Are there prophylactic effects of vitamin D among healthier adult patients? A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

IF 2.2 Q3 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Caroline Goswami, Sherrice Law, Hannah Zhang, Hannah Park, Bhagvat Maheta, Katherine Arnott, Megan Hsu, Kevin Truong, Mark Sheffield, Zahid Iqbal, Chainaronk Limanon, David Pai
{"title":"Are there prophylactic effects of vitamin D among healthier adult patients? A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.","authors":"Caroline Goswami, Sherrice Law, Hannah Zhang, Hannah Park, Bhagvat Maheta, Katherine Arnott, Megan Hsu, Kevin Truong, Mark Sheffield, Zahid Iqbal, Chainaronk Limanon, David Pai","doi":"10.1186/s40795-025-01107-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In 2017, a study uncovered increasing trends in vitamin D supplementation, revealing that 18% of adults exceeded 1000 international units (IU) daily, and 3% surpassed the safe limit of 4000 IU, raising concern for severe hypercalcemia and associated pathological effects on the kidneys, heart, and vascular system. While vitamin D is well-established for prophylactic use against osteomalacia and osteoporosis, its extra-skeletal benefits for healthy individuals, such as improving insulin sensitivity and low-density lipoprotein, remain unclear. This study focuses on defining healthy adults and exploring the potential benefits and drawbacks of prophylactic vitamin D supplementation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases, 10,155 articles on vitamin D prophylaxis were identified. Randomized controlled trials targeting healthy patients receiving vitamin D for prophylaxis were included, with exclusions based on language, absence of reported outcomes, and patient history. Articles were screened and evaluated by Covidence and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, respectively. Dosage, form, frequency, duration, follow-up care, outcomes, and complications of included articles were recorded. This study protocol has been registered to PROSPERO: CRD42023446944.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 18 articles, 4,415 patients showed low bias risk by the Cochrane tool. Seven studies found significant improvements: protection against autoimmune reactions, elevated hematological and iron profiles, reduced influenza-like illness, and enhanced cognitive tasks. 5000 IU Vitamin D for four weeks significantly reduced cholesterol, unlike 1000 IU for 16 weeks. Conversely, 11 studies revealed no Vitamin D impact on outcomes including hemoglobin-A1c, lipoproteins, BMI, blood pressures, and respiratory infections.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Except for a few outcomes, most prophylactic Vitamin D supplementation was generally not found to have statistically significant benefits in the healthy adult population. Future directions can include additional prospective studies with larger sample sizes of healthy adults testing for benefits and adverse effects of prophylactic vitamin D use.</p>","PeriodicalId":36422,"journal":{"name":"BMC Nutrition","volume":"11 1","pages":"118"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12226867/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40795-025-01107-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: In 2017, a study uncovered increasing trends in vitamin D supplementation, revealing that 18% of adults exceeded 1000 international units (IU) daily, and 3% surpassed the safe limit of 4000 IU, raising concern for severe hypercalcemia and associated pathological effects on the kidneys, heart, and vascular system. While vitamin D is well-established for prophylactic use against osteomalacia and osteoporosis, its extra-skeletal benefits for healthy individuals, such as improving insulin sensitivity and low-density lipoprotein, remain unclear. This study focuses on defining healthy adults and exploring the potential benefits and drawbacks of prophylactic vitamin D supplementation.

Methods: Using PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases, 10,155 articles on vitamin D prophylaxis were identified. Randomized controlled trials targeting healthy patients receiving vitamin D for prophylaxis were included, with exclusions based on language, absence of reported outcomes, and patient history. Articles were screened and evaluated by Covidence and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, respectively. Dosage, form, frequency, duration, follow-up care, outcomes, and complications of included articles were recorded. This study protocol has been registered to PROSPERO: CRD42023446944.

Results: Out of 18 articles, 4,415 patients showed low bias risk by the Cochrane tool. Seven studies found significant improvements: protection against autoimmune reactions, elevated hematological and iron profiles, reduced influenza-like illness, and enhanced cognitive tasks. 5000 IU Vitamin D for four weeks significantly reduced cholesterol, unlike 1000 IU for 16 weeks. Conversely, 11 studies revealed no Vitamin D impact on outcomes including hemoglobin-A1c, lipoproteins, BMI, blood pressures, and respiratory infections.

Conclusion: Except for a few outcomes, most prophylactic Vitamin D supplementation was generally not found to have statistically significant benefits in the healthy adult population. Future directions can include additional prospective studies with larger sample sizes of healthy adults testing for benefits and adverse effects of prophylactic vitamin D use.

Abstract Image

维生素D对健康成人患者有预防作用吗?随机对照试验的系统综述。
2017年,一项研究揭示了维生素D补充的增加趋势,显示18%的成年人每天超过1000国际单位(IU), 3%超过4000国际单位的安全限制,引起了对严重高钙血症和相关肾脏、心脏和血管系统病理影响的关注。虽然维生素D在预防骨软化症和骨质疏松症方面已经得到证实,但它对健康个体的骨骼外益处,如改善胰岛素敏感性和低密度脂蛋白,仍不清楚。这项研究的重点是定义健康的成年人,并探索预防性补充维生素D的潜在好处和缺点。方法:利用PubMed、EMBASE和Scopus数据库,筛选维生素D预防相关文献10155篇。纳入了针对接受维生素D预防的健康患者的随机对照试验,根据语言、缺乏报告的结果和患者病史排除。文章分别通过covid和Cochrane偏倚风险工具进行筛选和评估。记录纳入物品的剂量、形态、频次、持续时间、随访护理、结局及并发症。本研究方案已注册到PROSPERO: CRD42023446944。结果:18篇文章中,4415例患者通过Cochrane工具显示低偏倚风险。七项研究发现了显著的改善:对自身免疫反应的保护,血液和铁谱的升高,流感样疾病的减少,认知任务的增强。5000国际单位的维生素D,四周显著降低胆固醇,不像1000国际单位的16周。相反,11项研究显示维生素D对包括血红蛋白a1c、脂蛋白、BMI、血压和呼吸道感染在内的结果没有影响。结论:除了少数结果外,大多数预防性补充维生素D在健康成人人群中通常没有统计学上显著的益处。未来的方向可以包括对健康成人进行更大样本的前瞻性研究,以测试预防性使用维生素D的益处和不良影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Nutrition
BMC Nutrition Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
131
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信