UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Benefit–risk assessment of vitamin D supplementation


Bischoff-Ferrari, H A; Dawson-Hughes, B; Shao, A; Hathcock, J; Giovannucci, E; Willett, W C (2010). Benefit–risk assessment of vitamin D supplementation. Osteoporosis International, 21(7):1121-1132.

Abstract

Current intake recommendations of 200 to 600 IU vitamin D per day may be insufficient for important disease outcomes reduced by vitamin D. INTRODUCTION: This study assessed the benefit of higher-dose and higher achieved 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels [25(OH)D] versus any associated risk. METHODS AND RESULTS: Based on double-blind randomized control trials (RCTs), eight for falls (n = 2426) and 12 for non-vertebral fractures (n = 42,279), there was a significant dose-response relationship between higher-dose and higher achieved 25(OH)D and greater fall and fracture prevention. Optimal benefits were observed at the highest dose tested to date for 700 to 1000 IU vitamin D per day or mean 25(OH)D between 75 and 110 nmol/l (30-44 ng/ml). Prospective cohort data on cardiovascular health and colorectal cancer prevention suggested increased benefits with the highest categories of 25(OH)D evaluated (median between 75 and 110 nmol/l). In 25 RCTs, mean serum calcium levels were not related to oral vitamin D up to 100,000 IU per day or achieved 25(OH)D up to 643 nmol/l. Mean levels of 75 to 110 nmol/l were reached in most RCTs with 1,800 to 4,000 IU vitamin D per day without risk. CONCLUSION: Our analysis suggests that mean serum 25(OH)D levels of about 75 to 110 nmol/l provide optimal benefits for all investigated endpoints without increasing health risks. These levels can be best obtained with oral doses in the range of 1,800 to 4,000 IU vitamin D per day; further work is needed, including subject and environment factors, to better define the doses that will achieve optimal blood levels in the large majority of the population.

Abstract

Current intake recommendations of 200 to 600 IU vitamin D per day may be insufficient for important disease outcomes reduced by vitamin D. INTRODUCTION: This study assessed the benefit of higher-dose and higher achieved 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels [25(OH)D] versus any associated risk. METHODS AND RESULTS: Based on double-blind randomized control trials (RCTs), eight for falls (n = 2426) and 12 for non-vertebral fractures (n = 42,279), there was a significant dose-response relationship between higher-dose and higher achieved 25(OH)D and greater fall and fracture prevention. Optimal benefits were observed at the highest dose tested to date for 700 to 1000 IU vitamin D per day or mean 25(OH)D between 75 and 110 nmol/l (30-44 ng/ml). Prospective cohort data on cardiovascular health and colorectal cancer prevention suggested increased benefits with the highest categories of 25(OH)D evaluated (median between 75 and 110 nmol/l). In 25 RCTs, mean serum calcium levels were not related to oral vitamin D up to 100,000 IU per day or achieved 25(OH)D up to 643 nmol/l. Mean levels of 75 to 110 nmol/l were reached in most RCTs with 1,800 to 4,000 IU vitamin D per day without risk. CONCLUSION: Our analysis suggests that mean serum 25(OH)D levels of about 75 to 110 nmol/l provide optimal benefits for all investigated endpoints without increasing health risks. These levels can be best obtained with oral doses in the range of 1,800 to 4,000 IU vitamin D per day; further work is needed, including subject and environment factors, to better define the doses that will achieve optimal blood levels in the large majority of the population.

Citations

133 citations in Web of Science®
162 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

100 downloads since deposited on 27 Feb 2010
16 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Geriatric Medicine
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
360 Social problems & social services
300 Social sciences, sociology & anthropology
Language:English
Date:July 2010
Deposited On:27 Feb 2010 08:19
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 14:01
Publisher:Springer
ISSN:0937-941X
Additional Information:The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-009-1119-3
PubMed ID:19957164

Download

[img]
Preview
Content: Accepted Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 1MB
View at publisher

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations