Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation

Search Page

MyNCBI Filters
Results by year

Table representation of search results timeline featuring number of search results per year.

Year Number of Results
1946 1
1948 1
1949 2
1959 3
1960 4
1961 4
1966 2
1967 5
1968 3
1969 10
1970 8
1971 6
1972 6
1973 18
1974 25
1975 21
1976 28
1977 22
1978 40
1979 39
1980 29
1981 30
1982 35
1983 36
1984 43
1985 42
1986 50
1987 41
1988 43
1989 44
1990 43
1991 49
1992 41
1993 43
1994 40
1995 28
1996 40
1997 72
1998 57
1999 62
2000 57
2001 65
2002 96
2003 87
2004 82
2005 95
2006 81
2007 117
2008 106
2009 135
2010 155
2011 178
2012 188
2013 207
2014 188
2015 202
2016 167
2017 158
2018 153
2019 87
2020 5
Text availability
Article attribute
Article type
Publication date

Search Results

3,454 results
Results by year
Filters applied: . Clear all
Page 1
Carcinogenicity of consumption of red meat and processed meat: A review of scientific news since the IARC decision.
Domingo JL and Nadal M. Food Chem Toxicol 2017 - Review. PMID 28450127
In October 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) issued a press release on the results of the evaluation of the carcinogenicity of red and processed meat. Based on the accumulated scientific literature, the consumption of red meat was classified as "probably carcinogenic to humans" and processed meat as "carcinogenic to humans". ...
In October 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) issued a press release on the results of the evaluation of the carci …
Health Risks Associated with Meat Consumption: A Review of Epidemiological Studies.
Battaglia Richi E, et al. Int J Vitam Nutr Res 2015 - Review. PMID 26780279 Free article.
The association has not always been noted with red meat, and it has been absent with white meat. There is evidence of several mechanisms for the observed adverse effects that might be involved, however, their individual role is not defined at present. It is concluded that recommendations for the consumption of unprocessed red meat and particularly of processed red meat should be more restrictive than existing recommendations. ...
The association has not always been noted with red meat, and it has been absent with white meat. There is evidence of several …
Mechanistic Evidence for Red Meat and Processed Meat Intake and Cancer Risk: A Follow-up on the International Agency for Research on Cancer Evaluation of 2015.
Turesky RJ. Chimia (Aarau) 2018 - Review. PMID 30376922 Free PMC article.
The Working Group of the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified the consumption of processed meat as carcinogenic to humans (Group 1), and classified red meat as probably carcinogenic to humans (Group 2A); consumption of both meat types is associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer. ...The high-temperature cooking of meat also produces carcinogenic heterocyclic aromatic amines (HAAs). The ingestion of heme from meat can catalyze the formation of NOCs and lipid peroxidation products (LPOs) in the digestive tract. ...
The Working Group of the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified the consumption of processed meat as carcinogenic to …
Red and processed meat consumption and gastric cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Zhao Z, et al. Oncotarget 2017 - Review. PMID 28430644 Free PMC article.
The summary relative risks of highest versus lowest consumption were positive for case-control studies with 1.67 (1.36-2.05) for red meat and 1.76 (1.51-2.05) for processed meat, but negative for cohort studies with 1.14 (0.97-1.34) for red meat and 1.23 (0.98-1.55) for processed meat. Subtype analyses of cohort studies suggested null results for gastric cardia adenocarcinoma (red meat, P = 0.79; processed meat, P = 0.89) and gastric non-cardiac adenocarcinoma (red meat, P = 0.12; processed meat, P = 0.12). ...
The summary relative risks of highest versus lowest consumption were positive for case-control studies with 1.67 (1.36-2.05) for red meat
Consumption of red and processed meat and breast cancer incidence: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies.
Farvid MS, et al. Int J Cancer 2018. PMID 30183083 Free article.
Prior studies on red and processed meat consumption with breast cancer risk have generated inconsistent results. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies to summarize the evidence regarding the relation of red meat and processed meat consumption with breast cancer incidence. We searched in MEDLINE and EMBASE databases through January 2018 for prospective studies that reported the association between red meat and processed meat consumption with incident breast cancer. ...
Prior studies on red and processed meat consumption with breast cancer risk have generated inconsistent results. We performed a syste …
Red and processed meat intake and cancer risk: Results from the prospective NutriNet-Santé cohort study.
Diallo A, et al. Int J Cancer 2018 - Clinical Trial. PMID 28913916 Free article.
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (WHO-IARC) classified red meat and processed meat as probably carcinogenic and carcinogenic for humans, respectively. ...No association was observed between red meat intake and prostate cancer risk. Processed meat intake was relatively low in this study (cut-offs for the 5th quintile = 46 g/d in men and 29 g/d in women) and was not associated with overall, breast or prostate cancer risk. ...
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (WHO-IARC) classified red meat and processed meat as probably carcinogenic and …
Processed meat: the real villain?
Rohrmann S and Linseisen J. Proc Nutr Soc 2016 - Review. PMID 26621069 Free article.
Processed meat is defined as products usually made of red meat that are cured, salted or smoked (e.g. ham or bacon) in order to improve the durability of the food and/or to improve colour and taste, and often contain a high amount of minced fatty tissue (e.g. sausages). ...A meta-analysis of nine cohort studies observed a higher mortality among high consumers of processed red meat (relative risk (RR) = 1·23; 95 % CI 1·17, 1·28, top v. bottom consumption category), but not unprocessed red meat (RR = 1·10; 95 % CI 0·98, 1·22). ...
Processed meat is defined as products usually made of red meat that are cured, salted or smoked (e.g. ham or bacon) in order t …
Red and processed meat consumption and mortality: dose-response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies.
Wang X, et al. Public Health Nutr 2016 - Review. PMID 26143683
The dose-response relationships were estimated using data from red and processed meat intake categories in each study. Random-effects models were used to calculate pooled relative risks and 95 % confidence intervals and to incorporate between-study variations. ...CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis indicates that higher consumption of total red meat and processed meat is associated with an increased risk of total, cardiovascular and cancer mortality....
The dose-response relationships were estimated using data from red and processed meat intake categories in each study. Random-effe
Red and processed meat consumption and risk of incident coronary heart disease, stroke, and diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Micha R, et al. Circulation 2010 - Review. PMID 20479151 Free PMC article.
Effects of meat intake on these different outcomes, as well as of red versus processed meat, may also vary. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of evidence for relationships of red (unprocessed), processed, and total meat consumption with incident CHD, stroke, and diabetes mellitus. ...These results highlight the need for better understanding of potential mechanisms of effects and for particular focus on processed meats for dietary and policy recommendations....
Effects of meat intake on these different outcomes, as well as of red versus processed meat, may also vary. METHODS AND
Effect of Red, Processed, and White Meat Consumption on the Risk of Gastric Cancer: An Overall and Dose⁻Response Meta-Analysis.
Kim SR, et al. Nutrients 2019 - Review. PMID 30979076 Free PMC article.
In a dose-response meta-analysis, the RRs of gastric cancer were 1.26 (95% CI: 1.11-1.42) for every 100 g/day increment in red meat consumption, 1.72 (95% CI: 1.36-2.18) for every 50 g/day increment in processed meat consumption, and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.64-1.15) for every 100 g/day increment in white meat consumption. The increase of white meat consumption may reduce the risk of gastric cancer, while red or processed meat may increase the risk of gastric cancer. ...
In a dose-response meta-analysis, the RRs of gastric cancer were 1.26 (95% CI: 1.11-1.42) for every 100 g/day increment in red meat c …
3,454 results
Jump to page
Feedback