Meta-Analysis of European Clinical Trials Characterizing the Healthy-Adult Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D Response to Vitamin D Supplementation.

To obtain reliable data that allow health authorities to re-evaluate recommendations for oral vitamin D uptake, we conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the impact of supplementation on serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) levels in healthy adults in Europe. Of the publications identified (n = 4005) in our literature search (PUBMED, through 2 January 2022), 49 primary studies (7320 subjects, 73 study arms) were eligible for inclusion in our meta-analysis. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB tool based on seven categories, according to which each study is rated using three grades, and overall was rated as rather low. The median duration of intervention was 136.78 days (range, 1088 days); the mean weighted baseline 25(OH)D concentration and mean age were 33.01 vs. 33.84 nmol/L and 46.8 vs. 44.8 years in the vitamin D and placebo groups, respectively. Using random-effects models, 25(OH)D levels were increased by 36.28 nmol/L (95% CI 31.97-40.59) in the vitamin D group compared to the placebo, with a relative serum increment of 1.77 nmol/L per 2.5 µg of vitamin D daily. Notably, the relative serum 25(OH)D increment was affected by various factors, including the dosage and baseline serum 25(OH)D concentration, decreasing with increasing vitamin D doses and with increasing baseline serum levels. We estimate that supplementation in all healthy adults in Europe with appr. 25 µg of vitamin D (1000 IU) daily would raise serum 25(OH)D levels in 95% of the population to ≥50 nmol/L. Our work provides health authorities with reliable data that can help to re-evaluate recommendations for oral vitamin D supplementation.

Critique of Public Health Guidance for Vitamin D and Sun Exposure in the Context of Cancer and COVID-19.

Official public health pronouncements about sun exposure and vitamin D can be summarized as follows: First, there is no such thing as a safe tan. Therefore, avoid exposing the skin to sunshine. Second, in the absence of sunshine, a daily intake of 800 IU/day (20 mcg/d) vitamin D or less is sufficient for the health needs of almost all members of the population. However, exposure of the skin to sunlight induces multiple mechanisms that lower blood pressure, while also initiating production of vitamin D, which is needed to produce a hormone that regulates multiple systems including the cellular biology that affects cancer mortality. Disease-prevention relationships point to a beneficial threshold for serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D; the index of vitamin D nutrition] that is at least 75 nmol/l (30 ng/ml). To ensure the threshold for all adults, an average per-day minimum total input of vitamin D3 from sunshine/UVB exposure, and/or from food (natural food like fish or fortified food like milk), and/or vitamin supplementation of at least 4,000 IU/d (100 mcg/d) is required. Strong, although not Level-1, evidence indicates that the maintenance of that threshold will lower mortality overall, lower mortality from cancer, and lower the risk of certain other diseases such as respiratory infection and COVID-19.

An Appraisal to Address Health Consequences of Vitamin D Deficiency With Food Fortification and Supplements: Time to Act!

A symposium entitled "Vitamin D in Prevention and Therapy" was held on May 4-5, 2022, in Homburg, Germany to discuss important new advances in the field, including identification of new vitamin D signaling pathways, of new biologic effects of vitamin D-compounds (e.g., on the microbiome), and convincing proof of the relevance of vitamin D deficiency for the risk and outcome of many chronic diseases, including cancer, cardio-vascular, auto-immune, metabolic, and infectious diseases. Concerning the COVID-19-pandemic, an inverse association between 25(OH)D serum concentrations and SARS-CoV-2-infections, morbidity, and mortality was shown. In relation to cancer, several meta-analyses recently demonstrated an association of vitamin D-supplementation with significantly decreased mortality rates, which presumably would reduce health care costs. Considering the impressive body of evidence and the high safety of oral supplementation and food fortification with vitamin D, it was concluded that there is now an urgent need to act. In many countries worldwide, health care authorities need to increase efforts to address vitamin D deficiency, e.g., via food fortification and/or supplementation with vitamin D, and/or promoting moderate UV-exposure. It was estimated that in many countries, vitamin D intakes of the order of appr. 1,000 IE (25 µg)/day would be needed to bring and/or keep the vast majority of people over a serum 25(OH)D threshold of 20 ng/ml (50 nmol/l), which would be difficult to obtain alone from food fortification. New developments in personalized medicine may represent helpful tools to identify populations at risk for vitamin D deficiency and their responsiveness to vitamin D treatment.

Mistakes in terminology cause false conclusions: Vitamin D does not increase the risk of dementia.

There has been a progressive trend in recent years, to trivialize the terminology surrounding the molecules based on a secosteroid structure. The generic use of the term, "vitamin D," results in gross misrepresentations that confuse the use of a drug commonly used for patients with kidney failure, with the nutritional use of vitamin D. This commentary is a critique of one particularly bad example of that terminological trivialization. Authors may simply want to add impact to their findings when they refer to "vitamin D supplementation" when what they are reporting on is calcitriol. However, the consequences of this practice are to mislead all readers who do not go through the primary publication very carefully to understand the details behind sloppy terminology. Contrary to all the words written in the publication commented upon here, it offers no clinical evidence that vitamin D supplementation increases risk of Alzheimer's disease or dementia.

Supplemental Vitamins and Minerals for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and Treatment: JACC Focus Seminar.

This is an update of the previous 2018 systematic review and meta-analysis of vitamin and mineral supplementation on cardiovascular disease outcomes and all-cause mortality. New randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses were identified by searching the Cochrane library, Medline, and Embase, and data were analyzed using random effects models and classified by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation approach. This updated review shows similar findings to the previous report for preventive benefits from both folic acid and B vitamins for stroke and has been graded with moderate quality. No effect was seen for the commonly used multivitamins, vitamin D, calcium, and vitamin C, and an increased risk was seen with niacin (with statin) for all-cause mortality. Conclusive evidence for the benefit of supplements across different dietary backgrounds, when the nutrient is sufficient, has not been demonstrated.

Individual participant data (IPD)-level meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials with vitamin D-fortified foods to estimate Dietary Reference Values for vitamin D.

CONTEXT AND PURPOSE: Individual participant data-level meta-regression (IPD) analysis is superior to meta-regression based on aggregate data in determining Dietary Reference Values (DRV) for vitamin D. Using data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with vitamin D3-fortified foods, we undertook an IPD analysis of the response of winter serum 25-hydroxyvitamin (25(OH)D) to total vitamin D intake among children and adults and derived DRV for vitamin D. METHODS: IPD analysis using data from 1429 participants (ages 2-89 years) in 11 RCTs with vitamin D-fortified foods identified via a systematic review and predefined eligibility criteria. Outcome measures were vitamin D DRV estimates across a range of serum 25(OH)D thresholds using unadjusted and adjusted models. RESULTS: Our IPD-derived estimates of vitamin D intakes required to maintain 97.5% of winter 25(OH)D concentrations ≥ 25 and ≥ 30 nmol/L are 6 and 12 µg/day, respectively (unadjusted model). The intake estimates to maintain 90%, 95% and 97.5% of concentrations ≥ 50 nmol/L are 33.4, 57.5 and 92.3 µg/day, respectively (unadjusted) and 17.0, 28.1 and 43.6 µg/day, respectively (adjusted for mean values for baseline serum 25(OH)D, age and BMI). CONCLUSIONS: IPD-derived vitamin D intakes required to maintain 90%, 95% and 97.5% of winter 25(OH)D concentrations ≥ 50 nmol/L are much higher than those derived from standard meta-regression based on aggregate data, due to the inability of the latter to capture between person-variability. Our IPD provides further evidence that using food-based approaches to achieve an intake of 12 µg/day could prevent vitamin D deficiency (i.e., serum 25(OH)D < 30 nmol/L) in the general population.

The Paleolithic Nutrition Model in Relation to Ultraviolet Light and Vitamin D.

The biology of every species has been optimized for life in the environment in which that species evolved. Humans originated in the tropics, and while some natural selection took place in response to behaviors and environments that decreased exposure to ultraviolet light, there has never been a species-wide biological accommodation. Paleolithic nutrition advocates argue that risk of disease is higher because modern diets differ from what was consumed by early humans. Early humans were the naked ape living in the tropics, exposed to high levels of ultraviolet light and vitamin D nutrition (serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D; 25(OH)D) averaging 115 nmol/L, as compared to today's population averages that are well below 70 nmol/L. Natural selection from an available gene pool cannot compensate fully to an environmental change away from the one within which the species originally evolved. Vitamin D nutrition remains a contentious area. The epidemiological evidence consistently relates lower 25(OH)D to higher disease risk. However, evidence from double-blind clinical trials looking at preventing new disease in healthy volunteers has been disappointing. But such negative trials have been the case for all nutrients except for folic acid which lowers risk of spina bifida. The Paleolithic nutrition model is based on fundamental biological concepts, but it has overlooked the environmental effects of ultraviolet light and vitamin D nutrition. This paper presents evolutionary and Paleolithic aspects of ultraviolet light and vitamin D with the aim to support pertinent research and, ultimately, public policy regarding nutrition and light exposure.

Vitamin D supplementation: cholecalciferol, calcifediol, and calcitriol.

The specific compound that is meant for use in the context of vitamin D supplementation is often ambiguous. The term "supplementation" has been used in the context of cholecalciferol, ergocalciferol, calcidiol, and calcitriol. In nature, by far the major form of vitamin D that nurtures the body is cholecalciferol. In contrast, ergocalciferol is primarily a synthetic and less stable product which is less potent per microgram dose than is cholecalciferol. Calcidol is the major circulating metabolite of cholecalciferol, while calcitriol is the hormone that upregulates the active transport of calcium from the gut, and which suppresses parathyroid hormone secretion. Nutrition policy papers and guidelines leave unstated the obvious fact that calcidiol and calcitriol are not nutrients, and that those metabolites are not pertinent to food fortification or dietary supplementation. Recent evidence shows that ergocalciferol is not stable with storage, and it is far more susceptible to breakdown with cooking and baking than is cholecalciferol. Therefore, it must be concluded that cholecalciferol is the only form of vitamin D that should be considered in the context of the nutritional functions of fortification and supplementation.

Randomized trial of daily high-dose vitamin D3 in patients with RRMS receiving subcutaneous interferon ß-1a.

OBJECTIVE: In the phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Supplementation of Vigantol Oil versus Placebo Add-on in Patients with Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (RRMS) Receiving Rebif Treatment (SOLAR) study (NCT01285401), we assessed the efficacy and safety of add-on vitamin D3 in patients with RRMS. METHODS: Eligible patients with RRMS treated with SC interferon-ß-1a (IFN-ß-1a) 44 µg 3 times weekly and serum 25(OH)D levels <150 nmol/L were included. From February 15, 2011, to May 11, 2015, 229 patients were included and randomized 1:1 to receive SC IFN-ß-1a plus placebo (n = 116) or SC IFN-ß-1a plus oral high-dose vitamin D3 14,007 IU/d (n = 113). The revised primary outcome was the proportion of patients with no evidence of disease activity (NEDA-3) at week 48. RESULTS: At 48 weeks, 36.3% of patients who received high-dose vitamin D3 had NEDA-3, without a statistically significant difference in NEDA-3 status between groups (placebo 35.3%; odds ratio 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53-1.63; p = 0.80). Compared with placebo, the high-dose vitamin D3 group had better MRI outcomes for combined unique active lesions (incidence rate ratio 0.68; 95% CI 0.52-0.89; p = 0.0045) and change from baseline in total volume of T2 lesions (difference in mean ranks: -0.074; p = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: SOLAR did not establish a benefit for high-dose vitamin D3 as add-on to IFN-ß-1a, based on the primary outcome of NEDA-3, but findings from exploratory outcomes suggest protective effects on development of new MRI lesions in patients with RRMS. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01285401. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that for patients with RRMS treated with SC IFN-ß-1a, 48 weeks of cholecalciferol supplementation did not promote NEDA-3 status.

Randomized window of opportunity trial evaluating high-dose vitamin D in breast cancer patients.

PURPOSE: Epidemiologic and preclinical data suggest a potential role for vitamin D in breast cancer treatment and prevention. However, results of prospective randomized trials are inconsistent. The objective of this study was to assess the effects of high-dose cholecalciferol (vitamin D3) on breast tumour proliferation and apoptosis. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, randomized, phase 2, double-blinded pre-surgical window of opportunity trial. Newly diagnosed breast cancer patients were randomized to receive 40,000 IU of vitamin D3 per day or placebo for 2 to 6 weeks prior to breast surgery. The primary outcome was the relative change in proliferation (Ki67) and apoptosis (cleaved caspase 3 apoptotic assay [CC3]) in primary breast cancer cells pre and post treatment. RESULTS: Of 83 patients randomized, 80 completed the study (43 (53.8%) vitamin D and 37 (46.3%) placebo). Mean duration of drug intake was 19 days (range 9-28 days). There were no significant differences between the control arm and the vitamin D arm in percent changes of either Ki67 index (1.6% vs. 16.7%, p = 0.25) or CC3 (- 55.9% vs. - 45.9%, p = 0.28). Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25-OHD) levels were 3 times higher in the vitamin D arm (62 nmol/L vs. 246 nmol/L, p < 0.001). Adverse effects were minimal and all classified as grade 1. CONCLUSIONS: Despite significantly higher levels of serum 25-OHD in the vitamin D-treated group, this was not associated with any significant effects on tumour proliferation or apoptosis. These findings are consistent with the lack of benefit observed in prospective prevention trials. TRIAL REGISTRY: Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov NCT01948128.

25-Hydroxyvitamin D variability within-person due to diurnal rhythm and illness: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin D nutrition research requires accurate measures of circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D. Our objectives were to test whether a diurnal fluctuation in blood-spot concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D can be demonstrated statistically in a single individual, and whether such fluctuation is affected by the pre-dose versus post-dose timing of the blood draw. CASE PRESENTATION: The participant in this case study was a generally healthy Caucasian woman in her 40s who has taken 5000 IU vitamin D3 supplement at midday for over 1 year. Each blood sample was drawn individually from a finger prick onto filter paper at morning, midday, or night, on 4 days (three groups of five individual blood samples per collection day). On days 1 and 2, the midday samples were collected approximately 1 hour after the supplement was taken; on days 3 and 4, the midday samples were collected within an hour prior to supplementation (the classical, daily "trough" value for a drug). There was a significant daily pattern of variation in 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations (analysis of variance p ≤ 0.02 for 3 of the 4 days): peak midday mean 25-hydroxyvitamin D was approximately 20% higher than in the morning, and approximately 13% higher than in the evening. Trough sampling produced no significant difference in 25-hydroxyvitamin D compared to sampling an hour after the dose. An incidental finding was that acute illness during the study was related to acutely lower 25-hydroxyvitamin D at every sampling time in the day (p < 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: There was a consistent diurnal variation in 25-hydroxyvitamin D, with the peak at midday. There was no difference between trough versus post-dose blood draws. Acute illness may acutely lower serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels. Because within-person, within-day variability in 25-hydroxyvitamin D is approximately 20%, sampling time introduces systematic error in vitamin D nutritional assessment that is bigger than random analytical error or choice of assay method.

Rationale and Plan for Vitamin D Food Fortification: A Review and Guidance Paper.

Vitamin D deficiency can lead to musculoskeletal diseases such as rickets and osteomalacia, but vitamin D supplementation may also prevent extraskeletal diseases such as respiratory tract infections, asthma exacerbations, pregnancy complications and premature deaths. Vitamin D has a unique metabolism as it is mainly obtained through synthesis in the skin under the influence of sunlight (i.e., ultraviolet-B radiation) whereas intake by nutrition traditionally plays a relatively minor role. Dietary guidelines for vitamin D are based on a consensus that serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) concentrations are used to assess vitamin D status, with the recommended target concentrations ranging from ≥25 to ≥50 nmol/L (≥10-≥20 ng/mL), corresponding to a daily vitamin D intake of 10 to 20 µg (400-800 international units). Most populations fail to meet these recommended dietary vitamin D requirements. In Europe, 25(OH)D concentrations <30 nmol/L (12 ng/mL) and <50 nmol/L (20 ng/mL) are present in 13.0 and 40.4% of the general population, respectively. This substantial gap between officially recommended dietary reference intakes for vitamin D and the high prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in the general population requires action from health authorities. Promotion of a healthier lifestyle with more outdoor activities and optimal nutrition are definitely warranted but will not erase vitamin D deficiency and must, in the case of sunlight exposure, be well balanced with regard to potential adverse effects such as skin cancer. Intake of vitamin D supplements is limited by relatively poor adherence (in particular in individuals with low-socioeconomic status) and potential for overdosing. Systematic vitamin D food fortification is, however, an effective approach to improve vitamin D status in the general population, and this has already been introduced by countries such as the US, Canada, India, and Finland. Recent advances in our knowledge on the safety of vitamin D treatment, the dose-response relationship of vitamin D intake and 25(OH)D levels, as well as data on the effectiveness of vitamin D fortification in countries such as Finland provide a solid basis to introduce and modify vitamin D food fortification in order to improve public health with this likewise cost-effective approach.

Supplemental Vitamins and Minerals for CVD Prevention and Treatment.

The authors identified individual randomized controlled trials from previous meta-analyses and additional searches, and then performed meta-analyses on cardiovascular disease outcomes and all-cause mortality. The authors assessed publications from 2012, both before and including the U.S. Preventive Service Task Force review. Their systematic reviews and meta-analyses showed generally moderate- or low-quality evidence for preventive benefits (folic acid for total cardiovascular disease, folic acid and B-vitamins for stroke), no effect (multivitamins, vitamins C, D, ß-carotene, calcium, and selenium), or increased risk (antioxidant mixtures and niacin [with a statin] for all-cause mortality). Conclusive evidence for the benefit of any supplement across all dietary backgrounds (including deficiency and sufficiency) was not demonstrated; therefore, any benefits seen must be balanced against possible risks.

A Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Trial of the Effect of Vitamin D3 Supplementation on Breast Density in Premenopausal Women.

Background: This double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel group trial assessed whether oral supplementation with 1,000, 2,000, or 3,000 IU/day vitamin D3 over one year reduces percent mammographic breast density in premenopausal women.Methods: The trial was conducted between October 2012 and June 2015, among premenopausal female volunteers from Quebec City (Quebec, Canada). Women were randomized with ratio 1:1:1:1 to one of four study arms (1,000, 2,000, or 3,000 IU/day vitamin D3 or placebo). The primary outcome was mean change in percent mammographic breast density. Participants and research team were blinded to study arm assignment.Results: Participants (n = 405) were randomized to receive 1,000 (n = 101), 2,000 (n = 104), or 3,000 IU/day (n = 101) vitamin D3, or a placebo (n = 99). The primary analysis included 391 participants (96, 99, 100, and 96, respectively). After the one-year intervention, mean ± SE change in percent breast density in the arms 1,000 IU/day (-5.5% ± 0.5%) and 2,000 IU/day (-5.9% ± 0.5%) vitamin D3 was similar to that in the placebo arm (-5.7% ± 0.5%) (P values = 1.0). In the 3,000 IU/day vitamin D3 arm, percent breast density also declined but slightly less (-3.8% ± 0.5%) compared with placebo arm (P = 0.03). Adherence to intervention was excellent (92.8%), and reporting of health problems was comparable among study arms (P ≥ 0.95). All participants had normal serum calcium.Conclusions: In premenopausal women, one-year supplementation with 1,000, 2,000, or 3,000 IU/day vitamin D3 resulted in a reduction of percent breast density no greater than that seen with the placebo.Impact: At doses of 1,000-3,000 IU/day, vitamin D supplementation will not reduce breast cancer risk through changes in breast density. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(8); 1233-41. ©2017 AACR.

Effect of vitamin D supplementation on oral glucose tolerance in individuals with low vitamin D status and increased risk for developing type 2 diabetes (EVIDENCE): A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

AIMS: Low serum 25-hydroxyvitamin-D (25(OH)D) concentrations are associated with insulin resistance, ß-cell dysfunction and type 2 diabetes. We conducted a 24-week double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to examine the effect of 28 000 IU of vitamin D3 once weekly on plasma glucose after a 2 hour-75 g oral glucose tolerance test (2hrPC glucose), insulin sensitivity and ß-cell function. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 71 participants with serum 25(OH)D ≤65 nmol/L, impaired fasting glucose and elevated glycated hemoglobin were randomly assigned to receive 28 000 IU of vitamin D3 (VitD; n = 35) or placebo (n = 36) in cheese once weekly for 24 weeks. The primary outcome was the change in 2hPC glucose. Secondary outcomes were fasting glucose, fasting and postprandial insulin, indices of insulin sensitivity and ß-cell function, glycated hemoglobin and lipid profile. Participants underwent an oral glucose tolerance test to determine 2hPC glucose. RESULTS: Mean baseline serum 25(OH)D was 48.1 and 47.6 nmol/L in the VitD and placebo groups, respectively. Serum 25(OH)D significantly increased to 98.7 nmol/L (51 nmol/L increase; P < .0001) in the VitD group. No significant differences in fasting ( P = .42) or 2hPC glucose ( P = .55) or other indices of glucose metabolism, including ß-cell function and insulin sensitivity, were observed between groups. A subgroup analysis of individuals with 25(OH)D < 50 nmol/L and prediabetes did not change these results. The VitD group exhibited a significant reduction in LDL cholesterol (-0.27 vs 0.01 mmol/L, P = .03). CONCLUSION: Weekly doses of vitamin D3 in individuals with suboptimal vitamin D levels who were at risk for type 2 diabetes did not improve oral glucose tolerance or markers of glycaemic status.

Sunbeds with UVB radiation can produce physiological levels of serum 25-Hydroxyvitamin D in healthy volunteers.

Vitamin D3 is produced in the skin in response to UVB irradiation, from either sun exposure or UVB sunbeds. The objective of the current study was to characterize serum 25(OH)D response to regular sunbed use from several lamp outputs following their respective time exposure recommendations. There were three groups that tanned over 12 weeks during the winter months in dedicated sunbeds based on lamp outputs (100 W and 160 W low pressure fluorescent and 700 W high pressure filtered metal halide lamps) and a control group provided serum 25(OH)D samples at baseline and end-of-study. Tanning session lengths were calculated based on Health Canada guidelines to stay below the erythema levels. Mean 25(OH)D were increased by an average of 42 nmol/L in the sunbeds that used 100 W and 160 W fluorescents. Change in 25(OH)D was dependent on baseline 25(OH)D levels and sunbed (p = 0.003) and age (p = 0.03), but was not affected by gender, BMI, Fitzpatrick type or cumulative length of tanning sessions. There was no significant increase in 25(OH)D levels in participants using the 700 W filtered metal halide lamp sunbed or in the control participants. Skin pigmentation, [Formula: see text], was markedly increased in all tanners and skin lightness, L*, significantly decreased at 12 weeks. Both L* and [Formula: see text] were significantly correlated with 25(OH)D concentrations for the sunbeds with fluorescent lamps emitting UVB (100 W and 160W). Participants following standardized exposure schedules meeting Health Canada regulations in sunbeds irradiating adequate UVB showed continuous increases of 25(OH)D to physiological levels even after producing a tan in a controlled manner. ClinicalTrials.gov Registration: NCT02334592.

Bioavailability and Safety of Vitamin D3 from Pizza Baked with Fortified Mozzarella Cheese: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: To assess the bioavailability and safety of vitamin D3 from fortified mozzarella cheese baked on pizza. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind trial, 96 apparently healthy, ethnically diverse adults were randomized to consume 200 IU or 28 000 IU vitamin D3 fortified mozzarella cheese with pizza once weekly for a total of 8 weeks. Blood and urine samples were collected at baseline (week 1) and final (week 10) visits for serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D and other biochemical measures. The primary outcome compared serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D between groups at 10 weeks. The secondary outcome evaluated the safety of vitamin D dosing protocol as measured by serum and urine calcium, phosphate, creatinine, and serum parathyroid hormone (PTH). RESULTS: Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D increased by 5.1 ± 11 nmol/L in the low-dose group (n = 47; P = 0.003), and by 73 ± 22 nmol/L in the high-dose group (n = 49; P < 0.0001). None of the subjects in either group developed any adverse events during the supplementation protocol. Serum PTH significantly decreased in the high-dose group only (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Vitamin D3 is safe and bioavailable from fortified mozzarella cheese baked on pizza.

Adjunctive vitamin D for treatment of active tuberculosis in India: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin D has immunomodulatory effects that might aid clearance of mycobacterial infection. We aimed to assess whether vitamin D supplementation would reduce time to sputum culture conversion in patients with active tuberculosis. METHODS: We did this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, superiority trial at 13 sites in India. Treatment-naive patients who were sputum-smear positive, HIV negative, and had pulmonary tuberculosis were randomly assigned (1:1), with centrally labelled, serially numbered bottles, to receive standard active tuberculosis treatment with either supplemental high-dose oral vitamin D3 (four doses of 2·5 mg at weeks 0, 2, 4, and 6) or placebo. Neither the patients nor the clinical and laboratory investigators and personnel were aware of treatment assignment. The primary efficacy outcome was time to sputum culture conversion. Analysis was by modified intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00366470. FINDINGS: Between Jan 20, 2010, and Aug 23, 2011, we randomly assigned 247 participants to the vitamin D group (n=121) or the placebo group (n=126), of whom 211 participants (n=101 and n=110, respectively) were included in the primary efficacy analysis. Median time to culture conversion in the vitamin D group was 43·0 days (95% CI 33·3-52·8) versus 42·0 days (33·9-50·1) in the placebo group (log-rank p=0·95). Three (2%) patients died in the vitamin D group and one (1%) patient died in the placebo group; no death was considered attributable to the study intervention. No patients had hypercalcaemia. INTERPRETATION: Our findings show that vitamin D supplementation did not reduce time to sputum culture conversion. Further studies should investigate the role of vitamin D in prevention or reactivation of tuberculosis infection. FUNDING: Dalhousie University and Infectious Diseases Training and Research Centre.

Mechanisms in endocrinology: vitamin D as a potential contributor in endocrine health and disease.

OBJECTIVE: It has been suggested that vitamin D may play a role in the pathogenesis of several endocrine diseases, such as hyperparathyroidism, type 1 diabetes (T1DM), type 2 diabetes (T2DM), autoimmune thyroid diseases, Addison's disease and polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). In this review, we debate the role of vitamin D in the pathogenesis of endocrine diseases. METHODS: Narrative overview of the literature synthesizing the current evidence retrieved from searches of computerized databases, hand searches and authoritative texts. RESULTS: Evidence from basic science supports a role for vitamin D in many endocrine conditions. In humans, inverse relationships have been reported not only between blood 25-hydroxyvitamin D and parathyroid hormone concentrations but also with risk of T1DM, T2DM, and PCOS. There is less evidence for an association with Addison's disease or autoimmune thyroid disease. Vitamin D supplementation may have a role for prevention of T2DM, but the available evidence is not consistent. CONCLUSIONS: Although observational studies support a potential role of vitamin D in endocrine disease, high quality evidence from clinical trials does not exist to establish a place for vitamin D supplementation in optimizing endocrine health. Ongoing randomized controlled trials are expected to provide insights into the efficacy and safety of vitamin D in the management of endocrine disease.