruits and vegetables, which may reduce risks, Western diets high in processed foods might contribute through chronic inflammation. Differences by sex were also examined but did not yield statistically significant results except for one subgroup based on limited data.
