Lifestyle, wcrf/aicr recommendations, and esophageal adenocarcinoma risk: A systematic review of the literature

Daniele Nucci, Alessio Marino, Stefano Realdon, Mariateresa Nardi, Cristina Fatigoni, Vincenza Gianfredi

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review


One of the most notable changes in the epidemiology of esophageal cancer (EC) is the rising incidence and prevalence of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in developed countries. The aim of this systematic review was to collect and summarize all the available evidence regarding lifestyle, diet, and EAC risk. We searched the PubMed and Scopus databases in January 2021 for studies providing information about lifestyle, diet, WCRF/AICR recommendations, and EAC risk; published in English; without a time filter. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was used to assess risk of bias. The results are stratified by risk factor. A total of 106 publications were included. Half of the case-control studies were judged as high quality, whilst practically all cohort studies were judged as high quality. Body mass index and waist circumference were associated with increased EAC risk. Physical activity did not appear to have a significant direct role in EAC risk. A diet rich in fruit, vegetables, and whole grains appeared to be more protective than a Western diet. Alcohol does not seem to be related to EAC, whereas smokers, particularly heavy smokers, have an increased risk of EAC. Prevention remains the best option to avert EAC. Comprehensible and easy to follow recommendations should be provided to all subjects. Protocol ID number: CRD-42021228762, no funds received.

Original languageEnglish
Article number3525
Number of pages26
Issue number10
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2021


  • Cancer prevention
  • Esophageal adenocarcinoma
  • Esophageal cancer
  • Lifestyle

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Food Science
  • Nutrition and Dietetics


Dive into the research topics of 'Lifestyle, wcrf/aicr recommendations, and esophageal adenocarcinoma risk: A systematic review of the literature'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this