The antifracture efficacy of vitamin D in adults - are we assessing it reliably? A systematic review.

Endokrynologia Polska Pub Date : 2023-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-02 DOI:10.5603/ep.95639
Jerzy Przedlacki, Urszula Ołdakowska-Jedynak
{"title":"The antifracture efficacy of vitamin D in adults - are we assessing it reliably? A systematic review.","authors":"Jerzy Przedlacki,&nbsp;Urszula Ołdakowska-Jedynak","doi":"10.5603/ep.95639","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The antifracture efficacy of vitamin D is still controversial. The aim of this systematic review was to examine if the vitamin D trials were designed adequately to reliably assess its antifracture activity.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>The electronic databases PubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched to identify clinical trials evaluating the antifracture efficacy of vitamin D in adults. We compared the protocols of the trials against the opinions of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR), International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD), National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF), European Medicines Agency (EMEA) experts, and the consensus statement from the 2nd International Conference on Controversies in Vitamin D, and against the protocols of the trials of the medications with proven antifracture efficacy (bisphosphonates, teriparatide, abaloparatide, raloxifene, denosumab, romosozumab). We assessed the prospective character, study design, group description, number of patients, study duration, and vitamin D (serum examination and dosage) supplementation. A description of the desired characteristics of the study protocol was presented.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen eligible trials were identified. All but 2 were conducted in the elderly population only. Nine trials were included in the final analysis. Serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D (25OHD) was not measured in a representative number of subjects before (except in 2 studies), during, or after treatment in any study.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The analysed studies did not conclusively assess the vitamin D antifracture efficacy in patients with prestudy low serum vitamin levels, due to the lack of assessment of whether sufficient doses of vitamin D were used. They informed about the relevant doses and preparations of vitamin D in particular groups (specific fracture risk, age, place of residence) only.</p>","PeriodicalId":93990,"journal":{"name":"Endokrynologia Polska","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endokrynologia Polska","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5603/ep.95639","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The antifracture efficacy of vitamin D is still controversial. The aim of this systematic review was to examine if the vitamin D trials were designed adequately to reliably assess its antifracture activity.

Material and methods: The electronic databases PubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched to identify clinical trials evaluating the antifracture efficacy of vitamin D in adults. We compared the protocols of the trials against the opinions of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR), International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD), National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF), European Medicines Agency (EMEA) experts, and the consensus statement from the 2nd International Conference on Controversies in Vitamin D, and against the protocols of the trials of the medications with proven antifracture efficacy (bisphosphonates, teriparatide, abaloparatide, raloxifene, denosumab, romosozumab). We assessed the prospective character, study design, group description, number of patients, study duration, and vitamin D (serum examination and dosage) supplementation. A description of the desired characteristics of the study protocol was presented.

Results: Thirteen eligible trials were identified. All but 2 were conducted in the elderly population only. Nine trials were included in the final analysis. Serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D (25OHD) was not measured in a representative number of subjects before (except in 2 studies), during, or after treatment in any study.

Conclusions: The analysed studies did not conclusively assess the vitamin D antifracture efficacy in patients with prestudy low serum vitamin levels, due to the lack of assessment of whether sufficient doses of vitamin D were used. They informed about the relevant doses and preparations of vitamin D in particular groups (specific fracture risk, age, place of residence) only.

维生素D对成年人的防冻功效——我们是否可靠地评估它?系统的回顾。
引言:维生素D的防冻功效仍然存在争议。这项系统综述的目的是检查维生素D试验是否设计充分,以可靠地评估其防冻活性。材料和方法:检索电子数据库PubMed、Medline、Embase、Web of Science和Cochrane Library,以确定评估维生素D在成人中的防冻功效的临床试验。我们将试验方案与美国骨与矿物研究学会(ASBMR)、国际临床密度测定学会(ISCD)、国家骨质疏松基金会(NOF)、欧洲药品管理局(EMEA)专家的意见以及第二届维生素D争议国际会议的一致声明进行了比较,并对照已证明具有抗凝血功效的药物(双膦酸盐、特立帕肽、阿巴洛帕肽、雷洛昔芬、替诺沙单抗、罗莫索珠单抗)的试验方案。我们评估了前瞻性特征、研究设计、组描述、患者数量、研究持续时间和维生素D(血清检查和剂量)补充。对研究方案的预期特征进行了描述。结果:确定了13项符合条件的试验。除2例外,其余均仅在老年人群中进行。九项试验被纳入最终分析。在任何研究中,在治疗前(2项研究除外)、治疗期间或治疗后,没有在代表性数量的受试者中测量血清25-羟基维生素D(25OHD)。结论:由于缺乏对是否使用了足够剂量的维生素D的评估,所分析的研究并没有最终评估研究前血清维生素水平低的患者的维生素D防冻效果。他们只告知了特定人群(特定骨折风险、年龄、居住地)维生素D的相关剂量和制剂。
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
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信