SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article
Front. Nutr.
Sec. Clinical Nutrition
Volume 12 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fnut.2025.1668302
This article is part of the Research TopicAdvancing Inflammatory Bowel Disease Treatment through Nutritional InterventionsView all 7 articles
The impact of red meat and processed meat consumption on the risk of development and relapse of ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis
Provisionally accepted
Yangyang Zhang1Yitong Yu2Ziyun Jiang3Junhong Yu4Zeyang Zhang4Zhuojia An2Yanhong Du4
Yiqing Mao1
Lanshuo Hu1
Xu Dong Tang1*
Ying pan Zhao1*
Tangyou Mao2*- 1China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences Xiyuan Hospital, Beijing, China
- 2Dongfang Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China
- 3Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Peking University Health Science Center,, Beijing, China
- 4Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Background: Consumption of red and processed meats has been classified as probably carcinogenic and carcinogenic to humans, respectively. However, the association between their consumption and the incidence or recurrence of ulcerative colitis (UC) remains unclear. This study aims to systematically evaluate the dose-response relationship between red or processed meat consumption and UC. Methods: Databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang, SinoMed, Yiigle, and ICTRP were searched from inception through July 2024. Pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using random-effects or fixed-effects models based on heterogeneity. A dose-response meta-analysis was conducted using R 4.4.2. Results: Eighteen studies comprising 1,384,024 participants were included, all rated as moderate to high quality. Red meat consumption was significantly associated with an increased risk of UC development (RR=1.21, 95% CI [1.03, 1.42], P=0.020). Processed meat consumption showed a tendency toward increased UC risk, although not statistically significant (RR=1.54, 95% CI [0.99, 2.42], P=0.058). Neither red nor processed meat consumption was significantly associated with UC recurrence. Dose-response analysis indicated that each additional 100g/day of red meat intake increased UC incidence risk by 65% (RR=1.65, 95% CI [1.30, 2.09]). Conclusion: Based on very low-certainty evidence, increased red meat intake may be associated with a potential risk of developing UC. However, there is currently insufficient evidence to support an association between red or processed meat consumption and the recurrence of UC. Future studies with long-term follow-up and rigorous design are warranted to verify these findings and explore underlying mechanisms.
Keywords: red meat, Processed meat, ulcerative colitis, Systematic review, dose-response meta-analysis
Received: 17 Jul 2025; Accepted: 29 Aug 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Zhang, Yu, Jiang, Yu, Zhang, An, Du, Mao, Hu, Tang, Zhao and Mao. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence:
Xu Dong Tang, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences Xiyuan Hospital, Beijing, China
Ying pan Zhao, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences Xiyuan Hospital, Beijing, China
Tangyou Mao, Dongfang Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.