Dietary trans-fatty acid intake in relation to cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Apart from ruminant fat, trans-fatty acids are produced during the partial hydrogenation of vegetable oils, (eg, in the production of ultraprocessed foods). Harmful cardiovascular effects of trans-fatty acids are already proven, but the link with cancer risk has not yet been summarized. OBJECTIVE: A systematic review (following PRISMA guidelines) - including observational studies on the association of trans-fatty acid intake with any cancer risk - was conducted, with no limitations on population types. DATA SOURCES: The electronic databases PubMed and Embase were searched to identify relevant studies. DATA EXTRACTION: This systematic review included 46 articles. Quality was assessed via the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Meta-analyses were conducted if at least 4 articles exploring the same transfat-cancer pairings were found. DATA ANALYSIS: Nineteen cancer types have been researched in cohort and case-control studies on trans-fatty acids, with breast cancer (n = 17), prostate cancer (n = 11), and colorectal cancer (n = 9) as the most researched. The meta-analyses on total trans-fat showed a significant positive association for prostate cancer (odds ratio [OR] 1.49; 95%CI, 1.13-1.95) and colorectal cancer (OR 1.26; 95%CI, 1.08-1.46) but not for breast cancer (OR 1.12; 95%CI, 0.99-1.26), ovarian cancer (OR 1.10; 95%CI, 0.94-1.28), or non-Hodgkin lymphoma (OR 1.32; 95%CI, 0.99-1.76). Results were dependent on the fatty acid subtype, with even cancer-protective associations for some partially hydrogenated vegetable oils. Enhancing moderators in the positive transfat-cancer relation were gender (direction was cancer-site specific), European ancestry, menopause, older age, and overweight. CONCLUSION: Despite heterogeneity, higher risk of prostate and colorectal cancer by high consumption of trans-fatty acids was found. Future studies need methodological improvements (eg, using long-term follow-up cancer data and intake biomarkers). Owing to the lack of studies testing trans-fatty acid subtypes in standardized ways, it is not clear which subtypes (eg, ruminant sources) are more carcinogenic. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration no. CRD42018105899.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it