Dietary calcium intake and change in bone mineral density in older adults: a systematic review of longitudinal cohort studies.

Many older adults do not achieve recommended intakes of calcium and there is some concern over the potential impact of this on bone health. The objective of this review was to examine evidence from cohort studies on the relationship between calcium intake and change in bone mineral density (BMD) in older adults, something not undertaken in the last two decades. Data sources included Ovid Medline, Embase, and PubMed and references from retrieved reviews and articles. The final search was performed in February 2021. We included cohort studies of calcium intake in participants aged >50 years with change in BMD over ≥1 year as an outcome. We identified 23 studies of women and 7 of men. Most studies found no association between calcium intake and change in BMD in women (71%) or men (71%). Among women, five studies reported high rates (>30% of participants) of hormone treatment or osteoporosis therapy (HT/OT) use; 80% of these studies reported a positive association between calcium intake and change in BMD, compared with 10% of studies in which HT/OT use was low. No study in women in which the mean age was >60 years reported a positive association between calcium intake and change in BMD. We conclude that calcium intake across the ranges consumed in these studies (mean intake in all but one study >500 mg/day) is not an important determinant of bone loss, particularly among women >60 years. The positive findings in studies with high rates of HT/OT use are likely to arise from confounding as a result of co-administration of calcium supplements with these medications.

Vitamin D deficiency, supplementation and testing: have we got it right in New Zealand?

BACKGROUND: Severe prolonged vitamin D deficiency can cause rickets or osteomalacia. Both can be prevented by sunshine exposure or vitamin D supplementation. Although New Zealand guidance does not recommend vitamin D supplementation for the general population, it can be considered for individuals at risk of vitamin D deficiency. Routine measurement of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) is also considered unnecessary. METHODS: We investigated the rates of vitamin D supplementation, rickets and osteomalacia in New Zealand, and of 25OHD results in Auckland, over the last two decades. RESULTS: Vitamin D prescriptions increased 14-fold, from 86,295/year to 1,215,507/year, between 2003 and 2019, with medication costs alone in 2019 being >$1 million. Despite these changes, the annual prevalence of hospital admissions for rickets, osteomalacia and unspecified vitamin D deficiency remained low and stable (10-20/year). 25OHD concentrations increased between 2002 and 2003 and between 2009 and 2019, and in the later time-period, 25OHD tests mainly identified individuals without vitamin D deficiency (40-50% >75nmol/L, 65-70% >50nmol/L and only 7-12.5% <25nmol/L). CONCLUSIONS: Osteomalacia and rickets persist at low rates despite widespread, increasingly costly vitamin D supplementation and testing, which largely identifies individuals without vitamin D deficiency. These results suggest that vitamin D guidance and practice in New Zealand should change.

Prevalence of biochemical osteomalacia in adults undergoing vitamin D testing.

OBJECTIVE: Prolonged severe vitamin D deficiency can cause osteomalacia, but the 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) concentration below which this occurs is unknown. We investigated the prevalence of biochemical osteomalacia in adults with a measurement of 25OHD. DESIGN, MEASUREMENT, AND PATIENTS: 25OHD results between 1/1/2009 and 15/6/2020 were obtained from the regional laboratory database, together with measurements of serum calcium, parathyroid hormone (PTH) and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) within 6 months of the index 25OHD. We defined biochemical osteomalacia as all 3 of: albumin-adjusted serum calcium (aCa)<2.0 mmol/L, PTH>7.3 pmol/L and ALP>150 IU/L. Possible osteomalacia was 2/3 criteria with the other test not done. 25OHD measurements associated with significant renal impairment, elevated hepatic transaminases or hypercalcaemia were excluded. RESULTS: 110,046 25OHD measurements were identified over the 11.5 years period. After removal of ineligible measurements, 42,171 25OHD measurements from 32,386 individuals with at least 2 of aCa, PTH and ALP were included in analyses. Median 25OHD was 63 nmol/L; 8% were <25 nmol/L, and 33% were <50 nmol/L. Five index 25OHD measurements met the definition of biochemical osteomalacia, and another 11 were possible osteomalacia. After reviewing available clinical records for these 16 episodes, we classified 9 cases as osteomalacia and 7 as other diagnoses. Thus, the prevalence of biochemical osteomalacia was 0.02% (9/42,171) for 25OHD measurements and 0.23% (8/3432) for 25OHD<25 nmol/L. All cases of osteomalacia with 25OHD measurements prior to supplementation had 25OHD≤18 nmol/L. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of biochemical osteomalacia is very low, even in individuals with 25OHD<25 nmol/L.

Population vitamin D supplementation in UK adults: too much of nothing?

Topics for DTB review articles are selected by DTB's editorial board to provide concise overviews of medicines and other treatments to help patients get the best care. Articles include a summary of key points and a brief overview for patients. Articles may also have a series of multiple choice CME questions.

Calcium and/or Vitamin D Supplementation for the Prevention of Fragility Fractures: Who Needs It?

Vitamin D and calcium have different biological functions, so the need for supplementation, and its safety and efficacy, need to be evaluated for each separately. Vitamin D deficiency is usually the result of low sunlight exposure (e.g., in frail older people, those who are veiled, those with dark-skin living at higher latitudes) and is reversible with calciferol 400-800 IU/day. Calcium supplements produce a 1% increase in bone density in the first year of use, without further increases subsequently. Vitamin D supplements do not improve bone density in clinical trials except in analyses of subgroups with baseline levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D <30 nmol/L. Supplementation with calcium, vitamin D, or their combination does not prevent fractures in community-dwelling adults, but a large study in vitamin D-deficient nursing home residents did demonstrate fracture prevention. When treating osteoporosis, co-administration of calcium with anti-resorptive drugs has not been shown to impact on treatment efficacy. Correction of severe vitamin D deficiency (<25 nmol/L) is necessary before use of potent anti-resorptive drugs to avoid hypocalcemia. Calcium supplements cause gastrointestinal side effects, particularly constipation, and increase the risk of kidney stones and, probably, heart attacks by about 20%. Low-dose vitamin D is safe, but doses >4000 IU/day have been associated with more falls and fractures. Current evidence does not support use of either calcium or vitamin D supplements in healthy community-dwelling adults.

Controversies in medicine: the role of calcium and vitamin D supplements in adults.

Vitamin D is made in the skin when exposed to sunlight, so deficiency is usually the result of low sunlight exposure (eg, in frail older people and in individuals who are veiled). Calcium and/or vitamin D supplements have been used for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. The major trials in community-dwelling individuals have not demonstrated fracture prevention with either calcium, vitamin D, or their combination, but the results of a large study in vitamin D-deficient nursing home residents indicated a reduced fracture incidence. Trials show that vitamin D increases bone density when winter 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels are below 25-30 nmol/L. However, assay expense and variability suggest that supplements are better targeted based on clinical status to frail older people and possibly to people with dark skin living at higher latitudes. A daily dose of 400-800 units (10-20 µg) is usually adequate. Parenteral antiresorptive drugs can cause hypocalcaemia in severe vitamin D deficiency (< 25 nmol/L), which should therefore be corrected before treatment. Clinical trials have not demonstrated benefits of vitamin D on non-skeletal endpoints. Calcium supplements in healthy individuals are not needed, nor are they required in most people receiving treatment for osteoporosis, where they have not been shown to affect treatment efficacy. Calcium supplements cause constipation, bloating and kidney stones, and some evidence suggests they may cause a small increase in the risk of myocardial infarction. Low dose vitamin D is safe, but high doses result in more falls and fractures. Current evidence does not support the use of these supplements in healthy community-dwelling adults.

Fracture Prevention with Zoledronate in Older Women with Osteopenia.

BACKGROUND: Bisphosphonates prevent fractures in patients with osteoporosis, but their efficacy in women with osteopenia is unknown. Most fractures in postmenopausal women occur in those with osteopenia, so therapies that are effective in women with osteopenia are needed. METHODS: We conducted a 6-year, double-blind trial involving 2000 women with osteopenia (defined by a T score of -1.0 to -2.5 at either the total hip or the femoral neck on either side) who were 65 years of age or older. Participants were randomly assigned to receive four infusions of either zoledronate at a dose of 5 mg (zoledronate group) or normal saline (placebo group) at 18-month intervals. A dietary calcium intake of 1 g per day was advised, but calcium supplements were not provided. Participants who were not already taking vitamin D supplements received cholecalciferol before the trial began (a single dose of 2.5 mg) and during the trial (1.25 mg per month). The primary end point was the time to first occurrence of a nonvertebral or vertebral fragility fracture. RESULTS: At baseline, the mean (±SD) age was 71±5 years, the T score at the femoral neck was -1.6±0.5, and the median 10-year risk of hip fracture was 2.3%. A fragility fracture occurred in 190 women in the placebo group and in 122 women in the zoledronate group (hazard ratio with zoledronate, 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.50 to 0.79; P<0.001). The number of women that would need to be treated to prevent the occurrence of a fracture in 1 woman was 15. As compared with the placebo group, women who received zoledronate had a lower risk of nonvertebral fragility fractures (hazard ratio, 0.66; P=0.001), symptomatic fractures (hazard ratio, 0.73; P=0.003), vertebral fractures (odds ratio, 0.45; P=0.002), and height loss (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of nonvertebral or vertebral fragility fractures was significantly lower in women with osteopenia who received zoledronate than in women who received placebo. (Funded by the Health Research Council of New Zealand; Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number, ACTRN12609000593235 .).

Assessment of research waste part 1: an exemplar from examining study design, surrogate and clinical endpoints in studies of calcium intake and vitamin D supplementation.

BACKGROUND: Research waste is estimated to be very common, but assessments of its prevalence and scope are rare. As an example, we assessed research waste in clinical research on calcium intake (assessing study design and endpoint type) and vitamin D supplementation (assessing endpoint type). METHODS: We examined 404 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies of calcium intake (diet or supplements) and bone mineral density (BMD) or fracture, and 547 RCTs of vitamin D supplements, and assessed the proportion of studies that used surrogate or clinical endpoints. For studies with BMD or fracture as an endpoint, we estimated when the 'tipping' point occurred indicating the need for RCTs with fracture as an endpoint (based on cumulative meta-analyses of BMD RCTs, and chronological review of observational studies), and whether each study published at least 5y after the tipping point was novel, added new clinical knowledge or was research waste. RESULTS: Observational studies of calcium intake and BMD or fracture outnumbered RCTs by 3.3-4.5 times. For both calcium intake and vitamin D supplements, studies using surrogate endpoints outnumbered studies using clinical endpoints by 1.6-3 times. Of 41 RCT publications of calcium intake and BMD or fracture published at least 5y after the tipping point in 1994, we considered that 19 (46%) lacked novelty, another 13 (32%) added no new clinical knowledge, and 30 (73%) were research waste. Of 204 observational study publications of calcium intake and BMD or fracture, 197 (96%) lacked novelty, another 5 (2%) added no new clinical knowledge, and 202 (99%) were research waste. Of 39 RCTs of vitamin D supplementation and BMD or fracture published at least 5y after the tipping point in 1999, 14 (36%) lacked novelty, another 13 (33%) added no new clinical knowledge, and 27 (69%) were research waste. CONCLUSIONS: A high proportion of studies of calcium intake since 2000 (95%) and trials of vitamin D supplements since 2005 (69%) on BMD or fracture represent research waste.

Effects of vitamin D supplementation on musculoskeletal health: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis.

BACKGROUND: The effects of vitamin D on fractures, falls, and bone mineral density are uncertain, particularly for high vitamin D doses. We aimed to determine the effect of vitamin D supplementation on fractures, falls, and bone density. METHODS: In this systematic review, random-effects meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis, we used findings from literature searches in previously published meta-analyses. We updated these findings by searching PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central on Sept 14, 2017, and Feb 26, 2018, using the search term "vitamin D" and additional keywords, without any language restrictions. We assessed randomised controlled trials of adults (>18 years) that compared vitamin D with untreated controls, placebo, or lower-dose vitamin D supplements. Trials with multiple interventions (eg, co-administered calcium and vitamin D) were eligible if the study groups differed only by use of vitamin D. We excluded trials of hydroxylated vitamin D analogues. Eligible studies included outcome data for total or hip fractures, falls, or bone mineral density measured at the lumbar spine, total hip, femoral neck, total body, or forearm. We extracted data about participant characteristics, study design, interventions, outcomes, funding sources, and conflicts of interest. The co-primary endpoints were participants with at least one fracture, at least one hip fracture, or at least one fall; we compared data for fractures and falls using relative risks with an intention-to-treat analysis using all available data. The secondary endpoints were the percentage change in bone mineral density from baseline at lumbar spine, total hip, femoral neck, total body, and forearm. FINDINGS: We identified 81 randomised controlled trials (n=53 537 participants) that reported fracture (n=42), falls (n=37), or bone mineral density (n=41). In pooled analyses, vitamin D had no effect on total fracture (36 trials; n=44 790, relative risk 1·00, 95% CI 0·93-1·07), hip fracture (20 trials; n=36 655, 1·11, 0·97-1·26), or falls (37 trials; n=34 144, 0·97, 0·93-1·02). Results were similar in randomised controlled trials of high-dose versus low-dose vitamin D and in subgroup analyses of randomised controlled trials using doses greater than 800 IU per day. In pooled analyses, there were no clinically relevant between-group differences in bone mineral density at any site (range -0·16% to 0·76% over 1-5 years). For total fracture and falls, the effect estimate lay within the futility boundary for relative risks of 15%, 10%, 7·5%, and 5% (total fracture only), suggesting that vitamin D supplementation does not reduce fractures or falls by these amounts. For hip fracture, at a 15% relative risk, the effect estimate lay between the futility boundary and the inferior boundary, meaning there is reliable evidence that vitamin D supplementation does not reduce hip fractures by this amount, but uncertainty remains as to whether it might increase hip fractures. The effect estimate lay within the futility boundary at thresholds of 0·5% for total hip, forearm, and total body bone mineral density, and 1·0% for lumbar spine and femoral neck, providing reliable evidence that vitamin D does not alter these outcomes by these amounts. INTERPRETATION: Our findings suggest that vitamin D supplementation does not prevent fractures or falls, or have clinically meaningful effects on bone mineral density. There were no differences between the effects of higher and lower doses of vitamin D. There is little justification to use vitamin D supplements to maintain or improve musculoskeletal health. This conclusion should be reflected in clinical guidelines. FUNDING: Health Research Council of New Zealand.

Assessment of research waste part 2: wrong study populations- an exemplar of baseline vitamin D status of participants in trials of vitamin D supplementation.

BACKGROUND: Research waste can occur when trials are conducted in the wrong populations. Vitamin D deficient populations are most likely to benefit from vitamin D supplementation. We investigated waste attributable to randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of supplementation in populations that were not vitamin D deficient. METHODS: In December 2015, we searched Pubmed, recent systematic reviews, and three trial registries for RCTs of vitamin D with clinical endpoints in adults, and 25-hydroxvitamin D (25OHD) survey data relevant to large (N ≥ 1000) RCTs. We investigated the proportion of RCTs that studied vitamin D deficient populations, temporal trends in baseline 25OHD, and whether investigators in large RCTs considered relevant 25OHD survey data or systematic reviews in their trial justifications. RESULTS: Of 137 RCTs of vitamin D with clinical endpoints, 118 (86%) reported baseline mean/median 25OHD, which was < 25, 25-49, 50-74, and ≥ 75 nmol/L in 12 (10%), 62 (53%), 36 (31%), and 8 (7%) RCTs, respectively. In 70% of RCTs, baseline 25OHD was > 40 nmol/L. Baseline 25OHD increased over time. Before 2006, 38%, 62%, 0% and 0% of RCTs had baseline 25OHD < 25, 25-49, 50-74, and ≥ 75 nmol/L respectively; in 2011-15, the respective proportions were 9%, 49%, 37%, and 6%. Of 12 RCTs with baseline 25OHD < 25 nmol/L, 8 had neutral findings. Of 25 large RCTs (18 completed, 7 ongoing), 1 was undertaken in a vitamin D deficient population, 3 in vitamin D insufficient populations, and 17 had, or probably will have, baseline 25OHD > 40 nmol/L. 44% (8/18) of large completed RCTs cited relevant prior population 25OHD data, and only 3/10 (30%) relevant prior systematic reviews. CONCLUSIONS: Up to 70% of RCTs of vitamin D with clinical endpoints, 71% of large completed RCTs, and 100% of ongoing large RCTs could be considered research waste because they studied cohorts that were not vitamin D deficient.

Calcium supplementation in osteoporosis: useful or harmful?

Osteoporosis and fragility fractures are important social and economic problems worldwide and are due to both the loss of bone mineral density and sarcopenia. Indeed, fragility fractures are associated with increased disability, morbidity and mortality. It is known that a normal calcium balance together with a normal vitamin D status is important for maintaining well-balanced bone metabolism, and for many years, calcium and vitamin D have been considered crucial in the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. However, recently, the usefulness of calcium supplementation (alone or with concomitant vitamin D) has been questioned, since some studies reported only weak efficacy of these supplementations in reducing fragility fracture risk. On the other hand, besides the gastrointestinal side effects of calcium supplements and the risk of kidney stones related to use of co-administered calcium and vitamin D supplements, other recent data suggested potential adverse cardiovascular effects from calcium supplementation. This debate article is focused on the evidence regarding both the possible usefulness for bone health and the potential harmful effects of calcium and/or calcium with vitamin D supplementation.

Calcium and Cardiovascular Disease.

Circulating calcium is a risk factor for vascular disease, a conclusion arising from prospective studies involving hundreds of thousands of participants and extending over periods of up to 30 years. These associations may be partially mediated by other cardiovascular risk factors such as circulating lipid levels, blood pressure, and body mass index, but there appears to be a residual independent effect of serum calcium. Polymorphisms of the calcium-sensing receptor associated with small elevations of serum calcium are also associated with cardiovascular disease, suggesting that calcium plays a causative role. Trials of calcium supplements in patients on dialysis and those with less severe renal failure demonstrate increased mortality and/or acceleration of vascular disease, and meta-analyses of trials in those without overt renal disease suggest a similar adverse effect. Interpretation of the latter trials is complicated by a significant interaction between baseline use of calcium supplements and the effect of randomisation to calcium in the largest trial. Restriction of analysis to those who are calcium-naive demonstrates a consistent adverse effect. Observational studies of dietary calcium do not demonstrate a consistent adverse effect on cardiovascular health, though very high or very low intakes may be deleterious. Thus, obtaining calcium from the diet rather than supplements is to be encouraged.