A daily sugar-sweetened beverage may be doing more than adding calories to the diet: it may also be linked to a substantially higher risk of gastric cancer, according to a large observational study from researchers at the Mass General Brigham Cancer Institute. The analysis, published in Gastro Hep Advances, found that adults who reported drinking at least one sugar-sweetened beverage each day had a 2.45-fold higher risk of developing gastric cancer than those who consumed fewer than one such drink per month. The association remained after researchers adjusted for a broad range of lifestyle, dietary, and medical factors. The findings do not prove that soft drinks or other sweetened beverages directly cause stomach cancer, but they add to growing evidence connecting high consumption of sugary drinks with several major cancers.
The study drew on health and dietary data from 112,284 participants enrolled in two long-running U.S. research programs: the Nurses’ Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study. Participants periodically reported what they ate and drank, along with information about body weight, physical activity, smoking, alcohol use, medication, and other health characteristics. Because these cohorts have been followed for decades, researchers were able to compare beverage habits with cancer diagnoses over an extended period. During follow-up, 278 participants developed gastric cancer. The large sample and repeated dietary assessments gave investigators an opportunity to examine relatively uncommon cancer outcomes while accounting for factors that could otherwise distort the results.
Sugar-sweetened beverages in the analysis included carbonated soft drinks, fruit punch, lemonade, and sports drinks. These products commonly contain substantial quantities of added sugars, including fructose, the primary sweetener in many beverages made with high-fructose corn syrup or sucrose. When consumed in liquid form, sugar can be absorbed rapidly because beverages generally provide little fiber, protein, or fat to slow digestion. The researchers found that greater overall fructose intake was also associated with a higher incidence of gastric cancer, strengthening the biological plausibility of the beverage finding. However, fructose is present in many foods, and the study cannot determine whether the risk is specific to beverages, the total dietary pattern associated with them, or another correlated exposure.
The strongest associations appeared among people drinking sweetened beverages every day. Women in the Nurses’ Health Study who consumed more than one such beverage daily had a 3.04-fold higher risk of gastric cancer than women who rarely drank them. The relationship was observed in both women and men, suggesting that it was not confined to one sex or one cohort. Researchers also examined artificially sweetened beverages, defined in this study as low-calorie carbonated drinks. After adjustment for other risk factors, these beverages were not associated with an increased incidence of gastric cancer. That result should not be interpreted as proof that artificially sweetened drinks are universally harmless, because the study evaluated a specific beverage category and was not designed to establish the long-term safety of individual sweeteners.
Gastric cancer develops in the lining of the stomach and remains one of the world’s leading causes of cancer death. Its biology is complex, involving inherited susceptibility, chronic inflammation, infection, diet, smoking, and other environmental exposures. A potential explanation for the beverage association is that repeated exposure to high amounts of sugar could contribute to metabolic dysfunction, including weight gain, insulin resistance, and chronic inflammation. These conditions may influence cellular growth and the tissue environment in which tumors arise. Concentrated sugars might also affect the stomach indirectly by altering the gut microbiome or promoting biochemical changes that increase oxidative stress. Such mechanisms remain hypothetical in this context; the present study did not measure these biological pathways directly.
The investigators paid particular attention to Helicobacter pylori, a bacterium that colonizes the stomach and is one of the best-established risk factors for gastric cancer. Long-term H. pylori infection can cause chronic gastritis, damage the stomach lining, and promote a sequence of changes that may eventually lead to malignancy. In a subset of 940 participants, slightly more than one-third showed evidence of H. pylori infection. Researchers found no association between sugar-sweetened beverage consumption and infection status, suggesting that the beverage finding was not simply explained by people who drank more sugary beverages being more likely to carry the bacterium. The subset was small, however, and limited testing meant that the role of H. pylori could not be examined with the same precision as beverage intake.
The results fit within a broader research picture linking sugary beverages with colorectal, breast, and liver cancers, although the strength and consistency of those associations vary. Liquid sugar has attracted scientific interest because it can increase total energy intake without producing the same sense of fullness as solid food. Regular consumption may therefore contribute to excess body weight, a recognized risk factor for several cancers. Yet body weight alone is unlikely to explain every observation, and the Mass General Brigham team adjusted for obesity-related and other potential confounders in its statistical models. Even so, statistical adjustment cannot remove every source of bias, particularly when some relevant factors are measured incompletely or not measured at all.
The study’s observational design is its most important limitation. Participants were not randomly assigned to drink sugary beverages, so their beverage choices may have reflected broader differences in diet, income, health behavior, access to medical care, or underlying disease risk. The researchers had limited information about H. pylori status and family history of gastric cancer, both of which could influence the results. The participants were also predominantly white, restricting the ability to determine whether the association differs among racial and ethnic groups. In addition, dietary questionnaires depend on memory and may not fully capture changes in beverage consumption over time. These limitations mean the findings should be viewed as a signal requiring confirmation, not as evidence that a particular drink inevitably causes cancer.
Andrew T. Chan, a gastroenterologist and epidemiologist at the Mass General Brigham Cancer Institute and the study’s senior author, said the work represents the first study to demonstrate an association between sugar-sweetened beverage intake and gastric cancer in a U.S. population. The researchers say future investigations should test the finding in more diverse populations and explore whether metabolic changes, inflammation, microbial alterations, or other mechanisms connect sugary drinks with tumors of the stomach. For now, the evidence adds another reason for consumers and public-health researchers to scrutinize the role of added sugar in everyday diets. The central message is not that an occasional soft drink determines an individual’s cancer risk, but that sustained daily consumption may be part of a modifiable pattern associated with a serious disease.
Subject of Research: People
Article Title: Association between sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverage intake and gastric cancer incidence
News Publication Date: 17-Aug-2026
References: Gweon TG et al., “Association between sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverage intake and gastric cancer incidence,” Gastro Hep Advances.
Keywords: sugar-sweetened beverages, artificially sweetened beverages, gastric cancer, stomach cancer, fructose, Helicobacter pylori, diet, cancer risk, observational study, epidemiology
