Marlene Pandis

Vitamin-D concentrations, cardiovascular risk and events - a review of epidemiological evidence

Vitamin D has long been established as an elemental factor of bone physiology. Beyond mineral metabolism, the expression of the vitamin D receptor has been identified throughout the cardiovascular (CV) system. Experimental studies showed beneficial effects of vitamin D on heart and vessels, but vitamin D intoxication in animals also led to hypercalcemia and vascular calcification. Our knowledge has been extended by epidemiological studies that showed that 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) levels are inversely associated with an increased CV risk itself, but also with established CV risk factors, such as arterial hypertension, endothelial dysfunction and atherosclerosis. Conversely, randomized controlled trials could not document significant and consistent effects of vitamin D supplementation on CV risk or events. Potential explanations may lie in differences in reference ranges or the possibility that low vitamin D in CV disease is only an epiphenomenon. In the latter case, the key question is why low 25(OH)D levels are such a strong predictor of health. While we wait for new data, the current conclusion is that vitamin D is a strong risk marker for CV risk factors and for CV diseases itself.

Effects of Vitamin D Supplementation on Bone Turnover Markers: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Bone turnover markers (BTMs) are used to evaluate bone health together with bone mineral density and fracture assessment. Vitamin D supplementation is widely used to prevent and treat musculoskeletal diseases but existing data on vitamin D effects on markers of bone resorption and formation are inconsistent. We therefore examined the effects of vitamin D supplementation on bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (bALP), osteocalcin (OC), C-terminal telopeptide (CTX), and procollagen type 1 N-terminal propeptide (P1NP). This is a post-hoc analysis of the Styrian Vitamin D Hypertension Trial, a single-center, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (RCT) performed at the Medical University of Graz, Austria (2011–2014). Two hundred individuals with arterial hypertension and 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) levels <75 nmol/L were randomized to 2800 IU of vitamin D daily or placebo for eight weeks. One hundred ninety-seven participants (60.2 ± 11.1 years; 47% women) were included in this analysis. Vitamin D had no significant effect on bALP (mean treatment effect (MTE) 0.013, 95% CI −0.029 to 0.056 µg/L; p = 0.533), CTX (MTE 0.024, 95% CI −0.163 to 0.210 ng/mL, p = 0.802), OC (MTE 0.020, 95% CI −0.062 to 0.103 ng/mL, p = 0.626), or P1NP (MTE −0.021, 95% CI −0.099 to 0.057 ng/mL, p = 0.597). Analyzing patients with 25(OH)D levels <50 nmol/L separately (n = 74) left results largely unchanged. In hypertensive patients with low 25(OH)D levels, we observed no significant effect of vitamin D supplementation for eight weeks on BTMs.

Effects of Vitamin D Supplementation on IGF-1 and Calcitriol: A Randomized-Controlled Trial

Increasing evidence suggests a possible interaction between vitamin D and insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1). We aimed to investigate effects of vitamin D supplementation on IGF-1 (primary outcome) and calcitriol (1,25(OH)2D) concentrations (secondary outcome). This is a post-hoc analysis of the Styrian Vitamin D Hypertension Trial—a single-center, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (RCT) conducted from 2011 to 2014 at the Medical University of Graz, Austria. Two-hundred subjects with arterial hypertension and 25(OH)D concentrations <30 ng/mL were randomized to either receive 2800 IU of vitamin D daily or placebo for eight weeks. A total of 175 participants (mean ± standard deviation age, 60 ± 11 years; 49% women) with available IGF-1 concentrations were included in the present analysis. At baseline, IGF-1 concentrations were significantly correlated with 1,25(OH)2D (r = 0.21; p = 0.005) but not with 25(OH)D (r = −0.008; p = 0.91). In the RCT, vitamin D had no significant effect on IGF-1 (mean treatment effect 3.1; 95% confidence interval −5.6 to 11.9 ng/mL; p = 0.48), but it increased 1,25(OH)2D concentrations (mean treatment effect 9.2; 95% confidence interval 4.4 to 13.9 pg/mL; p ≤ 0.001). In this RCT, in hypertensive patients with low 25(OH)D concentrations, there was no significant effect of vitamin D supplementation on IGF-1 concentrations. However, we observed a cross-sectional correlation between 1,25(OH)2D and IGF-1 and an increase of 1,25(OH)2D after vitamin D supplementation.

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.

Beneficial Effects of UV-Radiation: Vitamin D and beyond

Aside from its well-known effects on bone and mineral metabolism, vitamin D may also play an important role in extra-skeletal processes like immunologic diseases, cancer, or cardiovascular diseases. Even though meta-analyses showed that vitamin D supplementation reduces fractures, falls, and overall mortality, its potential benefits did not find universal acclaim. Several health care authorities published Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs) for vitamin D, most of them ranging from 600 to 800 international units (IU) per day, corresponding to a serum level of 25-hydroxyvitamin D of at least 20 ng/mL (50 nmol/L). However, studies conducted in the general population revealed a much lower overall intake of vitamin D than the proposed RDAs. Thus, strategies to increase the vitamin D intake in the general population, e.g., food fortification or vitamin D supplementation, are needed to match the existing evidence and recommendations. Therefore, several currently ongoing projects aim to investigate the effect of vitamin D supplementation in the general population and try to establish food-based solutions to improve vitamin D status.

Feasibility and safety of using an automated decision support system for insulin therapy in the treatment of steroid-induced hyperglycemia in patients with acute graft-versus-host disease: A randomized trial

Steroid‐induced hyperglycemia (SIHG) has shown to independently increase the risk for mortality in patients with acute graft‐versus‐host disease, and it is still unclear whether SIHG might be a modifiable risk factor. Therefore, a feasibility trial was carried out aiming to evaluate the performance of a standardized decision support system (GlucoTab [GT]) for insulin therapy in patients with SIHG. A total of 10 hyperglycemic acute graft‐versus‐host disease patients were included and treated either with GT or standard of care during hospitalization. Follow‐up duration was 6 months. Comparing the GT versus standard of care group, 364 versus 1,020 glucose readings were available during a median of 41 days (interquartile range [IQR] 22–89) and 101 days (IQR 55–147) of hospitalization. The median overall glucose levels were 151 mg/dL (123–192) versus 162 mg/dL (IQR 138–193) for GT and standard of care, respectively (P < 0.001); hypoglycemia rates were comparably low. Treatment of SIHG with an algorithm‐based system for subcutaneous insulin was feasible and safe.

Mineralocorticoid Receptor Blockers and Aldosterone to Renin Ratio: A Randomized Controlled Trial and Observational Data

Current guidelines recommend to withdraw mineralocorticoid receptor (MR) blocker treatment for at least 4 weeks when measuring the aldosterone to renin ratio (ARR) as a screening test for primary aldosteronism (PA). We aimed to evaluate the effect of MR blocker treatment on ARR and its components, plasma aldosterone concentration (PAC), and direct renin concentration (DRC). First, we performed a post-hoc analysis of the effect of eplerenone on parathyroid hormone levels in primary hyperparathyroidism (EPATH) study, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) in 110 patients with primary hyperparathyroidism (pHPT). Patients were 1:1 randomly assigned to receive either 25 mg eplerenone once daily (up-titration after 4 weeks to 50 mg/day) or placebo for 8 weeks. Second, we measured the ARR in 4 PA patients from the Graz Endocrine Causes of Hypertension Study (GECOH) before and after MR blocker treatment. Ninety-seven participants completed the EPATH trial, and the mean treatment effect (95% confidence interval) for log(e)ARR was 0.08 (-0.32 to 0.48) ng/dl/μU/ml (p=0.694). The treatment effect was 0.71 (0.47 to 0.96; p<0.001) ng/dl for log(e)PAC and 0.64 (0.19 to 1.10; p=0.006) μU/ml for log(e)DRC, respectively. In the 4 PA patients, the ARR decreased from 11.24±3.58 at baseline to 2.70±1.03 (p=0.013) ng/dl/μU/ml after MR blocker treatment. In this study with limited sample size, MR blocker treatment did not significantly alter the ARR in pHPT patients but significantly reduced the ARR in PA patients. Diagnostic utility of ARR and its components for PA diagnostics under MR blocker treatment warrants further study.