Search

Background Emulsifiers are widely used food additives in industrially processed foods to improve texture and enhance shelf-life. Experimental research suggests deleterious effects of emulsifiers on the intestinal microbiota and the metabolome, leading to chronic inflammation and increasing susceptibility to carcinogenesis. However, human epidemiological evidence investigating their association with cancer is nonexistent. This study aimed to assess associations between food additive emulsifiers and cancer risk in a large population-based prospective cohort. Methods and findings This study included 92,000 adults of the French NutriNet-Santé cohort without prevalent cancer at enrolment (44.5 y [SD: 14.5], 78.8% female, 2009 to 2021). They were followed for an average of 6.7 years [SD: 2.2]. Food additive emulsifier intakes were estimated for participants who provided at least 3 repeated 24-h dietary records linked to comprehensive, brand-specific food composition databases on food additives. Multivariable Cox regressions were conducted to estimate associations between emulsifiers and cancer incidence. Overall, 2,604 incident cancer cases were diagnosed during follow-up (including 750 breast, 322 prostate, and 207 colorectal cancers). Higher intakes of mono- and diglycerides of fatty acids (FAs) (E471) were associated with higher risks of overall cancer (HR .sub.high vs. low category = 1.15; 95% CI [1.04, 1.27], p-trend = 0.01), breast cancer (HR = 1.24; 95% CI [1.03, 1.51], p-trend = 0.04), and prostate cancer (HR = 1.46; 95% CI [1.09, 1.97], p-trend = 0.02). In addition, associations with breast cancer risk were observed for higher intakes of total carrageenans (E407 and E407a) (HR = 1.32; 95% CI [1.09, 1.60], p-trend = 0.009) and carrageenan (E407) (HR = 1.28; 95% CI [1.06, 1.56], p-trend = 0.01). No association was detected between any of the emulsifiers and colorectal cancer risk. Several associations with other emulsifiers were observed but were not robust throughout sensitivity analyses. Main limitations include possible exposure measurement errors in emulsifiers intake and potential residual confounding linked to the observational design. Conclusions In this large prospective cohort, we observed associations between higher intakes of carrageenans and mono- and diglycerides of fatty acids with overall, breast and prostate cancer risk. These results need replication in other populations. They provide new epidemiological evidence on the role of emulsifiers in cancer risk. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03335644., Author(s): Laury Sellem 1,2, Bernard Srour 1,2,*, Guillaume Javaux 1, Eloi Chazelas 1,2, Benoit Chassaing 2,3, Emilie Viennois 4, Charlotte Debras 1,2, Nathalie Druesne-Pecollo 1,2, Younes Esseddik 1, Fabien Szabo [...]

Background Nitrites and nitrates occur naturally in water and soil and are commonly ingested from drinking water and dietary sources. They are also used as food additives, mainly in processed meats, to increase shelf life and to avoid bacterial growth. Experimental studies suggested both benefits and harmful effects of nitrites and nitrates exposure on type 2 diabetes (T2D) onset, but epidemiological and clinical data are lacking. We aimed to study these associations in a large population-based prospective cohort study, distinguishing foods and water-originated nitrites/nitrates from those from food additives. Methods and findings Overall, 104,168 adults from the French NutriNet-Santé cohort study (2009 to 2021, 79.1% female, mean age [SD] = 42.7 [14.5]) were included. Associations between self-reported exposure to nitrites and nitrates (evaluated using repeated 24-h dietary records, linked to a comprehensive food composition database and accounting for commercial names/brands details of industrial products) and risk of T2D were assessed using cause-specific multivariable Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for known risk factors (sociodemographic, anthropometric, lifestyle, medical history, and nutritional factors). During a median follow-up duration of 7.3 years (interquartile range: [3.2; 10.1] years), 969 incident T2D cases were ascertained. Total nitrites and foods and water-originated nitrites were both positively associated with a higher T2D risk (HR.sub.tertile 3 vs.1 = 1.27 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.54), P.sub.trend = 0.009 and 1.26 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.54), P.sub.trend = 0.02, respectively). Participants with higher exposure to additives-originated nitrites (i.e., above the sex-specific median) and specifically those having higher exposure to sodium nitrite (e250) had a higher T2D risk compared with those who were not exposed to additives-originated nitrites (HR .sub.higher consumers vs. non-consumers = 1.53 (95% CI 1.24 to 1.88), P.sub.trend < 0.001 and 1.54 (95% CI 1.26 to 1.90), P.sub.trend < 0.001, respectively). There was no evidence for an association between total, foods and water-originated, or additives-originated nitrates and T2D risk (all P.sub.trend = 0.7). No causal link can be established from this observational study. Main limitations include possible exposure measurement errors and the lack of validation versus specific nitrites/nitrates biomarkers; potential selection bias linked to the healthier behaviors of the cohort's participants compared to the general population; potential residual confounding linked to the observational design, as well as a self-reported, yet cross-checked, case ascertainment. Conclusions The findings of this large prospective cohort did not support any potential benefits for dietary nitrites and nitrates. They suggested that a higher exposure to both foods and water-originated and additives-originated nitrites was associated with higher T2D risk in the NutriNet-Santé cohort. This study provides a new piece of evidence in the context of current debates about updating regulations to limit the use of nitrites as food additives. The results need to be replicated in other populations. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03335644 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03335644), Author(s): Bernard Srour 1,2,*, Eloi Chazelas 1,2, Nathalie Druesne-Pecollo 1,2, Younes Esseddik 1, Fabien Szabo de Edelenyi 1, Cédric Agaësse 1, Alexandre De Sa 1, Rebecca Lutchia 1, Charlotte Debras [...]

Background The food industry uses artificial sweeteners in a wide range of foods and beverages as alternatives to added sugars, for which deleterious effects on several chronic diseases are now well established. The safety of these food additives is debated, with conflicting findings regarding their role in the aetiology of various diseases. In particular, their carcinogenicity has been suggested by several experimental studies, but robust epidemiological evidence is lacking. Thus, our objective was to investigate the associations between artificial sweetener intakes (total from all dietary sources, and most frequently consumed ones: aspartame [E951], acesulfame-K [E950], and sucralose [E955]) and cancer risk (overall and by site). Methods and findings Overall, 102,865 adults from the French population-based cohort NutriNet-Santé (2009-2021) were included (median follow-up time = 7.8 years). Dietary intakes and consumption of sweeteners were obtained by repeated 24-hour dietary records including brand names of industrial products. Associations between sweeteners and cancer incidence were assessed by Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for age, sex, education, physical activity, smoking, body mass index, height, weight gain during follow-up, diabetes, family history of cancer, number of 24-hour dietary records, and baseline intakes of energy, alcohol, sodium, saturated fatty acids, fibre, sugar, fruit and vegetables, whole-grain foods, and dairy products. Compared to non-consumers, higher consumers of total artificial sweeteners (i.e., above the median exposure in consumers) had higher risk of overall cancer (n = 3,358 cases, hazard ratio [HR] = 1.13 [95% CI 1.03 to 1.25], P-trend = 0.002). In particular, aspartame (HR = 1.15 [95% CI 1.03 to 1.28], P = 0.002) and acesulfame-K (HR = 1.13 [95% CI 1.01 to 1.26], P = 0.007) were associated with increased cancer risk. Higher risks were also observed for breast cancer (n = 979 cases, HR = 1.22 [95% CI 1.01 to 1.48], P = 0.036, for aspartame) and obesity-related cancers (n = 2,023 cases, HR = 1.13 [95% CI 1.00 to 1.28], P = 0.036, for total artificial sweeteners, and HR = 1.15 [95% CI 1.01 to 1.32], P = 0.026, for aspartame). Limitations of this study include potential selection bias, residual confounding, and reverse causality, though sensitivity analyses were performed to address these concerns. Conclusions In this large cohort study, artificial sweeteners (especially aspartame and acesulfame-K), which are used in many food and beverage brands worldwide, were associated with increased cancer risk. These findings provide important and novel insights for the ongoing re-evaluation of food additive sweeteners by the European Food Safety Authority and other health agencies globally. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03335644., Author(s): Charlotte Debras 1,2,*, Eloi Chazelas 1,2, Bernard Srour 1,2, Nathalie Druesne-Pecollo 1,2, Younes Esseddik 1, Fabien Szabo de Edelenyi 1, Cédric Agaësse 1, Alexandre De Sa 1, Rebecca Lutchia [...]

OBJECTIVE: To study the relationships between artificial sweeteners, accounting for all dietary sources (total and by type of artificial sweetener) and risk of type 2 diabetes (T2D), in a large-scale prospective cohort. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The analyses included 105,588 participants from the web-based NutriNet-Santé study (France, 2009–2022; mean age 42.5 ± 14.6 years, 79.2% women). Repeated 24-h dietary records, including brands and commercial names of industrial products, merged with qualitative and quantitative food additive composition data, enabled artificial sweetener intakes to be accurately assessed from all dietary sources. Associations between artificial sweeteners (total, aspartame, acesulfame potassium [K], and sucralose) and T2D were investigated using Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for potential confounders, including weight variation during follow-up. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 9.1 years (946,650 person-years, 972 incident T2D), compared with nonconsumers, higher consumers of artificial sweeteners (i.e., above the sex-specific medians of 16.4 mg/day in men and 18.5 mg/day in women) had higher risks of developing T2D (hazard ratio [HR] 1.69; 95% CI 1.45–1.97; P-trend <0.001). Positive associations were also observed for individual artificial sweeteners: aspartame (HR 1.63 [95% CI 1.38–1.93], P-trend <0.001), acesulfame-K (HR 1.70 [1.42–2.04], P-trend <0.001), and sucralose (HR 1.34 [1.07–1.69], P-trend = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: Potential for reverse causality cannot be eliminated; however, many sensitivity analyses were computed to limit this and other potential biases. These findings of positive associations between artificial sweetener intakes and increased T2D risk strengthen the evidence that these additives may not be safe sugar alternatives. This study provides important insights in the context of on-going reevaluation of artificial sweeteners by health authorities worldwide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: The deleterious effects of trans fatty acids (TFAs) on cardiovascular health are well established; however, their impact on type 2 diabetes remains poorly understood. In particular, little is known about the impact of specific TFA types on type 2 diabetes etiology. We aimed to explore the associations between different types of TFAs (total, ruminant, industry produced [iTFAs], and corresponding specific isomers) and risk of type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 105,551 participants age >18 years from the French NutriNet-Santé cohort (2009–2021) were included (mean baseline age 42.7 years; SD 14.6 years); 79.2% were women. Dietary intake data, including usual TFA intake, were collected using repeated 24-h dietary records (n = 5.7; SD 3.1). Associations between sex-specific quartile of dietary TFAs and diabetes risk were assessed using multivariable Cox models. RESULTS: Total TFA intake was associated with higher type 2 diabetes risk (hazard ratio [HR]quartile 4 vs. 1 1.38; 95% CI 1.11–1.73; Ptrend < 0.001; n = 969 incident cases). This association, specifically observed for iTFAs (HR 1.45; 95% CI 1.15–1.83; Ptrend < 0.001), was mainly driven by elaidic acid (HR 1.37; 95% CI 1.09–1.72; Ptrend < 0.001) and linolelaidic acid (HR 1.29; 95% CI 1.04–1.58; Ptrend = 0.07). In contrast, ruminant TFAs were not significantly associated with risk of type 2 diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: In this large prospective cohort, higher intakes of total and iTFAs were associated with increased type 2 diabetes risk. These findings support the World Health Organization's recommendation to eliminate iTFAs from the food supply worldwide. Consumers should be advised to limit the consumption of food products containing partially hydrogenated oils (main vector of iTFAs). This may contribute to lowering the substantial global burden of type 2 diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Evidence is accumulating that high dietary glycaemic index (GI) and glycaemic load (GL) are potential risk factors for several metabolic disorders (e.g. type-2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases), but remains limited concerning cancer risk. Although, mechanistic data suggest that consuming high-GI foods may contribute to carcinogenesis through elevated blood glucose levels, insulin resistance or obesity-related mechanisms. Our objective was to study the associations between dietary GI/GL and cancer.Methods: In total, 103 020 French adults (median age = 40.2 years) from the NutriNet-Santé cohort (2009-2020) with no cancer or diabetes at baseline were included (705 137 person-years, median follow-up time = 7.7 years). Repeated 24-h dietary records linked with a detailed food-composition table (>3500 food/beverage items). We computed the average dietary GI and GL at the individual level. Associations between GI, GL, contribution of low- and medium/high-GI foods to energy and carbohydrate intake and cancer risk (overall, breast, prostate and colorectal) were assessed using multivariable Cox proportional-hazard models.Results: Higher dietary GL was associated with higher overall cancer risk [n = 3131 cases, hazard ratios (HRs) for sex-specific quintile 5 vs 1 = 1.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.03-1.52; Ptrend = 0.008] and specifically postmenopausal breast cancer (n = 924, HRQ5vs.Q1 = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.06-2.55; Ptrend = 0.03). A higher contribution of low-GI food/beverages to energy intake was associated with lower cancer risk whereas a higher contribution of medium/high-GI items to energy intake was positively associated with higher risk of overall, breast and postmenopausal breast cancers (Ptrend ≤ 0.02).Conclusions: These results support a possible impact of GI/GL on cancer risk. If confirmed in other populations and settings, dietary GI/GL could be considered as modifiable risk factors for primary cancer prevention.Trial Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03335644. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]