Explore the vast range of titles available.

Your plain-English guide to the many benefits of vitamin D, whether you get it from the sun, the food you eat, or from supplements. Learn about its many benefits, as well as myths and misconceptions-- p. 4 of cover.

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 .).

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.

Vitamin D deficiency and insufficiency is a global health issue that afflicts more than one billion children and adults worldwide. The consequences of vitamin D deficiency cannot be under estimated. There has been an association of vitamin D deficiency with a myriad of acute and chronic illnesses including preeclampsia, childhood dental caries, periodontitis, autoimmune disorders, infectious diseases, cardiovascular disease, deadly cancers, type 2 diabetes and neurological disorders. This review is to put into perspective the controversy surrounding the definition for vitamin D deficiency and insufficiency as well as providing guidance for how to treat and prevent vitamin D deficiency.

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.

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.

Abstract Context More than 3% of adults report vitamin D intakes of 4000 IU/day or more, but the safety of this practice is unknown. Objective The objective of this work is to establish whether vitamin D doses up to 10 000 IU/day are safe and well tolerated. Design The Calgary Vitamin D Study was a 3-year, double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Setting A single-center study was conducted at the University of Calgary, Canada. Participants Participants included healthy adults (n = 373) ages 55 to 70 years with serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D 30 to 125 nmol/L. Interventions Participants were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to vitamin D3 400, 40 000, or 10 000 IU/day. Calcium supplementation was initiated if dietary calcium intake was less than 1200 mg/day. Main Outcome Measures In these prespecified secondary analyses, changes in serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D, calcium, creatinine, 24-hour urine calcium excretion, and incidence of adverse events were assessed. Between-group differences in adverse events were examined using incident rate differences and logistic regression. Results Of 373 participants (400: 124, 4000: 125, 10 000: 124), 49% were male, mean (SD) age was 64 (4) years, and 25-hydroxyvitamin D 78.0 (19.5) nmol/L. Serum calcium, creatinine, and 24-hour urine calcium excretion did not differ between treatments. Mild hypercalcemia (2.56-2.64 mmol/L) occurred in 15 (4%) participants (400: 0%, 4000: 3%, 10 000: 9%, P = .002); all cases resolved on repeat testing. Hypercalciuria occurred in 87 (23%) participants (400: 17%, 4000: 22%, 10 000: 31%, P = .01). Clinical adverse events were experienced by 365 (97.9%) participants and were balanced across treatment arms. Conclusions The safety profile of vitamin D supplementation is similar for doses of 400, 4000, and 10 000 IU/day. Hypercalciuria was common and occurred more frequently with higher doses. Hypercalcemia occurred more frequently with higher doses but was rare, mild, and transient.

ContextVitamin D and 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] are stored in adipose tissue, but the clinical relevance is uncertain.ObjectiveTo evaluate changes in serum 25(OH)D and adipose tissue vitamin D levels after stopping vitamin D supplementation.DesignA prospective, double-blind cohort follow-up study.SettingClinical Research Unit at University Hospital of North Norway.PatientsSeventy-six subjects were included after participation in a 3- to 5-year prevention of type 2 diabetes study and were administered 20,000 IU of vitamin D or placebo per week.InterventionDuring the 12-month follow-up period, blood samples were drawn at the beginning and after 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Fat biopsies were taken at the start and end.Main Outcome MeasuresChanges in 25(OH)D level in serum and 25(OH)D and vitamin D levels in adipose tissue.ResultsForty-one of 42 subjects who were given vitamin D and 33 of 34 subjects who were given placebo completed the study. At the inclusion, mean serum 25(OH)D levels were 122 and 71 nmol/L in the vitamin D and placebo groups, respectively. Serum 25(OH)D levels were significantly higher in the vitamin D group than in the placebo group throughout and were 84.5 and 73.1 nmol/L, respectively, after 12 months. In the vitamin D group, adipose tissue vitamin D levels decreased by 52% over 12 months.ConclusionVitamin D and 25(OH)D stored in adipose tissue after 3 to 5 years of vitamin D supplementation may have a clinically relevant effect on serum 25(OH)D level the following year.In this study, we explored the effects after high-dose vitamin D supplementation. We found that 25(OH)D and vitamin D stored in fat contributed to higher serum 25(OH)D values in 12 months.

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.

Vitamin D deficiency is a candidate risk factor for a range of adverse health outcomes. In a genome-wide association study of 25 hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) concentration in 417,580 Europeans we identify 143 independent loci in 112 1-Mb regions, providing insights into the physiology of vitamin D and implicating genes involved in lipid and lipoprotein metabolism, dermal tissue properties, and the sulphonation and glucuronidation of 25OHD. Mendelian randomization models find no robust evidence that 25OHD concentration has causal effects on candidate phenotypes (e.g. BMI, psychiatric disorders), but many phenotypes have (direct or indirect) causal effects on 25OHD concentration, clarifying the epidemiological relationship between 25OHD status and the health outcomes examined in this study. Vitamin D is a precursor of the steroid hormone 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3, and its deficiency is associated with many adverse health outcomes. Here, Revez et al. perform a genome-wide association study for circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D in 417,580 individuals and test for potential causal relationships with other traits using Mendelian randomization.