The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to synthesize the knowledge about the relation between intake of 12 major food groups and risk of type 2 diabetes (T2D). We conducted a systematic search in PubMed, Embase, Medline (Ovid), Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar for prospective studies investigating the association between whole grains, refined grains, vegetables, fruits, nuts, legumes, eggs, dairy, fish, red meat, processed meat, and sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB) on risk of T2D. Summary relative risks were estimated using a random effects model by contrasting categories, and for linear and non-linear dose–response relationships. Six out of the 12 food-groups showed a significant relation with risk of T2D, three of them a decrease of risk with increasing consumption (whole grains, fruits, and dairy), and three an increase of risk with increasing consumption (red meat, processed meat, and SSB) in the linear dose–response meta-analysis. There was evidence of a non-linear relationship between fruits, vegetables, processed meat, whole grains, and SSB and T2D risk. Optimal consumption of risk-decreasing foods resulted in a 42% reduction, and consumption of risk-increasing foods was associated with a threefold T2D risk, compared to non-consumption. The meta-evidence was graded “low” for legumes and nuts; “moderate” for refined grains, vegetables, fruit, eggs, dairy, and fish; and “high” for processed meat, red meat, whole grains, and SSB. Among the investigated food groups, selecting specific optimal intakes can lead to a considerable change in risk of T2D.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10654-017-0246-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

(2017): Food groups and risk of coronary heart disease, stroke and heart failure: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies, Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, DOI: 10.1080DOI: 10. /10408398.2017 Background: Despite growing evidence for food-based dietary patterns' potential to reduce cardiovascular disease risk, knowledge about the amounts of food associated with the greatest change in risk of specific cardiovascular outcomes and about the quality of meta-evidence is limited. Therefore, the aim of this metaanalysis was to synthesize the knowledge about the relation between intake of 12 major food groups (whole grains, refined grains, vegetables, fruits, nuts, legumes, eggs, dairy, fish, red meat, processed meat, and sugarsweetened beverages [SSB]) and the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke and heart failure (HF).Methods: We conducted a systematic search in PubMed and Embase up to March 2017 for prospective studies. Summary risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated using a random effects model for highest versus lowest intake categories, as well as for linear and non-linear relationships.Results: Overall, 123 reports were included in the meta-analyses. An inverse association was present for whole grains ( (1.02-1.34), RR HF : 1.12 (1.05-1.19)), and SSB consumption (RR CHD : 1.17 (1.11-1.23), RR stroke : 1.07 (1.02-1.12), RR HF : 1.08 (1.05-1.12)) in the linear dose-response meta-analysis. There were clear indications for nonlinear dose-response relationships between whole grains, fruits, nuts, dairy, and red meat and CHD.Conclusion: An optimal intake of whole grains, vegetables, fruits, nuts, legumes, dairy, fish, red and processed meat, eggs and SSB showed an important lower risk of CHD, stroke, and HF.

The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to gain further insight into the effects of adherence to Mediterranean Diet (MedD) on risk of overall cancer mortality, risk of different types of cancer, and cancer mortality and recurrence risk in cancer survivors. Literature search was performed using the electronic databases PubMed, and Scopus until 25 August 2017. We included randomized trials (RCTs), cohort (for specific tumors only incidence cases were used) studies, and case-control studies. Study-specific risk ratios, hazard ratios, and odds ratios (RR/HR/OR) were pooled using a random effects model. Observational studies (cohort and case-control studies), and intervention trials were meta-analyzed separately. The updated review process showed 27 studies that were not included in the previous meta-analysis (total number of studies evaluated: 83 studies). An overall population of 2,130,753 subjects was included in the present update. The highest adherence score to a MedD was inversely associated with a lower risk of cancer mortality (RRcohort: 0.86, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.91, I2 = 82%; n = 14 studies), colorectal cancer (RRobservational: 0.82, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.88, I2 = 73%; n = 11 studies), breast cancer (RRRCT: 0.43, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.88, n = 1 study) (RRobservational: 0.92, 95% CI 0.87 to 0.96, I2 = 22%, n = 16 studies), gastric cancer (RRobservational: 0.72, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.86, I2 = 55%; n = 4 studies), liver cancer (RRobservational: 0.58, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.73, I2 = 0%; n = 2 studies), head and neck cancer (RRobservational: 0.49, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.66, I2 = 87%; n = 7 studies), and prostate cancer (RRobservational: 0.96, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.00, I2 = 0%; n = 6 studies). Among cancer survivors, the association between the adherence to the highest MedD category and risk of cancer mortality, and cancer recurrence was not statistically significant. Pooled analyses of individual components of the MedD revealed that the protective effects appear to be most attributable to fruits, vegetables, and whole grains. The updated meta-analysis confirms an important inverse association between adherence to a MedD and cancer mortality and risk of several cancer types, especially colorectal cancer. These observed beneficial effects are mainly driven by higher intakes of fruits, vegetables, and whole grains. Moreover, we were able to report for the first time a small decrease in breast cancer risk (6%) by pooling seven cohort studies.

Suboptimal diet is one of the most important factors in preventing early death and disability worldwide. The aim of this meta-analysis was to synthesize the knowledge about the relation between intake of 12 major food groups, including whole grains, refined grains, vegetables, fruits, nuts, legumes, eggs, dairy, fish, red meat, processed meat, and sugar-sweetened beverages, with risk of all-cause mortality. We conducted a systematic search in PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar for prospective studies investigating the association between these 12 food groups and risk of all-cause mortality. Summary RRs and 95% CIs were estimated with the use of a random effects model for high-intake compared with low-intake categories, as well as for linear and nonlinear relations. Moreover, the risk reduction potential of foods was calculated by multiplying the RR by optimal intake values (serving category with the strongest association) for risk-reducing foods or risk-increasing foods, respectively. With increasing intake (for each daily serving) of whole grains (RR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.89, 0.95), vegetables (RR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.95, 0.98), fruits (RR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.92, 0.97), nuts (RR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.69, 0.84), and fish (RR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.88, 0.98), the risk of all-cause mortality decreased; higher intake of red meat (RR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.18) and processed meat (RR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.12, 1.36) was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality in a linear dose-response meta-analysis. A clear indication of nonlinearity was seen for the relations between vegetables, fruits, nuts, and dairy and all-cause mortality. Optimal consumption of risk-decreasing foods results in a 56% reduction of all-cause mortality, whereas consumption of risk-increasing foods is associated with a 2-fold increased risk of all-cause mortality. Selecting specific optimal intakes of the investigated food groups can lead to a considerable change in the risk of premature death.

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to summarize the evidence on the relationship between intake of 12 major food groups, including whole grains, refined grains, vegetables, fruit, nuts, legumes, eggs, dairy, fish, red meat, processed meat and sugar-sweetened beverages with risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). We conducted a systematic search in PubMed and Embase for prospective studies investigating the association between these 12 food groups and risk of CRC until April 2017. Summary risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated using a random effects model for high vs. low intake categories, as well as for linear and nonlinear relationships. An inverse association was observed for whole grains (RR : 0.95, 95% CI 0.93, 0.97; n = 9 studies), vegetables (RR : 0.97, 95% CI 0.96, 0.98; n = 15), fruit (RR : 0.97, 95% CI 0.95, 0.99; n = 16) and dairy (RR : 0.93, 95% CI 0.91, 0.94; n = 15), while a positive association for red meat (RR : 1.12, 95% CI 1.06, 1.19; n = 21) and processed meat (RR : 1.17, 95% CI 1.10, 1.23; n = 16), was seen in the linear dose-response meta-analysis. Some evidence for nonlinear relationships was observed between vegetables, fruit and dairy and risk of colorectal cancer. Findings of this meta-analysis showed that a diet characterized by high intake of whole grains, vegetables, fruit and dairy products and low amounts of red meat and processed meat was associated with lower risk of CRC.

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to summarize the evidence on the relation of the intakes of 12 major food groups, including whole grains, refined grains, vegetables, fruits, nuts, legumes, eggs, dairy, fish, red meat, processed meat, and sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) with the risk of hypertension. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched systematically until June 2017 for prospective studies having quantitatively investigated the above-mentioned foods. We conducted meta-analysis on the highest compared with the lowest intake categories and linear and nonlinear dose-response meta-analyses to analyze the association. Summary RRs and 95% CIs were estimated by using a random-effects model. Overall, 28 reports were included in the meta-analysis. An inverse association for the risk of hypertension was observed for 30 g whole grains/d (RR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.87, 0.98), 100 g fruits/d (RR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.96, 0.99), 28 g nuts/d (RR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.45, 1.08), and 200 g dairy/d (RR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.94, 0.97), whereas a positive association for 100 g red meat/d (RR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.02, 1.28), 50 g processed meat/d (RR: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.26), and 250 mL SSB/d (RR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.10) was seen in the linear dose-response meta-analysis. Indication for nonlinear relations of the intakes of whole grains, fruits, fish, and processed meats with the risk of hypertension was detected. In summary, this comprehensive dose-response meta-analysis of 28 reports identified optimal intakes of whole grains, fruits, nuts, legumes, dairy, red and processed meats, and SSBs related to the risk of hypertension. These findings need to be seen under the light of very-low to low quality of meta-evidence. However, the findings support the current dietary guidelines in the prevention of hypertension.

This meta-analysis summarizes the evidence of a prospective association between the intake of foods [whole grains, refined grains, vegetables, fruit, nuts, legumes, eggs, dairy, fish, red meat, processed meat, and sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs)] and risk of general overweight/obesity, abdominal obesity, and weight gain. PubMed and Web of Science were searched for prospective observational studies until August 2018. Summary RRs and 95% CIs were estimated from 43 reports for the highest compared with the lowest intake categories, as well as for linear and nonlinear relations focusing on each outcome separately: overweight/obesity, abdominal obesity, and weight gain. The quality of evidence was evaluated with use of the NutriGrade tool. In the dose-response meta-analysis, inverse associations were found for whole-grain (RRoverweight/obesity: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.89, 0.96), fruit (RRoverweight/obesity: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.86, 1.00; RRweight gain: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.86, 0.97), nut (RRabdominal obesity: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.31, 0.57), legume (RRoverweight/obesity: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.84, 0.93), and fish (RRabdominal obesity: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.71, 0.97) consumption and positive associations were found for refined grains (RRoverweight/obesity: 1.05; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.10), red meat (RRabdominal obesity: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.16; RRweight gain: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.26), and SSBs (RRoverweight/obesity: 1.05; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.11; RRabdominal obesity: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.20). The dose-response meta-analytical findings provided very low to low quality of evidence that certain food groups have an impact on different measurements of adiposity risk. To improve the quality of evidence, better-designed observational studies, inclusion of intervention trials, and use of novel statistical methods (e.g., substitution analyses or network meta-analyses) are needed.

Context: Evidence of an association between dietary patterns and individual foods and the risk of overall mortality among cancer survivors has not been reviewed systematically. Objective: The aim of this meta-analysis of cohort studies was to investigate the association between food intake and dietary patterns and overall mortality among cancer survivors. Data Sources: The PubMed and Embase databases were searched. Study Selection: A total of 117 studies enrolling 209 597 cancer survivors were included. Data Extraction: The following data were extracted: study location, types of outcome, population characteristics, dietary assessment method, risk estimates, and adjustment factors. Results: Higher intakes of vegetables and fish were inversely associated with overall mortality, and higher alcohol consumption was positively associated with overall mortality (RR, 1.08; 95%CI, 1.02–1.16). Adherence to the highest category of diet quality was inversely associated with overall mortality (RR, 0.78; 95%CI, 0.72–0.85; postdiagnosis RR, 0.79; 95%CI, 0.71–0.89), as was adherence to the highest category of a prudent/healthy dietary pattern (RR, 0.81; 95%CI, 0.67–0.98; postdiagnosis RR, 0.77; 95%CI, 0.60–0.99). The Western dietary pattern was associated with increased risk of overall mortality (RR, 1.46; 95%CI, 1.27–1.68; postdiagnosis RR, 1.51; 95%CI, 1.24–1.85). Conclusion: Adherence to a high-quality diet and a prudent/healthy dietary pattern is inversely associated with overall mortality among cancer survivors, whereas a Western dietary pattern is positively associated with overall mortality in this population.