Explore the vast range of titles available.

It is unclear whether maternal vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy and lactation improves fetal and infant growth in regions where vitamin D deficiency is common. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in Bangladesh to assess the effects of weekly prenatal vitamin D supplementation (from 17 to 24 weeks of gestation until birth) and postpartum vitamin D supplementation on the primary outcome of infants' length-for-age z scores at 1 year according to World Health Organization (WHO) child growth standards. One group received neither prenatal nor postpartum vitamin D (placebo group). Three groups received prenatal supplementation only, in doses of 4200 IU (prenatal 4200 group), 16,800 IU (prenatal 16,800 group), and 28,000 IU (prenatal 28,000 group). The fifth group received prenatal supplementation as well as 26 weeks of postpartum supplementation in the amount of 28,000 IU (prenatal and postpartum 28,000 group). Among 1164 infants assessed at 1 year of age (89.5% of 1300 pregnancies), there were no significant differences across groups in the mean (±SD) length-for-age z scores. Scores were as follows: placebo, -0.93±1.05; prenatal 4200, -1.11±1.12; prenatal 16,800, -0.97±0.97; prenatal 28,000, -1.06±1.07; and prenatal and postpartum 28,000, -0.94±1.00 (P=0.23 for a global test of differences across groups). Other anthropometric measures, birth outcomes, and morbidity did not differ significantly across groups. Vitamin D supplementation had expected effects on maternal and infant serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D and calcium concentrations, maternal urinary calcium excretion, and maternal parathyroid hormone concentrations. There were no significant differences in the frequencies of adverse events across groups, with the exception of a higher rate of possible hypercalciuria among the women receiving the highest dose. In a population with widespread prenatal vitamin D deficiency and fetal and infant growth restriction, maternal vitamin D supplementation from midpregnancy until birth or until 6 months post partum did not improve fetal or infant growth. (Funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01924013 .).

Fat-soluble vitamin deficiency remains a challenge in cystic fibrosis (CF), chronic pancreatitis, and biliary atresia. Liposomes and cyclodextrins can enhance their bioavailability, thus this multi-center randomized placebo-controlled trial compared three-month supplementation of fat-soluble vitamins in the form of liposomes or cyclodextrins to medium-chain triglycerides (MCT) in pancreatic-insufficient CF patients. The daily doses were as follows: 2000 IU of retinyl palmitate, 4000 IU of vitamin D3, 200 IU of RRR-α-tocopherol, and 200 µg of vitamin K2 as menaquinone-7, with vitamin E given in soybean oil instead of liposomes. All participants received 4 mg of β-carotene and 1.07 mg of vitamin K1 to ensure compliance with the guidelines. The primary outcome was the change from the baseline of all-trans-retinol and 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 concentrations and the percentage of undercarboxylated osteocalcin. Out of 75 randomized patients (n = 28 liposomes, n = 22 cyclodextrins, and n = 25 MCT), 67 completed the trial (89%; n = 26 liposomes, n = 18 cyclodextrins, and n = 23 MCT) and had a median age of 22 years (IQR 19–28), body mass index of 20.6 kg/m2 [18.4–22.0], and forced expiratory volume in 1 s of 65% (44–84%). The liposomal formulation of vitamin A was associated with the improved evolution of serum all-trans-retinol compared to the control (median +1.7 ng/mL (IQR −44.3–86.1) vs. −38.8 ng/mL (−71.2–6.8), p = 0.028). Cyclodextrins enhanced the bioavailability of vitamin D3 (+9.0 ng/mL (1.0–17.0) vs. +3.0 ng/mL (−4.0–7.0), p = 0.012) and vitamin E (+4.34 µg/mL (0.33–6.52) vs. −0.34 µg/mL (−1.71–2.15), p = 0.010). Liposomes may augment the bioavailability of vitamin A and cyclodextrins may strengthen the supplementation of vitamins D3 and E relative to MCT in pancreatic-insufficient CF but further studies are required to assess liposomal vitamin E (German Clinical Trial Register number DRKS00014295, funded from EU and Norsa Pharma).

Background/Objectives: Vitamins D and B12 play a crucial role in maintaining bone health, immune function, and neurological integrity. Combined deficiencies in these vitamins can lead to severe health consequences. Current treatment approaches, such as dietary changes and single-vitamin supplementation, often fail to address these deficiencies comprehensively. This study evaluates the effectiveness of concurrent vitamin D and B12 supplementation to correct these insufficiencies. Methods: A prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial was conducted in Greece from October 2024 to December 2024. Participants aged 20 to 80 years, with insufficient levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (serum < 20 ng/mL) and B12 (serum < 250 ng/L), were eligible for inclusion. Results: A total of 124 patients were randomized into three groups: one receiving vitamins B12 and D in a single supplement (2500 IU + 1000 mcg), one receiving separate doses of each vitamin (2000 IU + 1000 mcg), and a control group receiving no supplementation. The results demonstrated a significant increase in B12 and 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels among the supplemented groups. Particularly, participants in the combined supplementation group showed higher average serum levels of both vitamins. By the end of this study, 37.1% of those in the combined supplement group achieved adequate vitamin levels, compared to 29.4% in the separate supplementation group. Conclusions: In conclusion, combined supplementation may improve patient adherence and compliance, leading to better health outcomes for individuals with combined vitamins D and B12 deficiencies.

Abstract Background Numerous studies demonstrate associations between serum concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) and a variety of common disorders, including musculoskeletal, metabolic, cardiovascular, malignant, autoimmune, and infectious diseases. Although a causal link between serum 25(OH)D concentrations and many disorders has not been clearly established, these associations have led to widespread supplementation with vitamin D and increased laboratory testing for 25(OH)D in the general population. The benefit-risk ratio of this increase in vitamin D use is not clear, and the optimal vitamin D intake and the role of testing for 25(OH)D for disease prevention remain uncertain. Objective To develop clinical guidelines for the use of vitamin D (cholecalciferol [vitamin D3] or ergocalciferol [vitamin D2]) to lower the risk of disease in individuals without established indications for vitamin D treatment or 25(OH)D testing. Methods A multidisciplinary panel of clinical experts, along with experts in guideline methodology and systematic literature review, identified and prioritized 14 clinically relevant questions related to the use of vitamin D and 25(OH)D testing to lower the risk of disease. The panel prioritized randomized placebo-controlled trials in general populations (without an established indication for vitamin D treatment or 25[OH]D testing), evaluating the effects of empiric vitamin D administration throughout the lifespan, as well as in select conditions (pregnancy and prediabetes). The panel defined “empiric supplementation” as vitamin D intake that (a) exceeds the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRI) and (b) is implemented without testing for 25(OH)D. Systematic reviews queried electronic databases for publications related to these 14 clinical questions. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and guide recommendations. The approach incorporated perspectives from a patient representative and considered patient values, costs and resources required, acceptability and feasibility, and impact on health equity of the proposed recommendations. The process to develop this clinical guideline did not use a risk assessment framework and was not designed to replace current DRI for vitamin D. Results The panel suggests empiric vitamin D supplementation for children and adolescents aged 1 to 18 years to prevent nutritional rickets and because of its potential to lower the risk of respiratory tract infections; for those aged 75 years and older because of its potential to lower the risk of mortality; for those who are pregnant because of its potential to lower the risk of preeclampsia, intra-uterine mortality, preterm birth, small-for-gestational-age birth, and neonatal mortality; and for those with high-risk prediabetes because of its potential to reduce progression to diabetes. Because the vitamin D doses in the included clinical trials varied considerably and many trial participants were allowed to continue their own vitamin D–containing supplements, the optimal doses for empiric vitamin D supplementation remain unclear for the populations considered. For nonpregnant people older than 50 years for whom vitamin D is indicated, the panel suggests supplementation via daily administration of vitamin D, rather than intermittent use of high doses. The panel suggests against empiric vitamin D supplementation above the current DRI to lower the risk of disease in healthy adults younger than 75 years. No clinical trial evidence was found to support routine screening for 25(OH)D in the general population, nor in those with obesity or dark complexion, and there was no clear evidence defining the optimal target level of 25(OH)D required for disease prevention in the populations considered; thus, the panel suggests against routine 25(OH)D testing in all populations considered. The panel judged that, in most situations, empiric vitamin D supplementation is inexpensive, feasible, acceptable to both healthy individuals and health care professionals, and has no negative effect on health equity. Conclusion The panel suggests empiric vitamin D for those aged 1 to 18 years and adults over 75 years of age, those who are pregnant, and those with high-risk prediabetes. Due to the scarcity of natural food sources rich in vitamin D, empiric supplementation can be achieved through a combination of fortified foods and supplements that contain vitamin D. Based on the absence of supportive clinical trial evidence, the panel suggests against routine 25(OH)D testing in the absence of established indications. These recommendations are not meant to replace the current DRIs for vitamin D, nor do they apply to people with established indications for vitamin D treatment or 25(OH)D testing. Further research is needed to determine optimal 25(OH)D levels for specific health benefits.

Objective To evaluate the extent to which circulating biomarker and supplements of vitamin D are associated with mortality from cardiovascular, cancer, or other conditions, under various circumstances.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and randomised controlled trials.Data sources Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and reference lists of relevant studies to August 2013; correspondance with investigators.Study selection Observational cohort studies and randomised controlled trials in adults, which reported associations between vitamin D (measured as circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentration or vitamin D supplement given singly) and cause specific mortality outcomes.Data extraction Data were extracted by two independent investigators, and a consensus was reached with involvement of a third. Study specific relative risks from 73 cohort studies (849 412 participants) and 22 randomised controlled trials (vitamin D given alone versus placebo or no treatment; 30 716 participants) were meta-analysed using random effects models and were grouped by study and population characteristics.Results In the primary prevention observational studies, comparing bottom versus top thirds of baseline circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D distribution, pooled relative risks were 1.35 (95% confidence interval 1.13 to 1.61) for death from cardiovascular disease, 1.14 (1.01 to 1.29) for death from cancer, 1.30 (1.07 to 1.59) for non-vascular, non-cancer death, and 1.35 (1.22 to 1.49) for all cause mortality. Subgroup analyses in the observational studies indicated that risk of mortality was significantly higher in studies with lower baseline use of vitamin D supplements. In randomised controlled trials, relative risks for all cause mortality were 0.89 (0.80 to 0.99) for vitamin D3 supplementation and 1.04 (0.97 to 1.11) for vitamin D2 supplementation. The effects observed for vitamin D3 supplementation remained unchanged when grouped by various characteristics. However, for vitamin D2 supplementation, increased risks of mortality were observed in studies with lower intervention doses and shorter average intervention periods.Conclusions Evidence from observational studies indicates inverse associations of circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D with risks of death due to cardiovascular disease, cancer, and other causes. Supplementation with vitamin D3 significantly reduces overall mortality among older adults; however, before any widespread supplementation, further investigations will be required to establish the optimal dose and duration and whether vitamin D3 and D2 have different effects on mortality risk.

Little is known about how genetic and nongenetic factors modify responses of vitamin D supplementation in nonwhite populations. To investigate factors modifying 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] and bioavailable 25(OH)D [25(OH)DBio] responses after vitamin D3 supplementation. In this 20-week, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial, 448 Chinese with vitamin D deficiency received 2000 IU/d vitamin D3 or placebo. Serum 25(OH)D, vitamin D-binding protein (VDBP), parathyroid hormone (PTH) and calcium were measured, and 25(OH)DBio was calculated based on VDBP levels. Six common polymorphisms in vitamin D metabolism genes were genotyped. Between-arm net changes were +30.6 ± 1.7 nmol/L for 25(OH)D, +2.7 ± 0.2 nmol/L for 25(OH)DBio, and -5.2 ± 1.2 pg/mL for PTH, corresponding to 70% [95% confidence interval (CI), 62.8% to 77.2%] net reversion rate for vitamin D deficiency at week 20 (P < 0.001). Only 25(OH)DBio change was positively associated with calcium change (P < 0.001). Genetic factors (GC-rs4588/GC-rs7041, VDR-rs2228570, and CYP2R1-rs10741657; P ≤ 0.04) showed stronger influences on 25(OH)D or 25(OH)DBio responses than nongenetic factors, including baseline value, body mass index, and sex. An inverse association of PTH-25(OH)D was demonstrated only at 25(OH)D of <50.8 (95% CI, 43.6 to 59.0) nmol/L. Supplemented 2000 IU/d vitamin D3 raised 25(OH)D and 25(OH)DBio but was unable to correct deficiency in 25% of Chinese participants, which might be partially attributed to the effect of genetic modification. More studies are needed to elucidate appropriate vitamin D recommendations for Asians and the potential clinical implications of 25(OH)DBio.

Background Lifestyle changes have meant that it is problematic for many people across the globe to maintain adequate vitamin D concentrations. As UV-catalysed production in the skin, which uses vitamin D-binding protein to facilitate systemic absorption, is the primary source of vitamin D, it is questionable if oral supplementation of this vitamin is the optimal means to replace it. However, supplementing an oil-soluble vitamin via the skin is problematic as it gets stuck in the stratum corneum after topical application. This clinical study will test if a new vitamin D ester, vitamin D phosphate, which is more water-soluble compared to vitamin D, administered via a transdermal patch, can be used to improve vitamin D status. Method This is a two-part study comprising a dose-escalation with the vitamin D phosphate transdermal patch followed by a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiarmed, multistage clinical trial. It is a single-centred, 12-week study that will enrol a maximum of 100 participants. The dose escalation study will monitor safety and tolerability using serum calcium and 25(OH)D 3 levels. The blinded, randomised trial will test different dose frequencies for 4 weeks compared to a placebo. Then, after an interim analysis, the best dosing frequency will be assessed against a placebo. The primary outcome for the multistage clinical study will be the percentage change in 25(OH)D 3 concentration in the serum (ng/mL) at weeks 4 and 8 compared to baseline. The secondary outcome measures include percentage change in serum vitamin D-binding protein levels, skin interstitial fluid biomarker concentrations, and nail appearance after 4 and 8 weeks compared to baseline. Discussion This study will determine if a vitamin D phosphate transdermal patch can improve vitamin D status. In addition, it could provide a better understanding of how vitamin D is absorbed directly into the skin after application by measuring the serum vitamin D-binding protein and skin biomarker responses to transdermal supplementation. Trial registration Clinical Trials.gov NCT06098846, registered on 23rd October 2023.

Purpose Low vitamin D status is prevalent worldwide. We aim to investigate the effect of vitamin D fortification on serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration in women of Danish and Pakistani origin at risk of vitamin D deficiency. Methods A 12-week randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled intervention trial during winter time, designed to provide 20 µg vitamin D 3 /day through fortified yoghurt, cheese, eggs and crisp bread, and assess the change in serum 25(OH)D. Participants were 143 women of Danish and Pakistani origin, living in Denmark, randomized into four groups, stratified by ethnicity. Results Mean (SD) baseline 25(OH)D concentrations among women of Danish and Pakistani origin were 49.6 (18) and 46.9 (22) nmol/L, respectively ( P  = 0.4). While 9% of Danish women had 25(OH)D < 30 nmol/L, the prevalence among women of Pakistani origin was 24%. Median (IQR) vitamin D intake among Danish and Pakistani women at endpoint was 32.0 (27.0, 34.4) µg/day and 24.2 (19.2, 30.8) µg/day, respectively. Endpoint serum 25(OH)D increased in fortified groups to 77.8 (14) nmol/L among Danish women and 54.7 (18) nmol/L among women of Pakistani origin ( P  < 0.01). At endpoint, 0% in the Danish-fortified group and 3% in the Pakistani-fortified group had 25(OH)D < 30 nmol/L, compared with 23 % and 34% in their respective control groups. Conclusions Vitamin D fortification of four different foods for 12 weeks during winter was effective in increasing serum 25(OH)D and reducing the prevalence of very low vitamin D status among women of Danish and Pakistani origin. ClinicalTrials.gov with identifier NCT02631629.

Low serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) has been shown to correlate with increased risk of type 2 diabetes. Small, observational studies suggest an action for vitamin D in improving insulin sensitivity and/or insulin secretion. The objective of the present study was to investigate the effect of improved vitamin D status on insulin resistance (IR), utilising randomised, controlled, double-blind intervention administering 100 μg (4000 IU) vitamin D3 (n 42) or placebo (n 39) daily for 6 months to South Asian women, aged 23–68 years, living in Auckland, New Zealand. Subjects were insulin resistant – homeostasis model assessment 1 (HOMA1)>1·93 and had serum 25(OH)D concentration < 50 nmol/l. Exclusion criteria included diabetes medication and vitamin D supplementation >25 μg (1000 IU)/d. The HOMA2 computer model was used to calculate outcomes. Median (25th, 75th percentiles) serum 25(OH)D3 increased significantly from 21 (11, 40) to 75 (55, 84) nmol/l with supplementation. Significant improvements were seen in insulin sensitivity and IR (P = 0·003 and 0·02, respectively), and fasting insulin decreased (P = 0·02) with supplementation compared with placebo. There was no change in C-peptide with supplementation. IR was most improved when endpoint serum 25(OH)D reached ≥ 80 nmol/l. Secondary outcome variables (lipid profile and high sensitivity C-reactive protein) were not affected by supplementation. In conclusion, improving vitamin D status in insulin resistant women resulted in improved IR and sensitivity, but no change in insulin secretion. Optimal vitamin D concentrations for reducing IR were shown to be 80–119 nmol/l, providing further evidence for an increase in the recommended adequate levels. Registered Trial No. ACTRN12607000642482.

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.