Association of saturated fatty acids with cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Extensive research has explored the link between saturated fatty acids (SFAs) and cardiovascular diseases, alongside other biological dysfunctions. Yet, their association with cancer risk remains a topic of debate among scholars. The present study aimed to elucidate this association through a robust meta-analysis. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched systematically to identify relevant studies published until December 2023. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used as the primary metric for evaluating the quality of the included studies. Further, fixed- or random-effects models were adopted to determine the ORs and the associated confidence intervals using the Stata15.1 software. The subsequent subgroup analysis revealed the source of detection and the cancer types, accompanied by sensitivity analyses and publication bias evaluations. RESULTS: The meta-analysis incorporated 55 studies, comprising 38 case-control studies and 17 cohort studies. It revealed a significant positive correlation between elevated levels of total SFAs and the cancer risk (OR of 1.294; 95% CI: 1.182-1.416; P-value less than 0.001). Moreover, elevated levels of C14:0, C16:0, and C18:0 were implicated in the augmentation of the risk of cancer. However, no statistically significant correlation of the risk of cancer was observed with the elevated levels of C4:0, C6:0, C8:0, C10:0, C12:0, C15:0, C17:0, C20:0, C22:0, and C24:0. Subgroup analysis showed a significant relationship between excessive dietary SFA intake, elevated blood SFA levels, and heightened cancer risk. Increased total SFA levels correlated with higher risks of breast, prostate, and colorectal cancers, but not with lung, pancreatic, ovarian, or stomach cancers. CONCLUSION: High total SFA levels were correlated with an increased cancer risk, particularly affecting breast, prostate, and colorectal cancers. Higher levels of specific SFA subtypes (C14:0, C16:0, and C18:0) are also linked to an increased cancer risk. The findings of the present study would assist in providing dietary recommendations for cancer prevention, thereby contributing to the development of potential strategies for clinical trials in which diet-related interventions would be used in combination with immunotherapy to alter the levels of SFAs in patients and thereby improve the outcomes in cancer patients. Nonetheless, further high-quality studies are warranted to confirm these associations.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.021 | 0.045 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".