Relationship(s) between obesity and inflammatory bowel diseases: possible intertwined pathogenic mechanisms.

The inflammatory bowel diseases, Crohn's and ulcerative colitis have increased in incidence and prevalence from the mid-eighteen to the late nineteen centuries. From then to the current twenty-first century there has been a more rapid expansion of these disease to areas previously experiencing low rates. This latter expansion coincides with the current obesity pandemic which also began toward the end of the last century. Although the two diseases have radically different frequencies, there are interesting links between them. Four areas link the diseases. On an epidemiological level, IBD tends to follow a north-south gradient raising the importance of vitamin D in protection. Obesity has very weak relationship with latitude, but both diseases follow adult lactase distributions colliding in this plane. Is it possible that obesity (a low vitamin D condition with questionable response to supplements) reduces effects in IBD? On a pathogenic level, pro-inflammatory processes mark both IBD and obesity. The similarity raises the question of whether obesity could facilitate the development of IBD. Features of the metabolic syndrome occur in both, with or without obesity in IBD. The fourth interaction between the two diseases is the apparent effect of obesity on the course of IBD. There are suggestions that obesity may reduce the efficacy of biologic agents. Yet there is some suggestion also that obesity may reduce the need for hospitalization and surgery. The apparent co-expansion of both obesity and IBD suggests similar environmental changes may be involved in the promotion of both.

Dynamics of vitamin D in patients with mild or inactive inflammatory bowel disease and their families.

BACKGROUND: 25(OH) vitamin D levels may be low in patients with moderately or severely active inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD: Crohn's disease and Idiopathic Ulcerative Colitis) but this is less clear in patients with mild or inactive IBD. Furthermore there is limited information of any family influence on 25(OH) vitamin D levels in IBD. As a possible risk factor we hypothesize that vitamin D levels may also be low in families of IBD patients. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate 25[OH] vitamin D levels in patients with IBD in remission or with mild activity. A second objective is to evaluate whether there are relationships within IBD family units of 25[OH] vitamin D and what are the influences associated with these levels. METHODS: Participants underwent medical history, physical examination and a 114 item diet questionnaire. Serum 25[OH] vitamin D was measured, using a radioimmunoassay kit, (replete ≥ 75, insufficient 50-74, deficient < 25-50, or severely deficient < 25 nmol/L). Associations between 25[OH] vitamin D and twenty variables were evaluated using univariate regression. Multivariable analysis was also applied and intrafamilial dynamics were assessed. RESULTS: 55 patients and 48 controls with their respective families participated (N206). 25[OH] vitamin D levels between patients and controls were similar (71.2 ± 32.8 vs. 68.3 ±26.2 nmol/L). Vitamin D supplements significantly increased intake but correlation with serum 25[OH] vitamin D was significant only during non sunny months among patients. Within family units, patients' families had mean replete levels (82.3 ± 34.2 nmol/L) and a modest correlation emerged during sunny months between patients and family (r2 =0.209 p = 0.032). These relationships were less robust and non significant in controls and their families. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with mild or inactive IBD 25[OH] vitamin D levels are less than ideal but are similar to controls. Taken together collectively, the results of this study suggest that patient family dynamics may be different in IBD units from that in control family units. However contrary to the hypothesis, intra familial vitamin D dynamics do not pose additional risks for development of IBD.