Santarelli · Nutrition and cancer 2008 · narrative review · n=?

Processed meat and colorectal cancer: a review of epidemiologic and experimental evidence.

Cited 443 times in the scientific literature.

Level 5 - mechanism / opinion, no new human data

Narrative review synthesizing epidemiological and experimental mechanistic studies without systematic review methodology.

PubMed 18444144 · doi:10.1080/01635580701684872 · record verified 2026-08-29

What was done

This narrative review synthesized published epidemiological and experimental literature evaluating the relationship between processed meat consumption and colorectal cancer etiology. It examined risk estimates and evaluated four primary experimental hypotheses: high-fat promotion via insulin resistance or fecal bile acids, heterocyclic amines and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from high-temperature cooking, dietary and endogenous N-nitroso compound formation, and heme iron promotion of mucosal cell proliferation via lipoperoxidation or fecal water cytotoxicity.

What was found

Epidemiologic studies reported a 20% to 50% excess risk of colorectal cancer in the highest intake category of processed meat compared to non-eaters. The excess risk per gram of intake was reported to be clearly higher than that of fresh red meat. Experimental evidence suggested that nitrosation may increase the toxicity of heme iron in cured products.

Why it matters

Clarifying the specific carcinogenic mechanisms of processed meat may allow manufacturers to alter curing and processing methods to reduce cancer risk without requiring complete dietary avoidance.

Limits

As presented in the abstract, no systematic search criteria, meta-analytic pooling, or study count (n) are provided. Effect estimates lack confidence intervals. Furthermore, the mechanistic hypotheses rely largely on studies conducted on fresh red meat rather than processed meat specifically.

Cited by