A sweeping systematic review and meta‑analysis published in iScience has concluded that a large proportion of Latin America’s cancer burden is linked to modifiable lifestyle factors, particularly tobacco use, unhealthy diets and obesity.
New region‑specific evidence
The research team pooled decades of regionally specific studies to address a longstanding gap in global cancer epidemiology. Worldwide estimates suggest about 37.8% of new cancer cases are attributable to modifiable risk factors, but those figures are largely based on studies from North America and Europe. The new analysis brings together 47 observational studies undertaken between 1987 and 2023 across six Latin American countries and multinational collaborations, offering a clearer picture rooted in the region’s own data.
Latin America records roughly 1.4 million new cancer cases and 670,000 cancer deaths each year. The authors say the region’s mix of infection‑linked cancers (such as those related to human papillomavirus and Helicobacter pylori) alongside lifestyle‑driven tumours of the breast, colorectum and lung requires evidence generated locally rather than relying on extrapolation from high‑income settings.
Findings and methodological approach
Key conclusions of the review include a consistent association between tobacco smoking and higher cancer risk, a clear link between unhealthy dietary patterns and increased incidence, and a protective effect from healthy diets. The review also highlights obesity as a particularly strong driver of endometrial cancer in the region.
The authors applied conservative methods. From an initial 984 records, the team reduced the pool to 47 eligible studies after title, abstract and full‑text screening. Of those, 46 used case‑control designs. Because exposure definitions, cancer sites and comparison categories varied widely across studies, the researchers limited confirmatory quantitative meta‑analysis to a subset of site‑specific comparisons to avoid producing misleading pooled estimates.
- 47 observational studies included (1987–2023)
- 984 records screened initially
- 46 studies used case‑control designs
- Region records ~1.4m new cancer cases and 670,000 deaths annually
Implications for prevention and policy
Because much of the evidence on modifiable cancer risks has come from high‑income countries, global burden estimates may have under‑ or mis‑represented the specific patterns in Latin America. The new synthesis suggests that substantial gains in cancer prevention could be realised in the region by intensifying efforts to reduce smoking prevalence, promote healthier diets and address rising obesity.
Those measures would also need to be balanced with action on infection‑related cancers prevalent in parts of Latin America. The coexistence of infection‑linked and lifestyle‑linked cancers creates a dual prevention challenge that calls for integrated public‑health strategies.
What the data tell us
The review does not aim to produce a single region‑wide attributable fraction for preventable cancers, reflecting the authors’ caution about heterogeneity in exposures and outcomes across studies. Nonetheless, by collating decades of local research, it provides an evidence base that policy‑makers and health services in Latin America can use to target interventions more precisely.
| Metric | Value from review |
|---|---|
| Studies included | 47 |
| Records screened | 984 |
| Annual new cancer cases in region | 1.4 million |
| Annual cancer deaths in region | 670,000 |
For clinicians, public‑health officials and charities working in Latin America, the review strengthens the case for sustained investment in tobacco control, nutrition programmes and obesity prevention. It also underscores the importance of building and using local research to inform priorities rather than relying solely on evidence from different populations.
The study’s cautious approach to meta‑analysis is a reminder that while pooled estimates can be useful, they must reflect comparable exposures and outcomes. Where heterogeneity is large, targeted, site‑specific analyses grounded in local data may offer better guidance for policy and practice.
