Next Article in Journal
Dietary Salt Restriction Practices Contribute to Obesity Prevention in Middle-Aged and Older Japanese Adults
Previous Article in Journal
Egg Consumption: Trends Over 48 Years, Patterns Across the Lifespan, and Predictors of Intake
Previous Article in Special Issue
Study of the Association Between Diets Containing Nuts and Seeds and the Degree of Abdominal Aortic Calcification
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Nutrients
Volume 17
Issue 3
10.3390/nu17030534
nutrients-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Consumption of Red Versus White Wine and Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

by
Rachel K. Lim
1,
Jongeun Rhee
1,
Megan Hoang
1,
Abrar A. Qureshi
1,2 and
Eunyoung Cho
1,2,3,*
1
Department of Dermatology, The Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, 339 Eddy St, Providence, RI 02903, USA
2
Department of Epidemiology, Brown School of Public Health, Providence, RI 02903, USA
3
Channing Division of Network Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Nutrients 2025, 17(3), 534; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu17030534
Submission received: 1 January 2025 / Revised: 28 January 2025 / Accepted: 29 January 2025 / Published: 31 January 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Nutritional Epidemiology of Non-communicable Diseases—Feature Papers)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Background/Objectives: While alcoholic beverage consumption increases cancer risk, red wine has been touted as a healthier option. To address this unexplored question, we conducted a meta-analysis to summarize evidence from observational studies. Methods: A literature search of PubMed and EMBASE through December 2023 identified studies examining wine and cancer risk. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to estimate relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for an association between wine intake and overall cancer risk. Results: A total of 20 cohort and 22 case–control studies were included. Wine intake was not associated with overall cancer risk (n = 95,923) when comparing the highest vs. lowest levels of consumption, with no differences observed by wine type (red: summary RR = 0.98 [95% CI = 0.87, 1.10], white: 1.00 [0.91, 1.10]; Pdifference = 0.74). However, white wine intake was significantly associated with an increased risk of cancer among women (white: 1.26 [1.05, 1.52], red: 0.91 [95% CI: 0.72, 1.16], Pdifference = 0.03) and in analyses restricted to cohort studies (white: 1.12 [1.03, 1.22], red: 1.02 [95% CI: 0.96, 1.09], Pdifference = 0.02). For individual cancer sites, there was a significant difference in associations between red and white wine intake only in skin cancer risk [6 studies, white: 1.22 (1.14, 1.30), red: 1.02 (0.95, 1.09); Pdifference = 0.0003]. Conclusions: We found no differences in the association between red or white wine consumption and overall cancer risk, challenging the common belief that red wine is healthier than white wine. Our significant results related to white wine intake in subgroup analyses warrant further investigation.

1. Introduction

Alcoholic beverages have been classified as Group 1 carcinogens (i.e., carcinogenic to humans) by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) based on sufficient evidence in humans for cancers of the oral cavity, pharynx, larynx, esophagus, liver, colorectum, and female breast [1]. According to the IARC Global Cancer Observatory database, 741,300 cancer cases in 2020, which is 4.1% of total global cancer cases for that year, were attributed to alcohol consumption. Ethanol in alcohol metabolizes into acetaldehyde, which readily forms Schiff-base adducts with DNA and cellular proteins [2], resulting in point mutations and harmful DNA–protein and DNA–DNA crosslinks [3]. It has also been found that some alcoholic beverages contain significant levels of preexisting acetaldehyde [4,5]. Despite these findings, the consumption of wine in particular has been rising [6].
It is not clear whether cancer risk differs by consumption of different types of wine, in particular red versus white. Red wine has been considered a healthier option because it contains a higher number of antioxidants, including flavonoids and polymeric tannins, than white wine [7]. In fact, a recent Canadian survey showed that 41% of respondents felt uncertain about whether or not red wine reduced cancer risk, while 54% agreed that alcohol consumption increased cancer risk [8]. Numerous experimental studies found that resveratrol, a polyphenol stilbenoid in red wine, inhibits the proliferation of several different types of cancer cells [9,10,11,12,13,14,15]. Epidemiologic studies have primarily examined the relationship between overall alcohol intake and cancer risk [16,17]; however, studies that have separately analyzed red and white wine have reported inconsistent findings. Several studies have observed inverse or no associations between red wine intake and cancers of the breast, skin, prostate, ovaries, colon, and lungs [18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43], while other studies have shown increased risk of aforementioned cancers [19,37,39,44,45,46,47]. Similarly, white wine, which generally contains a lower amount of resveratrol than red wine (0–1.09 mg/L vs. red wine: 0.36–1.97 mg/L [48]), has been positively [29,32,33,35,36,41,44], inversely, or not [34,42] associated with cancers of the breast, skin, and prostate. A systematic review and meta-analysis summarized the relationship between wine consumption and cancer risk but did not evaluate red and white wine separately [49]. To our knowledge, there are few studies evaluating the difference in cancer risk by type of wine.
To address this research gap, especially given the vast and often contradictory literature on the carcinogenicity of red and white wine separately, we conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the association between red versus white wine consumption and the risk of all and site-specific cancers. We aimed to clarify the potentially differing carcinogenic effects of red and white wine and contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the role of wine type in cancer risk. Ultimately, this research may provide valuable insights to inform public health guidelines and individual lifestyle decisions regarding wine.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Search Strategy

A comprehensive search of PubMed and Embase was conducted for studies published up to December 2023 using the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms or keywords including cancer, tumor, carcinoma, malignant neoplasm, alcohol, wine, red wine, and white wine (Supplementary Table S1). Three independent reviewers (RL, JR, and MH) screened the titles, abstracts, and full texts based on pre-defined eligibility criteria. Any disagreements regarding study inclusion were discussed and resolved by the three investigators (RL, JR, and MH). Additionally, the reference lists of identified articles and relevant meta-analyses or reviews were examined to locate additional relevant studies. The Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines were adhered to in the design, execution, analysis, and reporting of this meta-analysis [50].

2.2. Study Selection and Data Extraction

We included prospective cohort and case–control studies that examined the association between red or white wine and cancer risk. We restricted our analysis to studies providing the type of wine (red or white, rather than wine as a whole) and relevant measures of association, relative risk (RR) or odds ratio (OR) estimates with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs), to perform a meta-analysis. Articles not published in English, literature reviews, abstracts, posters, case reports, and experimental studies were excluded (Figure 1). Studies with more than three categories of wine consumption, along with data on the case and non-case numbers, RR or OR estimates, and 95% CIs for each category, were eligible for inclusion in the dose–response analysis.
From each included study, we extracted the following details: author names, publication year, study design (cohort or case–control), type of wine (red or white), number of cases and non-cases, sample size, the most fully adjusted estimates of association and corresponding 95% CIs, study region, measurement of wine consumption (validated or not), measurement of outcomes (confirmed by medical record or not), and any adjustments for potential confounders (Table 1). For the dose–response meta-analysis, we collected category-specific doses of wine consumption (range, median) and the most adjusted RRs or ORs and their corresponding 95% CIs. The lowest wine intake category (nondrinkers) was used as the reference group. For each study, we assigned the midpoint of each wine intake category (range) as the corresponding RR or OR for that category. If the highest category was unbounded, we estimated the same range as the other categories for the highest category (e.g., if categories are <1, 1–3, or >3, we assumed 3–5 for the last category and assigned 4 as the midpoint). Wine intake measurements were all converted to grams of ethanol per day for dose–response analysis. The standard drink definition established by the government of the study’s country of origin was utilized to calculate conversions [51]. All extracted data were independently reviewed and cross-verified by the authors at least twice.

2.3. Statistical Analysis and Quality Assessment

A meta-analysis for highest versus lowest exposure levels was conducted. The summary RRs and 95% CIs were calculated by using a random-effects model. We performed subgroup analyses by type of wine (red, white) and cancer type for those having more than three studies (skin, colon/rectum, kidney/urinary tract, lung, ovary, female breast, and prostate). Then, meta-regression was used to assess whether the risks of cancer overall or site-specific cancers differ by type of wine (p-value for difference). We also conducted analyses restricted to cohort studies, which are less susceptible to recall or selection bias than case–control studies. A random-effects exposure–response meta-analysis was performed to examine a linear relationship between wine intake and cancer risk.
Potential publication bias was assessed through visual inspection of funnel plot asymmetry and by the p-value from Egger’s tests [64]. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the cancer risk, excluding studies that only had one type of wine intake (red or white) [18,43,46,47,61]. Additionally, the analysis was repeated after removing the most influential study with results that significantly deviated from the summary estimates. Between-study heterogeneity was evaluated using Cochran’s Q statistic and quantified with Higgins I2 statistic and associated 95% CI [65]. Sources of heterogeneity were investigated through meta-regression and subgroup analyses, considering variables such as study design (case–control or cohort), geographic region (US/Canada or other regions), sex, publication year (1990s, 2000s), exposure measurement assessment (validated or not), and the level of confounder adjustment [smoking and body mass index (BMI)] (Table 1).

3. Results

The searching scheme resulted in a total of 252 published articles, and we selected 42 articles (20 cohort [20,21,22,25,26,29,31,32,35,36,37,38,41,43,44,45,53,56,60,63] and 22 case–control studies [18,19,23,24,27,28,30,33,34,39,40,42,46,47,52,54,55,57,58,59,61,62]) to conduct a meta-analysis (Figure 1, Table 1). Of the 42 studies selected, 25 used validated methods of dietary assessment [18,20,21,22,25,26,27,28,29,30,32,34,35,36,37,38,40,41,43,44,45,53,59,60,63] (Table 1). A total of thirty-seven studies included measures of association for site-specific cancer incidence and consumption of both red and white wine, and five studies included data for red wine intake only [18,43,46,47,61]. We included cancers of the skin (number of studies = 6) [29,32,36,41,42,45], prostate (n = 6) [20,34,35,37,38,53], female breast (n = 5) [19,25,30,39,44], colon/rectum (n = 5) [24,28,31,43,59], ovary (n = 5) [23,26,27,52], lung (n = 4) [21,22,33,46], kidney/urinary track (n = 3) [18,56,57], pancreas (n = 2) [54,55], brain (n = 2) [62,63], lymphoma (n = 2) [60,61], stomach (n = 1) [58], and mouth/pharynx (n = 1) [46]. When a study presented effect estimates for multiple cancers (different sites or a subtype) or sex-specific estimates, we included all estimates and considered them as separate studies in our analyses.
The summary RR for the overall cancer risk, comparing the highest versus lowest level of wine intake, was 0.98 (95% CI = 0.87 to 1.10) for red wine and 1.00 (95% CI = 0.91 to 1.10) for white wine (Table 2). We observed no difference between red and white wine consumption on overall cancer risk (Pdifference = 0.74). After excluding five studies [18,43,46,47,61] that only included measurements of association for red wine, we still observed no difference in overall cancer risk between the two types of wine (Pdifference = 0.38). When restricted to cohort studies, the association with white wine intake became stronger and significant (RR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.22), while the null association remained for red wine intake (RR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.96, 1.09), and the difference became significant (Pdifference = 0.02).
The difference between red and white wine consumption on overall cancer risk was not significant in men (Pdifference = 0.37) but was significant in women (Pdifference = 0.03). The eligible studies for linear dose–response analyses were three cohort studies [22,25,38] and twelve case–control studies [18,19,23,25,30,34,39,47,52,54,57,58,59]. Based on these studies, we observed that every additional 10 g of estimated ethanol (e.g., about one glass) from red wine per day was associated with a 5% increase in overall cancer risk (summary RR = 1.05 [1.03, 1.08]); however, this association was null when restricted to cohort studies (1.01 [0.97, 1.04]) [21,24,37]. We found no significant dose–response relationship for white wine (RR = 1.02 [0.98, 1.05]), which was consistent when restricting to cohort studies (RR = 1.00 [0.96, 1.04]).
When we evaluated the association between wine intake and cancer risk by cancer site, we observed a significant difference in skin cancer risk associated with red versus white wine (Pdifference = 0.0003). White wine intake was associated with a 22% increased risk of skin cancer (RR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.14 to 1.30, Table 2, Figure 2), while red wine consumption was not associated with skin cancer (RR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.95 to 1.09). Studies of skin cancer were not eligible to assess the dose–response relationship. An increased risk of breast cancer was observed for both wine types (red: RR = 1.17, 95% CI = 0.97 to 1.42, white: 1.12, 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.20) with no significant difference (Pdifference = 0.61). Other than skin cancer, we did not observe a significant difference between the associations of red and white wine consumption and the risk of site-specific cancers.
The test of heterogeneity resulted in a moderate level of heterogeneity (I2 = 63.9%, Pheterogeneity < 0.0001) (Table 3). After excluding the most influential study [39], there was no change in directionality and significance of the summary RRs of high vs. low meta-analysis for overall cancer risk (red: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.86, 1.08; white: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.91, 1.10) and no significant difference between red and white wine (p = 0.63).
We observed possible publication bias through visual inspection of the funnel plot (Supplementary Figure S1) and Egger’s tests (p = 0.03). We used Duval and Tweedie’s trim and fill method [66] to estimate what the summary effect size would be if there was no publication bias. Briefly, this method omits small studies until the funnel plot is symmetrical (“trimming”), uses the trimmed plot to estimate the “true” center of the funnel plot, and then puts back the omitted studies, as well as their theoretical missing “counterparts”, around the new center (“filling”). We observed slightly increased summary RRs for both red and white wine on overall cancer risk after conducting trim and fill analysis (red: 1.00, 95% CI 0.91, 1.09; white: 1.13, 95% CI 1.03, 1.24) (Supplementary Figure S2).

4. Discussion

We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the association between red or white wine consumption and cancer risk. Although red wine has been considered healthier compared to white wine [67,68,69,70], there was no difference in cancer risk between the consumption of the two types of wine. When we restricted analysis to cohort studies, we observed a significant increase in overall cancer risk with white wine consumption. White wine intake was significantly associated with an increased risk of skin cancer compared to red wine intake.
A recent UK cohort study evaluating alcohol consumption patterns and health outcomes found no significant increase in the overall cancer risk and alcohol-related cancer (colon, rectum, breast, liver, esophagus, and larynx) incidence with white wine consumption compared to that of red wine, which is in line with our findings [71]. Red wine contains resveratrol, a natural stilbene and a non-flavonoid polyphenol, that possesses antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, cardioprotective, and anti-cancer properties [72]. Resveratrol has been investigated extensively as a potential chemopreventive agent because it has been shown to inhibit the proliferation of cancer cells in the breast, colon/rectum, skin, stomach, and kidney [9,10,11,12,13,14]. Many in vitro studies found that resveratrol influences tumor initiation and cancer progression pathways; however, in vivo studies have yielded mixed results [73]. For example, resveratrol can promote cell-cycle arrest leading to apoptosis of tumor cells, prevent tumor-derived nitric oxide synthase expression to block tumor growth and migration, as well as act as an antioxidant to prevent DNA damage that can lead to tumor formation [73]. Wu et al. [74] found that resveratrol is more toxic to cancer cell lines than to normal cell lines by comparing the activity of both types of cells following treatment with resveratrol. Additionally, it has been observed that combination therapy of resveratrol and other cancer drugs kills breast cancer cells more dramatically than either treatment in isolation [75]. Although there is some evidence of an anticarcinogenic effect of resveratrol in experimental studies, we did not observe that red wine consumption is associated with a reduced risk of cancer in our meta-analysis. In addition, there was no difference in the association between red vs. white wine and cancer risk, except for skin cancer.
A potential reason why we did not observe a difference in cancer risk between red and white wine may be that resveratrol has a fast metabolism [76]. Although concentrations of resveratrol are greater in red compared to white wine [48,77], studies have demonstrated that resveratrol is metabolized quickly, with nearly 75% excreted via feces and urine [76]. Several clinical studies have shown that the peak levels of resveratrol in plasma were low, given its extensive metabolism and poor bioavailability, after single or repeated oral administration [78]. A study involving 15 healthy participants who were given a single dose of 500 mg resveratrol observed a peak plasma concentration of 71.2 ng/mL [79]. Another study of 40 healthy subjects who received daily oral resveratrol of 500–5000 mg/day for 29 days reported a peak plasma concentration ranging from 44 to 967 ng/mL between days 21 and 28 [80]. Daily consumption of two glasses of red wine (375 mL) is equivalent to a dose of ~27 µg/kg body weight of resveratrol for a 70 kg individual, which leads to detectable concentrations of derivatives but not free resveratrol [81]. These low levels of resveratrol after consuming red wine may not result in bio-effective concentrations that may eventually make differences in health outcomes compared to white wine consumption.
We observed that white wine was associated with an increased risk of skin cancer. It has been hypothesized that alcohol consumption can promote skin carcinogenicity through the intermediate byproducts or metabolites of alcohol, such as acetaldehyde and reactive oxygen species, that have photosensitizing effects [82]. Also, drinking wine may be more common among whites who are more susceptible to skin cancer than other racial groups [68,83]. However, it may not explain why white wine specifically was associated with skin cancer risk. In addition, heavy wine consumption may be related to high-risk behaviors such as sunburn, indoor tanning, and lack of use of sun protection [84]. In fact, earlier studies have demonstrated an association between alcohol consumption and increased prevalence of severe sunburn [82,85]. Given that all six studies properly adjusted for detailed information on the risk factors of skin cancer, e.g., skin type, sun exposure, and sun protection habits, a positive association we found in the meta-analysis was most likely the true detrimental effect of white wine [29,32,36,41,42,45]. The sample size for skin cancer was the largest among individual cancer sites and potentially provided enough statistical power to detect the difference. Wine intake (both red and white) was associated with increased breast cancer risk, which may suggest that resveratrol is not a significant factor in breast carcinogenesis.
There are limitations to this meta-analysis. First, wine intake was obtained from a self-reported food frequency questionnaire (FFQ). While most of the included cohort studies used validated FFQs (18 out of 19), only six out of twenty-two case–control studies used validated FFQs. However, because the intake information on red and white wine was collected in each study, the misclassification would similarly affect the intake assessment of both wines. Nevertheless, the misclassification of exposure might have occurred randomly regardless of cancer status, which may attenuate our findings. In addition, exposure validation was not a source of heterogeneity in our summary estimates for both red and white wine. Additionally, case–control studies may be more susceptible than cohort studies to recall bias when evaluating wine intake; however, we also presented results restricted to cohort studies. For some cancer sites including the pancreas, lymphatic system, brain, mouth, and pharynx, there was a limited number of studies (<3) to explore the risk difference between red and white wine. In addition, our dose–response analyses were limited to a smaller number of studies, largely case–control studies. Potential regression dilution bias in the included cohort studies might have also played a role in underestimating summary risk estimates [86].
However, we added an important finding to the controversial conversation about whether red wine intake reduces cancer risk. The quality of outcome measurements in all included studies was reliable (from a cancer registry or confirmed by medical professionals). Although we found evidence of potential publication bias, we found similar summary estimates after conducting trim and fill analysis.

5. Conclusions

To our knowledge, we conducted the first meta-analysis and the largest investigation of red versus white wine consumption and cancer risk and found no difference between the two types of wine. However, we observed that white wine had a significantly stronger association with cancer when the analysis was restricted to cohort studies. Furthermore, white wine intake, but not red wine intake, was associated with an increased risk of skin cancer. Our findings provided a critical public health message that drinking red wine may not be any better than drinking white wine in terms of cancer risk.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/nu17030534/s1, Table S1: Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms and title/abstract (tiab) keywords in PubMed and Embase search strategy through December 2023; Figure S1: Funnel plot of meta-analysis on wine intake (highest vs. lowest) and risk of all cancer (A) All wine (p = 0.03) (B) Red wine (p = 0.04) (C) White wine (p = 0.04); Figure S2: Funnel plot of meta-analysis on wine intake (highest vs. lowest) and risk of all cancer after conducting trim-and-fill analysis.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.K.L., J.R. and E.C.; methodology, R.K.L., M.H. and E.C.; validation, R.K.L. and M.H.; formal analysis, J.R.; investigation, E.C.; resources, R.K.L. and M.H.; writing—original draft preparation, R.K.L. and J.R.; writing—review and editing, M.H., A.A.Q. and E.C.; visualization, R.K.L., J.R. and M.H.; supervision, E.C.; project administration, R.K.L. and M.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available upon email request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. Alcohol consumption and ethyl carbamate. IARC Monogr. Eval. Carcinog. Risks Hum. 2010, 96, 1383. [Google Scholar]
  2. Seitz, H.K.; Mueller, S. Alcohol and cancer: An overview with special emphasis on the role of acetaldehyde and cytochrome P450 2E1. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 2015, 815, 59–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Brooks, P.J.; Theruvathu, J.A. DNA adducts from acetaldehyde: Implications for alcohol-related carcinogenesis. Alcohol 2005, 35, 187–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Lachenmeier, D.W.; Kanteres, F.; Rehm, J. Carcinogenicity of acetaldehyde in alcoholic beverages: Risk assessment outside ethanol metabolism. Addiction 2009, 104, 533–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Lachenmeier, D.W.; Sohnius, E.M. The role of acetaldehyde outside ethanol metabolism in the carcinogenicity of alcoholic beverages: Evidence from a large chemical survey. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2008, 46, 2903–2911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Lakins, N.E.; Williams, G.D.; Yi, H.-Y.; Smothers, B.A. Apparent Per Capita Alcohol Consumption: National, State, and Regional Trends, 1977–2002; National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Division of Epidemiology and Prevention Research: Bethesda, MA, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  7. Wright, C.A.; Bruhn, C.M.; Heymann, H.; Bamforth, C.W. Beer and wine consumers’ perceptions of the nutritional value of alcoholic and nonalcoholic beverages. J. Food Sci. 2008, 73, H8–H11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Rydz, E.; Telfer, J.; Quinn, E.K.; Fazel, S.S.; Holmes, E.; Pennycook, G.; Peters, C.E. Canadians’ knowledge of cancer risk factors and belief in cancer myths. BMC Public Health. 2024, 24, 329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Dai, H.; Deng, H.B.; Wang, Y.H.; Guo, J.J. Resveratrol inhibits the growth of gastric cancer via the Wnt/beta-catenin pathway. Oncol. Lett. 2018, 16, 1579–1583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Sawata, Y.; Matsukawa, T.; Doi, S.; Tsunoda, T.; Arikawa, N.; Matsunaga, N.; Ohnuki, K.; Shirasawa, S.; Kotake, Y. A novel compound, ferulic acid-bound resveratrol, induces the tumor suppressor gene p15 and inhibits the three-dimensional proliferation of colorectal cancer cells. Mol. Cell. Biochem. 2019, 462, 25–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Garvin, S.; Ollinger, K.; Dabrosin, C. Resveratrol induces apoptosis and inhibits angiogenesis in human breast cancer xenografts in vivo. Cancer Lett. 2006, 231, 113–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Lu, R.; Serrero, G. Resveratrol, a natural product derived from grape, exhibits antiestrogenic activity and inhibits the growth of human breast cancer cells. J. Cell. Physiol. 1999, 179, 297–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Yang, H.Z.; Zhang, J.; Zeng, J.; Liu, S.; Zhou, F.; Zhang, F.; Giampieri, F.; Cianciosi, D.; Forbes-Hernandez, T.Y.; Ansary, J.; et al. Resveratrol inhibits the proliferation of melanoma cells by modulating cell cycle. Int. J. Food Sci. Nutr. 2019, 71, 84–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Zhao, Y.; Tang, H.; Zeng, X.; Ye, D.; Liu, J. Resveratrol inhibits proliferation, migration and invasion via Akt and ERK1/2 signaling pathways in renal cell carcinoma cells. Biomed. Pharmacother. 2018, 98, 36–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Suo, H.; Tian, R.; Li, J.; Zhang, S.; Cui, Y.; Li, L.; Sun, B. Compositional characterization study on high-molecular-mass polymeric polyphenols in red wines by chemical degradation. Food Res. Int. 2019, 123, 440–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Boffetta, P.; Hashibe, M. Alcohol and cancer. Lancet. Oncol. 2006, 7, 149–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Bagnardi, V.; Rota, M.; Botteri, E.; Tramacere, I.; Islami, F.; Fedirko, V.; Scotti, L.; Jenab, M.; Turati, F.; Pasquali, E.; et al. Alcohol consumption and site-specific cancer risk: A comprehensive dose-response meta-analysis. Br. J. Cancer 2015, 112, 580–593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Andreatta, M.M.; Navarro, A.; Munoz, S.E.; Aballay, L.; Eynard, A.R. Dietary patterns and food groups are linked to the risk of urinary tract tumors in Argentina. Eur. J. Cancer Prev. 2010, 19, 478–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Baglia, M.L.; Malone, K.E.; Tang, M.C.; Li, C.I. Alcohol Intake and Risk of Breast Cancer by Histologic Subtype and Estrogen Receptor Status among Women Aged 55 to 74 Years. Horm. Cancer 2017, 8, 211–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Chao, C.; Haque, R.; Van Den Eeden, S.K.; Caan, B.J.; Poon, K.Y.; Quinn, V.P. Red wine consumption and risk of prostate cancer: The California men’s health study. Int. J. Cancer 2010, 126, 171–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Chao, C.; Li, Q.; Zhang, F.; White, E. Alcohol consumption and risk of lung cancer in the VITamins and Lifestyle Study. Nutr. Cancer 2011, 63, 880–888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Chao, C.; Slezak, J.M.; Caan, B.J.; Quinn, V.P. Alcoholic beverage intake and risk of lung cancer: The California Men’s Health Study. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 2008, 17, 2692–2699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Cook, L.S.; Leung, A.C.; Swenerton, K.; Gallagher, R.P.; Magliocco, A.; Steed, H.; Koebel, M.; Nation, J.; Eshragh, S.; Brooks-Wilson, A.; et al. Adult lifetime alcohol consumption and invasive epithelial ovarian cancer risk in a population-based case-control study. Gynecol. Oncol. 2016, 140, 277–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Grosso, G.; Biondi, A.; Galvano, F.; Mistretta, A.; Marventano, S.; Buscemi, S.; Drago, F.; Basile, F. Factors associated with colorectal cancer in the context of the Mediterranean diet: A case-control study. Nutr. Cancer 2014, 66, 558–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Hirvonen, T.; Mennen, L.I.; De Bree, A.; Castetbon, K.; Galan, P.; Bertrais, S.; Arnault, N.; Hercberg, S. Consumption of antioxidant-rich beverages and risk for breast cancer in French women. Ann. Epidemiol. 2006, 16, 503–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Kelemen, L.E.; Sellers, T.A.; Vierkant, R.A.; Harnack, L.; Cerhan, J.R. Association of folate and alcohol with risk of ovarian cancer in a prospective study of postmenopausal women. Cancer Causes Control 2004, 15, 1085–1093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Kelemen, L.E.; Bandera, E.V.; Terry, K.L.; Rossing, M.A.; Brinton, L.A.; Doherty, J.A.; Ness, R.B.; Kjaer, S.K.; Chang-Claude, J.; Köbel, M.; et al. Recent alcohol consumption and risk of incident ovarian carcinoma: A pooled analysis of 5342 cases and 10,358 controls from the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium. BMC Cancer 2013, 13, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Kontou, N.; Psaltopoulou, T.; Soupos, N.; Polychronopoulos, E.; Xinopoulos, D.; Linos, A.; Panagiotakos, D. Alcohol consumption and colorectal cancer in a Mediterranean population: A case-control study. Dis. Colon. Rectum. 2012, 55, 703–710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Kubo, J.T.; Henderson, M.T.; Desai, M.; Wactawski-Wende, J.; Stefanick, M.L.; Tang, J.Y. Alcohol consumption and risk of melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer in the Women’s Health Initiative. Cancer Causes Control 2014, 25, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Newcomb, P.A.; Nichols, H.B.; Beasley, J.M.; Egan, K.; Titus-Ernstoff, L.; Hampton, J.M.; Trentham-Dietz, A. No difference between red wine or white wine consumption and breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 2009, 18, 1007–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Phipps, A.I.; Shi, Q.; Limburg, P.J.; Nelson, G.D.; Sargent, D.J.; Sinicrope, F.A.; Chan, E.; Gill, S.; Goldberg, R.M.; Kahlenberg, M.; et al. Alcohol consumption and colon cancer prognosis among participants in north central cancer treatment group phase III trial N0147. Int. J. Cancer 2016, 139, 986–995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Rivera, A.; Nan, H.; Li, T.; Qureshi, A.; Cho, E. Alcohol Intake and Risk of Incident Melanoma: A Pooled Analysis of Three Prospective Studies in the United States. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 2016, 25, 1550–1558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Ruano-Ravina, A.; Figueiras, A.; Barros-Dios, J.M. Type of wine and risk of lung cancer: A case-control study in Spain. Thorax 2004, 59, 981–985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Schoonen, W.M.; Salinas, C.A.; Kiemeney, L.A.; Stanford, J.L. Alcohol consumption and risk of prostate cancer in middle-aged men. Int. J. Cancer 2005, 113, 133–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Schuurman, A.G.; Goldbohm, R.A.; van den Brandt, P.A. A prospective cohort study on consumption of alcoholic beverages in relation to prostate cancer incidence (The Netherlands). Cancer Causes Control. 1999, 10, 597–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Siiskonen, S.; Han, J.; Li, T.; Cho, E.; Nijsten, T.; Qureshi, A. Alcohol Intake is Associated with Increased Risk of Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Skin: Three US Prospective Cohort Studies. Nutr. Cancer 2016, 68, 545–553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Sutcliffe, S.; Giovannucci, E.; Leitzmann, M.F.; Rimm, E.B.; Stampfer, M.J.; Willett, W.C.; Platz, E.A. A prospective cohort study of red wine consumption and risk of prostate cancer. Int. J. Cancer 2007, 120, 1529–1535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Velicer, C.M.; Kristal, A.; White, E. Alcohol use and the risk of prostate cancer: Results from the VITAL cohort study. Nutr. Cancer 2006, 56, 50–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Viel, J.F.; Perarnau, J.M.; Challier, B.; Faivre-Nappez, I. Alcoholic calories, red wine consumption and breast cancer among premenopausal women. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 1997, 13, 639–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Webb, P.M.; Purdie, D.M.; Bain, C.J.; Green, A.C. Alcohol, wine, and risk of epithelial ovarian cancer. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 2004, 13, 592–599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Wu, S.; Li, W.Q.; Qureshi, A.A.; Cho, E. Alcohol consumption and risk of cutaneous basal cell carcinoma in women and men: 3 prospective cohort studies. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2015, 102, 1158–1166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Zhang, Y.; Ferrucci, L.M.; Cartmel, B.; Molinaro, A.M.; Leffell, D.J.; Bale, A.E.; Mayne, S.T. Alcohol intake and early-onset basal cell carcinoma in a case-control study. Br. J. Dermatol. 2014, 171, 1451–1457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Chao, C.; Haque, R.; Caan, B.J.; Poon, K.Y.; Tseng, H.F.; Quinn, V.P. Red wine consumption not associated with reduced risk of colorectal cancer. Nutr. Cancer 2010, 62, 849–855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Allen, N.E.; Beral, V.; Casabonne, D.; Kan, S.W.; Reeves, G.K.; Brown, A.; Green, J. Moderate alcohol intake and cancer incidence in women. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2009, 101, 296–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Ansems, T.M.; van der Pols, J.C.; Hughes, M.C.; Ibiebele, T.; Marks, G.C.; Green, A.C. Alcohol intake and risk of skin cancer: A prospective study. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 2008, 62, 162–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. De Stefani, E.; Correa, P.; Fierro, L.; Fontham, E.T.; Chen, V.; Zavala, D. The effect of alcohol on the risk of lung cancer in Uruguay. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 1993, 2, 21–26. [Google Scholar]
  47. De Stefani, E.; Boffetta, P.; Deneo-Pellegrini, H.; Ronco, A.L.; Acosta, G.; Ferro, G.; Oreggia, F.; Leiva, J. The effect of smoking and drinking in oral and pharyngeal cancers: A case-control study in Uruguay. Cancer Lett. 2007, 246, 282–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Weiskirchen, S.; Weiskirchen, R. Resveratrol: How much wine do you have to drink to stay healthy? Adv. Nutr. 2016, 7, 706–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Luceron-Lucas-Torres, M.; Cavero-Redondo, I.; Martinez-Vizcaino, V.; Bizzozero-Peroni, B.; Pascual-Morena, C.; Alvarez-Bueno, C. Association between wine consumption and cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front. Nutr. 2023, 10, 1197745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Stroup, D.F.; Berlin, J.A.; Morton, S.C.; Olkin, I.; Williamson, G.D.; Rennie, D.; Moher, D.; Becker, B.J.; Sipe, T.A.; Thacker, S.B. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: A proposal for reporting. JAMA 2000, 283, 2008–2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Kalinowski, A.; Humphreys, K. Governmental standard drink definitions and low-risk alcohol consumption guidelines in 37 countries. Addiction 2016, 111, 1293–1298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. L’Esperance, K.; Grundy, A.; Abrahamowicz, M.; Arseneau, J.; Gilbert, L.; Gotlieb, W.H.; Provencher, D.; Koushik, A. Alcohol intake and the risk of epithelial ovarian cancer. Cancer Causes Control 2023, 34, 533–541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Downer, M.K.; Kenfield, S.A.; Stampfer, M.J.; Wilson, K.M.; Dickerman, B.A.; Giovannucci, E.L.; Rimm, E.B.; Wang, M.; Mucci, L.A.; Willett, W.C.; et al. Alcohol Intake and Risk of Lethal Prostate Cancer in the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study. J. Clin. Oncol. 2019, 37, 1499–1511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Farrow, D.C.; Davis, S. Risk of pancreatic cancer in relation to medical history and the use of tobacco, alcohol and coffee. Int. J. Cancer 1990, 45, 816–820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Bueno de Mesquita, H.B.; Maisonneuve, P.; Moerman, C.J.; Runia, S.; Boyle, P. Lifetime consumption of alcoholic beverages, tea and coffee and exocrine carcinoma of the pancreas: A population-based case-control study in The Netherlands. Int. J. Cancer 1992, 50, 514–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Nicodemus, K.K.; Sweeney, C.; Folsom, A.R. Evaluation of dietary, medical and lifestyle risk factors for incident kidney cancer in postmenopausal women. Int. J. Cancer 2004, 108, 115–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Greving, J.P.; Lee, J.E.; Wolk, A.; Lukkien, C.; Lindblad, P.; Bergstrom, A. Alcoholic beverages and risk of renal cell cancer. Br. J. Cancer 2007, 97, 429–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Falcao, J.M.; Dias, J.A.; Miranda, A.C.; Leitao, C.N.; Lacerda, M.M.; da Motta, L.C. Red wine consumption and gastric cancer in Portugal: A case-control study. Eur. J. Cancer Prev. 1994, 3, 269–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Murtaugh, M.A.; Ma, K.N.; Caan, B.J.; Slattery, M.L. Association of fluids from beverages with risk of rectal cancer. Nutr. Cancer 2004, 49, 25–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Chiu, B.C.; Cerhan, J.R.; Gapstur, S.M.; Sellers, T.A.; Zheng, W.; Lutz, C.T.; Wallace, R.B.; Potter, J.D. Alcohol consumption and non-Hodgkin lymphoma in a cohort of older women. Br. J. Cancer 1999, 80, 1476–1482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. De Stefani, E.; Ronco, A.L.; Deneo-Pellegrini, H.; Boffetta, P.; Correa, P.; Barrios, E.; Acosta, G.; Mendilaharsu, M. Meat, milk and risk of lymphoid malignancies: A case-control study in Uruguay. Nutr. Cancer 2013, 65, 375–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Ryan, P.; Lee, M.W.; North, B.; McMichael, A.J. Risk factors for tumors of the brain and meninges: Results from the Adelaide Adult Brain Tumor Study. Int. J. Cancer 1992, 51, 20–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Cote, D.J.; Samanic, C.M.; Smith, T.R.; Wang, M.; Smith-Warner, S.A.; Stampfer, M.J.; Egan, K.M. Alcohol intake and risk of glioma: Results from three prospective cohort studies. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 2021, 36, 965–974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Egger, M.; Smith, G.D.; Schneider, M.; Minder, C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997, 315, 629–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Higgins, J.P.; Thompson, S.G. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat. Med. 2002, 21, 1539–1558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Duval, S.; Tweedie, R. Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot–based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics 2000, 56, 455–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Artero, A.; Artero, A.; Tarín, J.J.; Cano, A. The impact of moderate wine consumption on health. Maturitas 2015, 80, 3–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Chang, K.J.; Thach, M.L.; Olsen, J. Wine and health perceptions: Exploring the impact of gender, age and ethnicity on consumer perceptions of wine and health. Wine Econ. Policy 2016, 5, 105–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Weaver, S.R.; Rendeiro, C.; McGettrick, H.M.; Philp, A.; Lucas, S.J. Fine wine or sour grapes? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of red wine polyphenols on vascular health. Eur. J. Nutr. 2021, 60, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Haseeb, S.; Alexander, B.; Baranchuk, A. Wine and cardiovascular health: A comprehensive review. Circulation 2017, 136, 1434–1448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Jani, B.D.; McQueenie, R.; Nicholl, B.I.; Field, R.; Hanlon, P.; Gallacher, K.I.; Mair, F.S.; Lewsey, J. Association between patterns of alcohol consumption (beverage type, frequency and consumption with food) and risk of adverse health outcomes: A prospective cohort study. BMC Med. 2021, 19, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Ko, J.H.; Sethi, G.; Um, J.Y.; Shanmugam, M.K.; Arfuso, F.; Kumar, A.P.; Bishayee, A.; Ahn, K.S. The Role of Resveratrol in Cancer Therapy. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2017, 18, 2589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Carter, L.G.; D’Orazio, J.A.; Pearson, K.J. Resveratrol and cancer: Focus on in vivo evidence. Endocr. Relat. Cancer 2014, 21, 209–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Wu, H.; Chen, L.; Zhu, F.; Han, X.; Sun, L.; Chen, K. The Cytotoxicity Effect of Resveratrol: Cell Cycle Arrest and Induced Apoptosis of Breast Cancer 4T1 Cells. Toxins 2019, 11, 731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Alobaedi, O.H.; Talib, W.H.; Basheti, I.A. Antitumor effect of thymoquinone combined with resveratrol on mice transplanted with breast cancer. Asian Pac. J. Trop. Med. 2017, 10, 400–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Wenzel, E.; Somoza, V. Metabolism and bioavailability of trans-resveratrol. Mol. Nutr. Food. Res. 2005, 49, 472–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Markoski, M.M.; Garavaglia, J.; Oliveira, A.; Olivaes, J.; Marcadenti, A. Molecular Properties of Red Wine Compounds and Cardiometabolic Benefits. Nutr. Metab. Insights 2016, 9, 51–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Springer, M.; Moco, S. Resveratrol and Its Human Metabolites-Effects on Metabolic Health and Obesity. Nutrients 2019, 11, 143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Sergides, C.; Chirilă, M.; Silvestro, L.; Pitta, D.; Pittas, A. Bioavailability and safety study of resveratrol 500 mg tablets in healthy male and female volunteers. Exp. Ther. Med. 2016, 11, 164–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Brown, V.A.; Patel, K.R.; Viskaduraki, M.; Crowell, J.A.; Perloff, M.; Booth, T.D.; Vasilinin, G.; Sen, A.; Schinas, A.M.; Piccirilli, G.; et al. Repeat dose study of the cancer chemopreventive agent resveratrol in healthy volunteers: Safety, pharmacokinetics, and effect on the insulin-like growth factor axis. Cancer Res. 2010, 70, 9003–9011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Baur, J.A.; Sinclair, D.A. Therapeutic potential of resveratrol: The in vivo evidence. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2006, 5, 493–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Saladi, R.N.; Nektalova, T.; Fox, J.L. Induction of skin carcinogenicity by alcohol and ultraviolet light. Clin. Exp. Dermatol. 2010, 35, 7–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Madan, V.; Lear, J.T.; Szeimies, R.M. Non-melanoma skin cancer. Lancet 2010, 375, 673–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Coups, E.J.; Manne, S.L.; Heckman, C.J. Multiple skin cancer risk behaviors in the U.S. population. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2008, 34, 87–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Mukamal, K.J. Alcohol consumption and self-reported sunburn: A cross-sectional, population-based survey. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 2006, 55, 584–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Clarke, R.; Shipley, M.; Lewington, S.; Youngman, L.; Collins, R.; Marmot, M.; Peto, R. Underestimation of risk associations due to regression dilution in long-term follow-up of prospective studies. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1999, 150, 341–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Nutrients 17 00534 g001
Figure 1. Literature search results for publications related to wine consumption (red or white) and cancer risk.
Figure 1. Literature search results for publications related to wine consumption (red or white) and cancer risk.
Nutrients 17 00534 g001
Nutrients 17 00534 g002
Figure 2. Forest plot of meta-analysis using random effects model for white wine consumption associated with skin cancer risk (comparing highest vs. lowest intake) [29,32,36,41,42,45]. The rectangles represent 95% confidence intervals and the diamond signifies the pooled effect of all included studies. Abbreviations: BCC, basal cell carcinoma; SCC, squamous cell carcinoma; MM, malignant melanoma.
Figure 2. Forest plot of meta-analysis using random effects model for white wine consumption associated with skin cancer risk (comparing highest vs. lowest intake) [29,32,36,41,42,45]. The rectangles represent 95% confidence intervals and the diamond signifies the pooled effect of all included studies. Abbreviations: BCC, basal cell carcinoma; SCC, squamous cell carcinoma; MM, malignant melanoma.
Nutrients 17 00534 g002
Table 1. Summary table of 42 selected studies in the meta-analysis.
Table 1. Summary table of 42 selected studies in the meta-analysis.
Cancer TypeAuthor,
Year		CountryStudy DesignPopulationMeasurement of Wine Intake (Used Validated Food Frequency Questionnaire)Number of Cases/Number of ParticipantsAdjusted Confounders
Skin (BCC, SCC)Ansems, 2008 [45]AustraliaCohort (Nambour Skin Cancer Study)Adult residents of Nambour, Queensland, Australia, average age of 50 yearsYes394/1360BCC: age, sex, beta-carotene treatment, sunscreen treatment, elastosis of the neck, occupational sun exposure, leisure time sun exposure, history of skin cancer before 1992
SCC: age, sex, beta-carotene treatment, sunscreen treatment, self-reported skin color, number of pack-years smoked until 1992, elastosis of the neck, leisure time sun exposure, history of skin cancer before 1992
Skin (MM, NMSC)Kubo, 2014 [29]USACohort (Women’s Health Initiative)White postmenopausal women aged 50–79 from across the USAYes10,125/59,575Age, education, BMI, Langleys of exposure, physical activity, history of NMSC, history of MM, smoking, sunscreen use, current summer sun exposure, childhood sun exposure, skin reaction to the sun, last medical visit within 1 year, having a current care provider, having insurance
Skin (BCC)Zhang, 2014 [42]USACase–controlIndividuals aged <40 in Connecticut diagnosed with BCC and matched controls No365/747Age, gender, body site of biopsy, indoor tanning, skin color, education, smoking status, hours spent outdoors in warm months, sunburns, family history of skin cancer, consumption of other types of alcohol
Skin (BCC)Wu, 2015 [41]USACohort (Nurses’ Health Study, Nurses’ Health Study II, Health Professionals Follow-Up Study)Female registered nurses aged 25–55, male health professionalsYes15,681/211,462Age, BMI, smoking status, physical activity, caffeine intake, ethnicity, family history of melanoma, natural hair color, number of moles on arms or legs, skin reaction to sun as a child/adolescent, number of severe sunburns, cumulative UV flux since baseline, Average time spent in direct sunlight in summer months, use of sunscreen in summer months, consumption of other types of alcohol
Skin (SCC)Siiskonen, 2016 [36]USACohort (Nurses’ Health Study, Nurses’ Health Study II, Health Professionals Follow-Up Study)Female registered nurses aged 25–55, male health professionalsYes2938/223,138Age, BMI, smoking status and pack-years smoked, physical activity, caffeine intake, family history of melanoma, tanning ability, lifetime number of severe sunburns, number of moles, natural hair color, average annual UV-B flux at place of residence, total alcohol intake
Skin (MM)Rivera, 2016 [32]USACohort (Nurses’ Health Study, Nurses’ Health Study II, Health Professionals Follow-Up Study)Female registered nurses aged 25–55, male health professionalsYes2209/21,052Age, BMI, smoking status, physical activity, caffeine intake, family history of melanoma, tanning ability, lifetime number of severe sunburns, number of moles on forearms, hair color at age 18, average annual UV-B flux at place of residence, intake of other alcoholic beverages
OvaryWebb, 2004 [40]AustraliaCase–controlWomen aged 18–79 with epithelial ovarian cancer in Australia Yes696/1482Age, age squared, level of education, BMI, smoking status, duration of oral contraceptive use, parity, caffeine intake, consumption of other types of alcohol
OvaryKelemen, 2004 [26]USACohort (Iowa Women’s Health Study)Women aged 55–69 randomly selected from Iowa driver’s license registryYes147/27,205Age at menopause, physical activity, postmenopausal hormone use, oral contraceptive use, family history of breast cancer, family history of ovarian cancer, known diabetes at baseline, smoking, energy-adjusted intakes of total carotene, vitamin C and vitamin E
OvaryKelemen, 2013 [27]USACase–controlPooled data from 12 case–control studies performed in USA, Canada, Europe, and Australia; all of used population-based ascertainment methods for identifying cases and controlYes5342/10,358Age, smoking status, site, race/ethnicity, menopausal status, oral contraceptive use, tubal ligation, endometriosis, hysterectomy, Family history of breast or ovarian cancer in first-degree relatives, parity/age at last birth, interview year, age at menarche, BMI, education
OvaryCook, 2016 [23]CanadaCase–controlWomen aged 20–79 diagnosed with ovarian tumors and matched controls No1144/3657Age, oral contraceptive use, parity, current smoking, family history of ovarian or breast cancer
OvaryL’Espérance, 2023 [52]CanadaCase–controlWomen aged 18–79 years of the Greater Montreal area with ovarian cancerNo495/1397Age, number of full-term pregnancies, education, other type of alcoholic beverage intake
ProstateSchuurma, 1999 [35]NetherlandsCohort (Netherlands Cohort Study)Men aged 55–69Yes680/58,279Age, family history of prostate cancer, socioeconomic status, total alcohol intake
ProstateSchoonen, 2005 [34]USACase–controlEuropean and African American men aged 40–64 in King County, WAYes753/1456Age, PSA screening, total lifetime number of female sexual partners, smoking status, consumption of other types of alcohol
ProstateVelicer, 2006 [38]USACohort (Vitamins and Lifestyle (VITAL) Cohort)Men aged 50–76 in Washington StateYes816/34,565Age, PSA test within 2 years of baseline, consumption of other types of alcohol
ProstateSutcliffe, 2007 [37]USACohort (Health Professionals Follow-Up Study)Male health professionals aged 40–75Yes3348/45,433Age, race/ethnicity, BMI at 21, cumulative family history of prostate cancer through 1996, height, updated cigarette smoking in the past 10 years, baseline intakes of total energy, tomato sauce, red meat, fish, calcium and vitamin E, baseline energy-adjusted intakes of fructose and α-linolenic acid, baseline vigorous physical activity, diabetes mellitus type 2, vasectomy
ProstateChao, 2010 [20]USACohort (California Men’s Health Study)Men aged 45–69 who were members of Kaiser Permanente health plans in CaliforniaYes1340/65,972Red wine: age, race/ethnicity, income, BMI, intake of other alcoholic beverages, meat consumption, family history of prostate cancer, person history of PSA testing, STI, BPH, BPH surgery, prostatitis, diabetes mellitus
White wine: race, income, BMI, intake of other alcoholic beverage, meat consumption, family history of prostate cancer, personal history of PSA testing, STI, BPH, BPH surgery, prostatitis, diabetes
ProstateDowner, 2019 [53]USACohort (Health Professionals Follow-Up Study)Male health professionals aged 40–75 who were diagnosed with nonmetastatic
prostate cancer during follow-up		Yes5182/47,568Total energy intake, smoking, BMI, vigorous physical activity, choline, vegetable fat, coffee, lycopene, whole milk, and diabetes, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening beginning in 1994, diabetes. Beer, wine, and liquor were mutually adjusted for each other.
PancreaticFarrow, 1990 [54]USACase–controlMen aged 20–74 diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and matched controls No148/336Age, smoking, race, education
PancreaticBueno de Mesquita, 1992 [55]NetherlandsCase–controlIndividuals aged 35–79 living in the central Netherlands diagnosed with cancer of the exocrine pancreas and matched controls No176/663Age, sex, response status, lifetime smoking of cigarettes, dietary intake of energy and vegetables, lifetime consumption of other alcoholic drinks
Urinary TractAndreatta, 2010 [18]ArgentinaCase–controlPatients with urinary tract tumors in Cordoba, Argentina, and controls taken from hospital registries at the time of diagnosis of cases Yes168/502Age, sex, BMI, tobacco smoking, occupational exposure, social status, physical activity
RenalNicodemus, 2003 [56]USACohort (Iowa Women’s Health Study)Women aged 55–69 randomly selected from Iowa driver’s license registryYes124/34,637Age
RenalGreving, 2007 [57]SwedenCase–control
Men and women aged 20–79 diagnosed with renal cancer and born and living in Sweden; controls were randomly selected and matched to casesNo855/2059Age, sex, BMI, cigarette smoking, consumption of other types of alcohol
BreastViel, 1997 [39]FranceCase–controlWomen aged 30–50 diagnosed with breast cancer without previous specific treatment No154/308Total calorie intake, parity
BreastHirvonen, 2006 [25]FranceCohort (French Supplementation en Vitamines et Mine raux Antioxydants Study)Women aged 35–60 and men 45–60 without a history of cancerYes95/4396Age, smoking, number of children, use of oral contraception, family history of breast cancer, menopausal status
BreastAllen, 2009 [44]United KingdomCohort (Million Women Study)Women who attended breast cancer screenings in the UKYes28,380/1,280,296Age, region of residence, socioeconomic status, BMI, smoking status, physical activity, use of oral contraceptives and hormone replacement therapy
BreastNewcomb, 2009 [30]USACase–controlWomen aged 20–69 diagnosed with breast cancer and matched controls No6327/13,885Age, state, family history of breast cancer, age at menarche, age at first birth, parity, menopausal status, age at menopause, postmenopausal hormone use, BMI, education, total alcohol consumption
Breast (ductal, ductal-lobular, lobular) Baglia, 2017 [19]USACase–controlWomen aged 55–74 diagnosed with breast cancer in the Greater Seattle area and matched controls No1961/2852Age, reference year, county of reference
Mouth/PharynxDe Stefani, 2007 [47]UruguayCase–controlPatients and controls recruited from hospitals in Montevideo, UruguayNo776/2277Age, residence, urban/rural status, hospital, year at diagnosis, education, family history of cancer among first-degree relatives, occupation, total vegetables and fruits consumption, maté intake, smoking status, years since quit, cigarettes/day among current smokers, total alcohol intake
LungDe Stefani, 1993 [46]UruguayCase–controlPatients and controls recruited from hospitals in Montevideo, Uruguay No327/677Age, residence, education, cigarette smoking measured in pack-years
LungRuano-Ravina, 2004 [33]SpainCase–controlLung cancer patients in Santiago University Teaching Hospital and matched controls No132/319Age, sex, occupation, smoking habit, total alcohol intake
LungChao, 2008 [22]USACohort (California Men’s Health Study)Men aged 45–69 who were members of Kaiser Permanente health plans in CaliforniaYes210/84,170Age, ethnicity, household income, BMI, smoking status, cigarettes smoked per day, smoking duration, and history of COPD/emphysema
LungChao, 2011 [21]USACohort [Vitamins and Lifestyle (VITAL) Study]Men and women aged 50–76 living in western Washington State covered by SEER registryYes580/66,186Gender, race, education, household income, BMI, history of COPD/emphysema, cigarette smoking, family history of lung cancer, high-intensity physical activity, fat intake, fruit and vegetable intake
StomachFalcao, 1994 [58]PortugalCase–controlPatients undergoing gastroscopy No74/267Social class, milk consumption, number of meals/day, rice consumption, vegetable consumption
Colon/
rectum		Chao, 2010 [43]USACohort (California Men’s Health Study)Men aged 45–69 who were members of Kaiser Permanente health plans in CaliforniaYes176/43,483Crude
Colon/
rectum		Kontou, 2012 [28]GreeceCase–controlMen and women diagnosed with CRC at a hospital in Athens, GreeceYes250/500Age, BMI, current smoking, physical activity, family history of colorectal cancer
Colon/
rectum		Grosso, 2014 [24]ItalyCase–controlMen and women diagnosed with CRC recruited from the list of patients who visited a hospital in Catania, Southern ItalyNo338/1014Age, sex, smoking status, family history of CRC, obesity status, having diabetes, physical activity level, alcohol quantity
Rectum Murtaugh, 2004 [59]USACase–controlMen and women from the Northern California Kaiser Permanente aged 30–79Yes952/2157Energy, fiber and calcium intake, age, physical activity
ColonPhipps, 2016 [31]USACohort (Multicenter Phase III drug trial led by North Central Cancer Treatment Group)Patients with resected stage III colon cancerNo649/1984 (outcome is colon cancer recurrence or death)Treatment, sex, BMI, smoking, physical activity, performance score, race
Lymphoma
(non-Hodgkin lymphoma)		Chiu, 1999 [60]USACohort (Iowa Women’s Health Study)Women aged 55–69 randomly selected from Iowa driver’s license registryYes143/35,156Age, residence, education, marital status, transfusion history, diabetes history, intake of red meat, intake of fruits, total energy intake
LymphomaDe Stefani, 2013 [61]UruguayCase–controlMen and women diagnosed with lymphoid cancers in Montevideo, Uruguay, with matched controlsNo697/4303Age, sex, residence, urban/rural status, education, BMI, smoking intensity in pack-years, total meat, total vegetable, and fruit intake, total meat, total energy
Brain (glioma, meningioma)Ryan, 1992 [62]AustraliaCase–controlAdults aged 25–74 diagnosed with primary tumors of the brain and meninges in metropolitan Adelaide, Australia No170/587Age, sex
Brain (glioma, glioblastoma)Cote, 2021 [63]USACohort (Nurses’ Health Study, Nurses’ Health Study II, Health Professionals Follow-Up Study)Female registered nurses aged 25–55, male health professionalsYes554/237,505Age, calendar year, smoking status, BMI, total caloric intake
Abbreviations: BCC, basal cell carcinoma; BMI, body mass index; BPH, benign prostatic hyperplasia; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; CRC, colorectal cancer; MM, malignant melanoma; NMSC, non-melanoma skin cancer; PSA, prostate-specific antigen; SCC, squamous cell carcinoma; STI, sexually transmitted infection. Murtaugh et al. [57] only presented effect estimates for women and men separately; we added both estimates and considered them as separate studies. For studies that provided estimates for all sex, women only, and/or men only, we included estimates for all sex. When a study provided results for individual cancer subtypes (instead of overall risk) or different kinds of cancers, we included all estimates and considered them as separate studies (e.g., Baglia et al. [45] (breast cancer): ductal, lobular, and ductal-lobular; Kubo et al. [28] (skin cancer): MM and NMSC; De Stefani et al. [46]: oral and pharyngeal cancer). Andreatta et al. [44], De Stefani et al. [23], De Stefani et al. [64], De Stefani et al. [46], and Chao et al. [42] only provided results of red wine intake.
Table 2. Summary RRs and 95% CIs of cancer risk associated with red and white wine, overall and stratified by sex and cancer sites.
Table 2. Summary RRs and 95% CIs of cancer risk associated with red and white wine, overall and stratified by sex and cancer sites.
Red WineWhite WinePdifference
No. of StudiesNo. of Cases
/No. of Participants		Summary RR
(95% CI)		No. of StudiesNo. of Cases
/No. of Participants		Summary RR
(95% CI)
All cancer4295,923/2,824,4250.98 (0.87, 1.10)3795,747/2,780,9421.00 (0.91, 1.10)0.74
Sex
Men1310,300/678,8211.01 (0.91, 1.12) 108906/484,051 1.08 (0.99, 1.18)0.37
Women1561,211/1,723,9920.91 (0.72, 1.16) 15 61,211/1,723,9921.26 (1.05, 1.52)0.03
Cancer sites
Female breast536,917/1,301,7371.17 (0.97, 1.42)536,917/1,301,7371.12 (1.05, 1.20)0.61
Skin631,712/706,5341.02 (0.95, 1.09)631,712/706,5341.22 (1.14, 1.30)0.0003
Ovary57676/44,0990.76 (0.46, 1.26)57676/44,0990.95 (0.81, 1.11)0.76
Prostate612,119/253,2730.92 (0.71, 1.18)612,119/253,2731.08 (0.72, 1.60)0.51
Lung41249/151,3520.82 (0.41, 1.63)3922/150,6750.79 (0.52, 1.22)0.94
Kidney/Urinary tract31147/37,1980.79 (0.44, 1.42)2979/36,6960.67 (0.49, 0.92)0.65
Colon/rectum52365/49,1380.91 (0.62, 1.32)42189/56551.01 (0.78, 1.33)0.64
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; RR, relative risk. We included each effect estimate for different subtypes of breast cancer (ductal, ductal-lobular, and lobular) in the study by Baglia et al. [45] We assumed wine intake in De Stefani et al. [46] as red wine intake since the authors mentioned that Uruguayans drink mainly red wine.
Table 3. Subgroup meta-analyses of wine intake (all types) and overall cancer risk comparing the highest vs. lowest levels.
Table 3. Subgroup meta-analyses of wine intake (all types) and overall cancer risk comparing the highest vs. lowest levels.
SubgroupsNo. of StudiesNo. of Cancer Cases
/No. of Participants		Summary RR (95% CI)I2Pdifference
All cancer4295,923/2,824,4250.99 (0.91, 1.06)61.3%
Study design 0.10
Cohort2073,771/2,772,6221.06 (1.99, 1.13)50.5%
Case–control2222,152/51,8030.94 (0.83, 1.07)67.7%
Study region 0.39
US/Canada2456,219/1,454,7781.03 (0.97, 1.13)49.2%
Other regions1839,704/1,369,6470.95 (0.80, 1.13)74.8%
Sex a 0.93
Men1310,300/678,8211.10 (0.90, 1.33)62.2%
Women1561,211/1,723,9921.09 (1.05, 1.13)57.5%
Publication year 0.92
1990s81872/96,2730.98 (0.69, 1.37)75.8%
2000s3494,051/2,728,1520.99 (0.93, 1.06)58.4%
Exposure validation 0.28
Yes2581,283 /2,787,0931.04 (0.96, 1.12)56.5%
No1715,975/37,3320.96 (0.85, 1.08)67.8%
Adjustments for confounders 0.97
Smoking and BMI367,057/2,407,1520.98 (0.86, 1.12)71.3%
Smoking or BMI1312,068/122,6041.00 (0.84, 1.19)64.3%
No smoking or BMI adjustment2518,133/294,6690.98 (0.88, 1.09)58.2%
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; CI, confidence interval; RR, relative risk. a Studies that provided sex-specific effect estimates are included.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lim, R.K.; Rhee, J.; Hoang, M.; Qureshi, A.A.; Cho, E. Consumption of Red Versus White Wine and Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies. Nutrients 2025, 17, 534. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu17030534

AMA Style

Lim RK, Rhee J, Hoang M, Qureshi AA, Cho E. Consumption of Red Versus White Wine and Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies. Nutrients. 2025; 17(3):534. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu17030534

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lim, Rachel K., Jongeun Rhee, Megan Hoang, Abrar A. Qureshi, and Eunyoung Cho. 2025. "Consumption of Red Versus White Wine and Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies" Nutrients 17, no. 3: 534. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu17030534

APA Style

Lim, R. K., Rhee, J., Hoang, M., Qureshi, A. A., & Cho, E. (2025). Consumption of Red Versus White Wine and Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies. Nutrients, 17(3), 534. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu17030534

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop