Abstract Context The associations between the consumption of different types of meat and precancerous lesions of colorectal cancer (CRC) remain debatable. Objective We aimed to investigate the relationships between various kinds of meat consumption and the risk of precancerous lesions of CRC. Data Source The Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, and PubMed databases were used to screen observational articles published up to December 31, 2024. Data Extraction Two reviewers separately extracted data from the included articles using standardized data-extraction forms, and cross-checked with each other. First author, study design and location, publication year, population characteristics, measurement of meat intake, number of participants, type of meat, adjustments, outcomes, odds ratios (ORs) or relative risks (RRs), and 95% CIs were extracted. Data Analysis Pooled RRs and 95% CIs were obtained using random-effects models. Thirty-one observational studies were ultimately included. The results positively linked red meat intake to the risk of colorectal adenomas (RR: 1.13; 95% CI: 1.05, 1.21), colorectal polyps (1.73; 1.02, 2.94), and distal colon adenomas (1.19; 1.02, 1.40). Processed meat consumption was correlated with increased colorectal polyp risk (1.65; 1.05, 2.61) but not colorectal adenoma risk (1.14; 0.93, 1.41). Conversely, seafood intake had an inverse association with the risk of colorectal adenomas (0.74; 0.58, 0.94), with the exception of colorectal polyps (0.86; 0.62, 1.21). The same pattern was observed for white meat consumption (0.79; 0.63, 0.99). Pooled RRs and 95% CIs suggest that the intake of total meat, charred meat, and unprocessed red meat had no significant associations with precancerous lesions of CRC. Conclusion Current results indicated that consuming more processed and red meat was correlated with a higher risk of precancerous lesions of CRC, while seafood and white meat may protect against colorectal adenomas, although the possible influence of the subclasses of these meats could not be ruled out. Systematic Review Registration PROSPERO no. CRD42022301907.
Yang et al. (Thu,) studied this question.