Explore the vast range of titles available.

25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) is commonly measured to assess vitamin D status. Other vitamin D metabolites such as 24,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (24,25(OH)2D) provide additional insights into vitamin D status or metabolism. Earlier studies suggested that the vitamin D metabolite ratio (VMR), calculated as 24,25(OH)2D/25(OH)D, could predict the 25(OH)D increase after vitamin D supplementation. However, the evidence for this additional value is inconclusive. Therefore, our aim was to assess whether the increase in 25(OH)D after supplementation was predicted by the VMR better than baseline 25(OH)D. Plasma samples of 106 individuals (25(OH)D < 75 nmol/L) with hypertension who completed the Styrian Vitamin D Hypertension Trial (NC.T.02136771) were analyzed. Participants received vitamin D (2800 IU daily) or placebo for 8 weeks. The treatment effect (ANCOVA) for 25(OH)D3, 24,25(OH)2D3 and the VMR was 32 nmol/L, 3.3 nmol/L and 0.015 (all p < 0.001), respectively. Baseline 25(OH)D3 and 24,25(OH)2D3 predicted the change in 25(OH)D3 with comparable strength and magnitude. Correlation and regression analysis showed that the VMR did not predict the change in 25(OH)D3. Therefore, our data do not support routine measurement of 24,25(OH)2D3 in order to individually optimize the dosage of vitamin D supplementation. Our data also suggest that activity of 24-hydroxylase increases after vitamin D supplementation.

Background Vitamin D deficiency is diagnosed by total serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration and is associated with poor health and increased mortality; however, some populations have low 25(OH) D concentrations without manifestations of vitamin D deficiency. The Vitamin D Metabolite Ratio (VMR) has been suggested as a superior indicator of vitamin D status. Therefore, VMR was determined in a population with type 2 diabetes at high risk for vitamin D deficiency and correlated with diabetic complications. Research design and methods Four hundred sisty patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) were recruited, all were vitamin D 3 supplement naive. Plasma concentration of 25-hydroxyvitamin D 3 (25(OH)D 3 ) and its metabolites 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D 3 (1,25(OH) 2 D 3 ) and 24,25-dihydroxyvitamin D 3 (24,25(OH) 2 D 3 ) and its epimer, 3-epi-25-hydroxyvitamin D 3 (3-epi-25(OH)D 3 ), were measured by LC-MS/MS analysis. VMR-1 was calculated as a ratio of 24,25(OH) 2 D 3 :25(OH)D 3 ; VMR-2 as a ratio of 1,25(OH) 2 D 3 :25(OH)D 3 ; VMR-3 was calculated as a ratio of 3-epi-25(OH)D 3 : 25(OH)D 3. Results An association means that there were significant differences between the ratios found for those with versus those without the various diabetic complications studied. VMR-1 was associated with diabetic retinopathy ( p  = 0.001) and peripheral artery disease ( p  = 0.012); VMR-2 associated with hypertension ( p  < 0.001), dyslipidemia ( p  < 0.001), diabetic retinopathy ( p  < 0.001), diabetic neuropathy ( p  < 0.001), coronary artery disease ( p  = 0.001) and stroke ( p  < 0.05). VMR-3 associated with hypertension ( p  < 0.05), dyslipidemia ( p  < 0.001) and coronary artery disease ( p  < 0.05). Conclusions In this cross sectional study, whilst not causal, VMR-2 was shown to be the superior predictor of diabetic and cardiovascular complications though not demonstrative of causality in this cross-sectional study population over VMR-1, VMR-3 and the individual vitamin D concentration measurements; VMR-2 associated with both microvascular and cardiovascular indices and therefore may have utility in predicting the development of diabetic complications.

Modest and even severe vitamin D deficiency is widely prevalent around the world. There is consensus that a good vitamin D status is necessary for bone and general health. Similarly, a better vitamin D status is essential for optimal efficacy of antiresorptive treatments. Supplementation of food with vitamin D or using vitamin D supplements is the most widely used strategy to improve the vitamin status. Cholecalciferol (vitamin D3) and ergocalciferol (vitamin D2) are the most widely used compounds and the relative use of both products depends on historical or practical reasons. Oral intake of calcifediol (25OHD3) rather than vitamin D itself should also be considered for oral supplementation. We reviewed all publications dealing with a comparison of oral cholecalciferol with oral calcifediol as to define the relative efficacy of both compounds for improving the vitamin D status. First, oral calcifediol results in a more rapid increase in serum 25OHD compared to oral cholecalciferol. Second, oral calcifediol is more potent than cholecalciferol, so that lower dosages are needed. Based on the results of nine RCTs comparing physiologic doses of oral cholecalciferol with oral calcifediol, calcifediol was 3.2-fold more potent than oral cholecalciferol. Indeed, when using dosages ≤ 25 μg/day, serum 25OHD increased by 1.5 ± 0.9 nmol/l for each 1 μg cholecalciferol, whereas this was 4.8 ± 1.2 nmol/l for oral calcifediol. Third, oral calcifediol has a higher rate of intestinal absorption and this may have important advantages in case of decreased intestinal absorption capacity due to a variety of diseases. A potential additional advantage of oral calcifediol is a linear dose-response curve, irrespective of baseline serum 25OHD, whereas the rise in serum 25OHD is lower after oral cholecalciferol, when baseline serum 25OHD is higher. Finally, intermittent intake of calcifediol results in fairly stable serum 25OHD compared with greater fluctuations after intermittent oral cholecalciferol.

Recent research activities have provided new insights in vitamin D metabolism in various conditions. Furthermore, substantial progress has been made in the analysis of vitamin D metabolites and related biomarkers, such as vitamin D binding protein. Liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometric (LC–MS/MS) methods are capable of accurately measuring multiple vitamin D metabolites in parallel. Nevertheless, only 25(OH)D and the biologically active form 1,25(OH)2D are routinely measured in clinical practice. While 25(OH)D remains the analyte of choice for the diagnosis of vitamin D deficiency, 1,25(OH)2D is only recommended in a few conditions with a dysregulated D metabolism. 24,25(OH)2D, free and bioavailable 25(OH)D, and the vitamin D metabolite ratio (VMR) have shown promising results, but technical pitfalls in their quantification, limited clinical data and the lack of reference values, impede their use in clinical practice. LC–MS/MS is the preferred method for the measurement of all vitamin D related analytes as it offers high sensitivity and specificity. In particular, 25(OH)D and 24,25(OH)2D can accurately be measured with this technology. When interpreted together, they seem to provide a functional measure of vitamin D metabolism beyond the analysis of 25(OH)D alone. The determination of VDBP, free and bioavailable 25(OH)D is compromised by unresolved analytical issues, lacking reference intervals and insufficient clinical data. Therefore, future research activities should focus on analytical standardization and exploration of their clinical value. This review provides an overview on established and new vitamin D related biomarkers including their pathophysiological role, preanalytical and analytical aspects, expected values, indications and influencing conditions.

Vitamin D deficiency and obesity are a worldwide health issue. Obesity refers to the accumulation of excessive fats in the body which could lead to the development of diseases. Obese people have low vitamin D levels for several reasons including larger volume of distribution, vitamin D tightly bound in fatty tissues, reduced absorption, and diets with low vitamin D. Accurately measuring vitamin D metabolites is challenging. The Ultra-High-Performance Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS) method was developed and validated for the analysis of vitamin D metabolites in the serum. Blood samples were collected from 452 subjects which consisted of baseline (vitamin D deficient obese subjects), follow-up (supplemented obese subjects), and healthy volunteers. The vitamin D metabolites were separated adequately by the developed UHPLC-MS/MS method. Moreover, the validation criteria for the method were within an acceptable range. The baseline, follow-up and even healthy volunteers were deficient in 25OHD3 and 25OHD2. The baseline and healthy subjects had comparable concentration of vitamin D2 and D3. However, healthy subjects had a higher concentration of 25OHD and its epimer compared to the baseline subjects. The vitamin D3 was increased significantly in the follow- up subjects; therefore, the 25OHD3 was increased significantly compared to the baseline as well; however, the increase was insufficient to achieve the optimal range. The UHPLC-MS/MS method test was applied successfully on estimation of vitamin D metabolites in subjects. This study indicates the significance of taking into account the metabolic and storage effects when evaluating the vitamin D status in obese subjects.

The active metabolites of vitamin D3 (D3) and lumisterol (L3) exert a variety of antiaging and photoprotective effects on the skin. These are achieved through immunomodulation and include anti-inflammatory actions, regulation of keratinocytes proliferation, and differentiation programs to build the epidermal barrier necessary for maintaining skin homeostasis. In addition, they induce antioxidative responses, inhibit DNA damage and induce DNA repair mechanisms to attenuate premature skin aging and cancerogenesis. The mechanism of action would involve interaction with multiple nuclear receptors including VDR, AhR, LXR, reverse agonism on RORα and -γ, and nongenomic actions through 1,25D3-MARRS receptor and interaction with the nongenomic binding site of the VDR. Therefore, active forms of vitamin D3 including its canonical (1,25(OH)2D3) and noncanonical (CYP11A1-intitated) D3 derivatives as well as L3 derivatives are promising agents for the prevention, attenuation, or treatment of premature skin aging. They could be administrated orally and/or topically. Other forms of parenteral application of vitamin D3 precursor should be considered to avoid its predominant metabolism to 25(OH)D3 that is not recognized by CYP11A1 enzyme. The efficacy of topically applied vitamin D3 and L3 derivatives needs further clinical evaluation in future trials.

Vitamin D-binding protein (VDBP), the main carrier of vitamin D, has recently been implicated in reproductive health and pregnancy outcomes including endometriosis, polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), pre-eclampsia, and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Improved methods for measuring VDBP and an increased understanding of its role in biological processes have led to a number of newly published studies exploring VDBP in the context of pregnancy. Here, we synthesize the available evidence regarding the role of VDBP in reproductive health and pregnancy, and we highlight areas requiring further study. Overall, low levels of maternal serum VDBP concentrations have been associated with infertility, endometriosis, PCOS and spontaneous miscarriage, as well as adverse pregnancy outcomes including GDM, pre-eclampsia, preterm birth and fetal growth restriction. However, increased VDBP concentration in cervicovaginal fluid has been linked to unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss and premature rupture of membranes. Some genetic variants of VDBP have also been associated with these adverse outcomes. Further studies using more accurate VDBP assays and accounting for ethnic variation and potential confounders are needed to clarify whether VDBP is associated with reproductive health and pregnancy outcomes, and the mechanisms underlying these relationships.

The demand for measurement of vitamin D metabolites for clinical diagnosis and to advance our understanding of the role of vitamin D in human health has significantly increased in the last decade. New developments in technologies employed have enabled the separation and quantification of additional metabolites and interferences. Also, developments of immunoassays have changed the landscape. Programmes and materials for assay standardisation, harmonisation and the expansion of the vitamin D external quality assurance scheme (DEQAS) with the provision of target values as measured by a reference measurement procedure have improved standardisation, quality assurance and comparability of measurements. In this article, we describe developments in the measurement of the commonly analysed vitamin D metabolites in clinical and research practice. We describe current analytical approaches, discuss differences between assays, their origin, and how these may be influenced by physiological and experimental conditions. The value of measuring metabolites beyond 25 hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D), the marker of vitamin D status, in routine clinical practice is not yet confirmed. Here we provide an overview of the value and application of the measurement of 1,25 dihydroxyvitamin D, 24,25 dihydroxyvitamin D and free 25OHD in the diagnosis of patients with abnormalities in vitamin D metabolism and for research purposes.

Clinical and preclinical studies have provided conflicting data on the postulated beneficial effects of vitamin D in patients with prostate cancer. In this opinion piece, we discuss reasons for discrepancies between preclinical and clinical vitamin D studies. Different criteria have been used as evidence for the key roles of vitamin D. Clinical studies report integrative cancer outcome criteria such as incidence and mortality in relation to vitamin D status over time. In contrast, preclinical vitamin D studies report molecular and cellular changes resulting from treatment with the biologically active vitamin D metabolite, 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 (calcitriol) in tissues. However, these reported changes in preclinical in vitro studies are often the result of treatment with biologically irrelevant high calcitriol concentrations. In typical experiments, the used calcitriol concentrations exceed the calcitriol concentrations in normal and malignant prostate tissue by 100 to 1000 times. This raises reasonable concerns regarding the postulated biological effects and mechanisms of these preclinical vitamin D approaches in relation to clinical relevance. This is not restricted to prostate cancer, as detailed data regarding the tissue-specific concentrations of vitamin D metabolites are currently lacking. The application of unnaturally high concentrations of calcitriol in preclinical studies appears to be a major reason why the results of preclinical in vitro studies hardly match up with outcomes of vitamin D-related clinical studies. Regarding future studies addressing these concerns, we suggest establishing reference ranges of tissue-specific vitamin D metabolites within various cancer entities, carrying out model studies on human cancer cells and patient-derived organoids with biologically relevant calcitriol concentrations, and lastly improving the design of vitamin D clinical trials where results from preclinical studies guide the protocols and endpoints within these trials.