Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract checked I-UPF-115 standard review
Artificial sweeteners and cancer: pooled studies
Can Artificial Sweeteners Increase the Risk of Cancer Incidence and Mortality: Evidence from Prospective Studies.
Overview
Yan S et al.. Nutrients 2022 · PMID 36145117 · DOI 10.3390/nu14183742
Across 25 studies, sweeteners were not linked to cancer overall; a small link appeared only in European studies.
Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate
Plain-language summary
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
To pool studies on sweeteners and cancer.
- How was the study done?
Meta-analysis of cohorts.
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
3.7 million people.
- What was actually found?
No overall cancer link; small European signal.
- How large was the observed effect?
Europe 1.07 (1.02-1.12).
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
The cancer link is uncertain.
- What are the study's limitations?
Observational; subgroups.
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Mixed for C-UPF-07.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Applicable.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Cannot prove harm or safety.
Scientific in-depth review
1. Full reference
- Authors
- Yan S et al.
- Journal
- Nutrients
- Year
- 2022
- Identifier
- PMID 36145117 DOI 10.3390/nu14183742 · PMC9506029
- Verification
- verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-26; Crossref works API 2026-10-26
- Retracted
- no
- Corrections
- none
- Extent checked
- abstract only
- Conflicts of interest and funding
COI statement in record: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
2. Research question
Are artificial sweeteners associated with cancer incidence and mortality?
3. Study design and population
- Study design
- Meta-analysis – Meta-analysis of prospective observational studies
- Population
Adults in cohort studies
- Country
Multinational
- Period
Search to July 2022
- Sample size
25 studies; 3,739,775 participants
- Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Prospective observational studies
4. Methods and endpoints
- Exposure / intervention
Artificial sweetener intake
- Comparator
Low/no intake
- Endpoints
Cancer incidence and mortality; all-cause mortality
- Statistical methods
Random-effects meta-analysis; Newcastle-Ottawa
5. Actual results
- Results
No apparent association with overall cancer incidence or mortality. Europe subgroup: cancer incidence HR/RR 1.07 (1.02-1.12; I2 25.8%). Aspartame and mixed sweetener subgroups significant. All-cause mortality HR/RR 1.13 (1.03-1.25; I2 79.7%), J-shaped.
- Absolute risks
not reported in abstract
- Authors' conclusion
Artificial sweeteners showed no apparent association with overall cancer; a European subgroup and mortality showed higher risk; more data needed.
6. Strengths
- Large pooled sample
7. Weaknesses
- Subgroup findings; high heterogeneity for mortality
- Observational
8. Risk of bias
- Orienting tool
- AMSTAR 2
- Type of assessment
- simplified assessment (abstract only)
- Full formal assessment
- no
- Overall risk of bias
- some concerns
- Rationale
Abstract only.
9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation
CIs log-symmetric (stats/C-UPF-07_sweeteners.py).
10. Relevance to the specific claim
Overall cancer null; contradicts the cancer part except in subgroups.
11. Independent contrary findings
NutriNet-Sante positive associations.
12. Transferability to Germany and Europe
European subgroup 1.07.
13. Overall methodological judgement
Mixed for cancer.
| Multidimensional assessment | |
|---|---|
| Authenticity of the source | verified |
| Methodological quality | moderate |
| Risk of bias | some concerns |
| Precision of results | moderate |
| Directness | direct |
| Reproducibility | partly replicated |
| Consistency with the overall evidence | inconsistent |
| Regional transferability | high |
| Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive) | not applicable |
14. Open questions
Reasons for European subgroup signal.
15. Linked fact checks
- Artificial sweeteners (aspartame, acesulfame-K, sucralose) are linked to higher cancer and cardiovascular risk. – Studies with mixed or unclear results