Evidence Hub

Association between red and processed meat consumption and colorectal cancer risk: a comprehensive meta-analysis of prospective studies

Z. Ungvari, M. Fekete, P. Varga, Andrea Lehoczki, G. Munkácsy, J. Fekete, G. Bianchini, Alberto Ocaña et al.

GeroScience, 2025

58 citations

Abstract

Increasing evidence suggests that red and processed meat consumption may elevate the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), yet the magnitude and consistency of this association remain debated. This meta-analysis aims to quantify the relationship between red and processed meat intake and the risk of CRC, colon cancer, and rectal cancer using the most comprehensive set of prospective studies to date. We conducted a comprehensive search in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Google Scholar databases from 1990 to November 2024, to identify relevant prospective studies examining red, processed, and total meat consumption in relation to colorectal, colon, and rectal cancer risk. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were extracted for each study and pooled using a random-effects model to account for variability among studies. Statistical evaluation was executed using the online platform MetaAnalysisOnline.com. A total of 60 prospective studies were included. Red meat consumption was associated with a significantly increased risk of colon cancer (HR = 1.22, 95% CI 1.15–1.30), colorectal cancer (HR = 1.15, 95% CI 1.10–1.21), and rectal cancer (HR = 1.22, 95% CI 1.07–1.39). Processed meat consumption showed similar associations with increased risk for colon cancer (HR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.07–1.20), colorectal cancer (HR = 1.21, 95% CI 1.14–1.28), and rectal cancer (HR = 1.17, 95% CI 1.05–1.30). Total meat consumption also correlated with an elevated risk of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free