Does vitamin D3 have negative effects on serum levels of lipids? A follow-up study with a sequential combination of estradiol valerate and cyproterone acetate and/or vitamin D3

Statins and muscle pain

Introduction: Statins remain among the most frequently prescribed drugs and constitute a cornerstone in the prevention of cardiovascular disease. However, muscle symptoms are often reported from patients on statins. Muscle symptoms are frequently reported as adverse events associated with statin therapy.Areas covered: In the present narrative review, statin-associated muscle pain is discussed. It elucidates potential mechanisms and possible targets for management.Expert opinion: In general, the evidence in support of muscle pain caused by statins is in some cases equivocal and not particularly strong. Reported symptoms are difficult to quantify. Rarely is it possible to establish a causal link between statins and muscle pain. In randomized controlled trials, statins are well tolerated, and muscle-pain related side-effects is similar to placebo. There are also nocebo effects of statins. Exchange of statin may be beneficial although all statins have been associated with muscle pain. In some patients reduction of dose is worth trying, especially in primary prevention Although the benefits of statins outweigh potential risks in the vast majority of cases, careful clinical judgment may be necessary in certain cases to manage potential side effects on an individual basis.

Hormone therapy for preventing cardiovascular disease in post-menopausal women

BACKGROUND

Evidence from systematic reviews of observational studies suggests that hormone therapy may have beneficial effects in reducing the incidence of cardiovascular disease events in post-menopausal women, however the results of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have had mixed results. This is an updated version of a Cochrane review published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of hormone therapy for the prevention of cardiovascular disease in post-menopausal women, and whether there are differential effects between use in primary or secondary prevention. Secondary aims were to undertake exploratory analyses to (i) assess the impact of time since menopause that treatment was commenced (≥ 10 years versus < 10 years), and where these data were not available, use age of trial participants at baseline as a proxy (≥ 60 years of age versus < 60 years of age); and (ii) assess the effects of length of time on treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases on 25 February 2014: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS. We also searched research and trials registers, and conducted reference checking of relevant studies and related systematic reviews to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs of women comparing orally administered hormone therapy with placebo or a no treatment control, with a minimum of six months follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each outcome. We combined results using random effects meta-analyses, and undertook further analyses to assess the effects of treatment as primary or secondary prevention, and whether treatment was commenced more than or less than 10 years after menopause.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified six new trials through this update. Therefore the review includes 19 trials with a total of 40,410 post-menopausal women. On the whole, study quality was good and generally at low risk of bias; the findings are dominated by the three largest trials. We found high quality evidence that hormone therapy in both primary and secondary prevention conferred no protective effects for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, angina, or revascularisation. However, there was an increased risk of stroke in those in the hormone therapy arm for combined primary and secondary prevention (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.41). Venous thromboembolic events were increased (RR 1.92, 95% CI 1.36 to 2.69), as were pulmonary emboli (RR 1.81, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.48) on hormone therapy relative to placebo.The absolute risk increase for stroke was 6 per 1000 women (number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) = 165; mean length of follow-up: 4.21 years (range: 2.0 to 7.1)); for venous thromboembolism 8 per 1000 women (NNTH = 118; mean length of follow-up: 5.95 years (range: 1.0 to 7.1)); and for pulmonary embolism 4 per 1000 (NNTH = 242; mean length of follow-up: 3.13 years (range: 1.0 to 7.1)).We performed subgroup analyses according to when treatment was started in relation to the menopause. Those who started hormone therapy less than 10 years after the menopause had lower mortality (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.95, moderate quality evidence) and coronary heart disease (composite of death from cardiovascular causes and non-fatal myocardial infarction) (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.96; moderate quality evidence), though they were still at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.73, high quality evidence) compared to placebo or no treatment. There was no strong evidence of effect on risk of stroke in this group. In those who started treatment more than 10 years after the menopause there was high quality evidence that it had little effect on death or coronary heart disease between groups but there was an increased risk of stroke (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.38, high quality evidence) and venous thromboembolism (RR 1.96, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.80, high quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review findings provide strong evidence that treatment with hormone therapy in post-menopausal women overall, for either primary or secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease events has little if any benefit and causes an increase in the risk of stroke and venous thromboembolic events.

Vitamin D supplementation for prevention of cancer in adults

BACKGROUND

The evidence on whether vitamin D supplementation is effective in decreasing cancers is contradictory.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of vitamin D supplementation for prevention of cancer in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, and the Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science to February 2014. We scanned bibliographies of relevant publications and asked experts and pharmaceutical companies for additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials that compared vitamin D at any dose, duration, and route of administration versus placebo or no intervention in adults who were healthy or were recruited among the general population, or diagnosed with a specific disease. Vitamin D could have been administered as supplemental vitamin D (vitamin D₃ (cholecalciferol) or vitamin D₂ (ergocalciferol)), or an active form of vitamin D (1α-hydroxyvitamin D (alfacalcidol), or 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (calcitriol)).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data independently. We conducted random-effects and fixed-effect model meta-analyses. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated the risk ratios (RRs). We considered risk of bias in order to assess the risk of systematic errors. We conducted trial sequential analyses to assess the risk of random errors.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighteen randomised trials with 50,623 participants provided data for the analyses. All trials came from high-income countries. Most of the trials had a high risk of bias, mainly for-profit bias. Most trials included elderly community-dwelling women (aged 47 to 97 years). Vitamin D was administered for a weighted mean of six years. Fourteen trials tested vitamin D₃, one trial tested vitamin D₂, and three trials tested calcitriol supplementation. Cancer occurrence was observed in 1927/25,275 (7.6%) recipients of vitamin D versus 1943/25,348 (7.7%) recipients of control interventions (RR 1.00 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 1.06); P = 0.88; I² = 0%; 18 trials; 50,623 participants; moderate quality evidence according to the GRADE instrument). Trial sequential analysis (TSA) of the 18 vitamin D trials shows that the futility area is reached after the 10th trial, allowing us to conclude that a possible intervention effect, if any, is lower than a 5% relative risk reduction. We did not observe substantial differences in the effect of vitamin D on cancer in subgroup analyses of trials at low risk of bias compared to trials at high risk of bias; of trials with no risk of for-profit bias compared to trials with risk of for-profit bias; of trials assessing primary prevention compared to trials assessing secondary prevention; of trials including participants with vitamin D levels below 20 ng/mL at entry compared to trials including participants with vitamin D levels of 20 ng/mL or more at entry; or of trials using concomitant calcium supplementation compared to trials without calcium. Vitamin D decreased all-cause mortality (1854/24,846 (7.5%) versus 2007/25,020 (8.0%); RR 0.93 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.98); P = 0.009; I² = 0%; 15 trials; 49,866 participants; moderate quality evidence), but TSA indicates that this finding could be due to random errors. Cancer occurrence was observed in 1918/24,908 (7.7%) recipients of vitamin D₃ versus 1933/24,983 (7.7%) in recipients of control interventions (RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.06); P = 0.88; I² = 0%; 14 trials; 49,891 participants; moderate quality evidence). TSA of the vitamin D₃ trials shows that the futility area is reached after the 10th trial, allowing us to conclude that a possible intervention effect, if any, is lower than a 5% relative risk reduction. Vitamin D₃ decreased cancer mortality (558/22,286 (2.5%) versus 634/22,206 (2.8%); RR 0.88 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.98); P = 0.02; I² = 0%; 4 trials; 44,492 participants; low quality evidence), but TSA indicates that this finding could be due to random errors. Vitamin D₃ combined with calcium increased nephrolithiasis (RR 1.17 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.34); P = 0.02; I² = 0%; 3 trials; 42,753 participants; moderate quality evidence). TSA, however, indicates that this finding could be due to random errors. We did not find any data on health-related quality of life or health economics in the randomised trials included in this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently no firm evidence that vitamin D supplementation decreases or increases cancer occurrence in predominantly elderly community-dwelling women. Vitamin D₃ supplementation decreased cancer mortality and vitamin D supplementation decreased all-cause mortality, but these estimates are at risk of type I errors due to the fact that too few participants were examined, and to risks of attrition bias originating from substantial dropout of participants. Combined vitamin D₃ and calcium supplements increased nephrolithiasis, whereas it remains unclear from the included trials whether vitamin D₃, calcium, or both were responsible for this effect. We need more trials on vitamin D supplementation, assessing the benefits and harms among younger participants, men, and people with low vitamin D status, and assessing longer duration of treatments as well as higher dosages of vitamin D. Follow-up of all participants is necessary to reduce attrition bias.

Vitamin D supplementation for prevention of mortality in adults

BACKGROUND

Available evidence on the effects of vitamin D on mortality has been inconclusive. In a recent systematic review, we found evidence that vitamin D3 may decrease mortality in mostly elderly women. The present systematic review updates and reassesses the benefits and harms of vitamin D supplementation used in primary and secondary prophylaxis of mortality.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of vitamin D supplementation for prevention of mortality in healthy adults and adults in a stable phase of disease.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, the Science Citation Index-Expanded and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (all up to February 2012). We checked references of included trials and pharmaceutical companies for unidentified relevant trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials that compared any type of vitamin D in any dose with any duration and route of administration versus placebo or no intervention in adult participants. Participants could have been recruited from the general population or from patients diagnosed with a disease in a stable phase. Vitamin D could have been administered as supplemental vitamin D (vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) or vitamin D2 (ergocalciferol)) or as an active form of vitamin D (1α-hydroxyvitamin D (alfacalcidol) or 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (calcitriol)).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Six review authors extracted data independently. Random-effects and fixed-effect meta-analyses were conducted. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated the risk ratios (RRs). To account for trials with zero events, we performed meta-analyses of dichotomous data using risk differences (RDs) and empirical continuity corrections. We used published data and data obtained by contacting trial authors.To minimise the risk of systematic error, we assessed the risk of bias of the included trials. Trial sequential analyses controlled the risk of random errors possibly caused by cumulative meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 159 randomised clinical trials. Ninety-four trials reported no mortality, and nine trials reported mortality but did not report in which intervention group the mortality occurred. Accordingly, 56 randomised trials with 95,286 participants provided usable data on mortality. The age of participants ranged from 18 to 107 years. Most trials included women older than 70 years. The mean proportion of women was 77%. Forty-eight of the trials randomly assigned 94,491 healthy participants. Of these, four trials included healthy volunteers, nine trials included postmenopausal women and 35 trials included older people living on their own or in institutional care. The remaining eight trials randomly assigned 795 participants with neurological, cardiovascular, respiratory or rheumatoid diseases. Vitamin D was administered for a weighted mean of 4.4 years. More than half of the trials had a low risk of bias. All trials were conducted in high-income countries. Forty-five trials (80%) reported the baseline vitamin D status of participants based on serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels. Participants in 19 trials had vitamin D adequacy (at or above 20 ng/mL). Participants in the remaining 26 trials had vitamin D insufficiency (less than 20 ng/mL).Vitamin D decreased mortality in all 56 trials analysed together (5,920/47,472 (12.5%) vs 6,077/47,814 (12.7%); RR 0.97 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 0.99); P = 0.02; I(2) = 0%). More than 8% of participants dropped out. 'Worst-best case' and 'best-worst case' scenario analyses demonstrated that vitamin D could be associated with a dramatic increase or decrease in mortality. When different forms of vitamin D were assessed in separate analyses, only vitamin D3 decreased mortality (4,153/37,817 (11.0%) vs 4,340/38,110 (11.4%); RR 0.94 (95% CI 0.91 to 0.98); P = 0.002; I(2) = 0%; 75,927 participants; 38 trials). Vitamin D2, alfacalcidol and calcitriol did not significantly affect mortality. A subgroup analysis of trials at high risk of bias suggested that vitamin D2 may even increase mortality, but this finding could be due to random errors. Trial sequential analysis supported our finding regarding vitamin D3, with the cumulative Z-score breaking the trial sequential monitoring boundary for benefit, corresponding to 150 people treated over five years to prevent one additional death. We did not observe any statistically significant differences in the effect of vitamin D on mortality in subgroup analyses of trials at low risk of bias compared with trials at high risk of bias; of trials using placebo compared with trials using no intervention in the control group; of trials with no risk of industry bias compared with trials with risk of industry bias; of trials assessing primary prevention compared with trials assessing secondary prevention; of trials including participants with vitamin D level below 20 ng/mL at entry compared with trials including participants with vitamin D levels equal to or greater than 20 ng/mL at entry; of trials including ambulatory participants compared with trials including institutionalised participants; of trials using concomitant calcium supplementation compared with trials without calcium; of trials using a dose below 800 IU per day compared with trials using doses above 800 IU per day; and of trials including only women compared with trials including both sexes or only men. Vitamin D3 statistically significantly decreased cancer mortality (RR 0.88 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.98); P = 0.02; I(2) = 0%; 44,492 participants; 4 trials). Vitamin D3 combined with calcium increased the risk of nephrolithiasis (RR 1.17 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.34); P = 0.02; I(2) = 0%; 42,876 participants; 4 trials). Alfacalcidol and calcitriol increased the risk of hypercalcaemia (RR 3.18 (95% CI 1.17 to 8.68); P = 0.02; I(2) = 17%; 710 participants; 3 trials).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Vitamin D3 seemed to decrease mortality in elderly people living independently or in institutional care. Vitamin D2, alfacalcidol and calcitriol had no statistically significant beneficial effects on mortality. Vitamin D3 combined with calcium increased nephrolithiasis. Both alfacalcidol and calcitriol increased hypercalcaemia. Because of risks of attrition bias originating from substantial dropout of participants and of outcome reporting bias due to a number of trials not reporting on mortality, as well as a number of other weaknesses in our evidence, further placebo-controlled randomised trials seem warranted.

The short-term effects of vitamin D repletion on cholesterol: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Vitamin D deficiency is common and associated with dyslipidemia. However, it is unclear whether oral vitamin D supplementation improves the lipid profile. Therefore, we conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled trial to determine the short-term effects of vitamin D repletion on the lipid profile.

METHODS AND RESULTS

One hundred fifty-one vitamin D-deficient (25-hydroxyvitamin D <20 ng/mL) adults with elevated risk for cardiovascular disease were randomized to receive either 50 000 IU of vitamin D3 weekly for 8 weeks or placebo. The primary outcome was the change in small low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particle number. Secondary outcomes included changes in other nuclear magnetic resonance-based and chemical lipid fractions. Vitamin D failed to improve the lipid profile. Compared with the placebo, vitamin D repletion did not change small LDL particle number (mean change, +18 nmol/L; 95% CI [-80 to +116 nmol/L]; P=0.63). There were also no changes in the chemical lipid profile: total cholesterol (+5.8 mg/dL, 95% CI [-1.4 to +13.0 mg/dL], P=0.14); LDL cholesterol (+3.8 mg/dL, 95% CI [-2.5 to +10.2 mg/dL], P=0.13); high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (+0.4 mg/dL 95% CI [-1.6 to +2.6 mg/dL], P=0.71); and triglycerides (+7.9 mg/dL 95% CI [-6.5 to +22.3 mg/dL]). In the vitamin D repletion group, exploratory multivariate regression analysis demonstrates that changes in LDL cholesterol were positively correlated with the changes in serum calcium (P<0.001) and inversely with the changes in serum parathyroid hormone (P=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to the association between low 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels and dyslipidemia, correcting vitamin D deficiency in the short-term does not improve the lipid profile. Repletion of 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels raised serum calcium levels and decreased serum parathyroid hormone levels. These expected physiological responses to vitamin D therapy were correlated with a significant increase in LDL cholesterol. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01008384.

Vitamin D may not improve lipid levels: a serial clinical laboratory data study

BACKGROUND

Vitamin D deficiency is highly prevalent and is associated with dyslipidemia and cardiovascular disease. The impact of correcting vitamin D deficiency on blood lipids, strong cardiovascular disease prognostic factors, is unknown.

METHODS AND RESULTS

To determine relationships between 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels and lipids, we analyzed 4.06 million deidentified patient laboratory test results from September 2009 through February 2011. We performed a cross-sectional study of this population to determine associations between 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels and lipids across clinically defined strata. We also conducted a retrospective cohort study of vitamin D deficient patients to investigate how changes in 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels relate to changes in lipid levels. After exclusions, 107 811 patients with serial testing were selected for cross-sectional analysis. Compared with vitamin D deficient patients (<20 ng/mL), those with optimal levels (≥30 ng/mL) had lower mean total cholesterol (-1.9 mg/dL; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], -1.2 to -2.7; P<0.0001), lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (-5.2 mg/dL; 95% CI, -4.5 to -5.8; P<0.0001), higher high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (4.8 mg/dL; 95% CI, 4.5-5.0; P<0.0001), and lower triglycerides (-7.5 mg/dL; 95% CI, -6.2 to -8.7; P<0.0001). For the retrospective cohort analysis, raising vitamin D levels from <20 to ≥30 ng/mL (n=6260), compared with remaining at <20 ng/mL (n=2332), was associated with a mean increase in total cholesterol (0.77 mg/dL; 95% CI, 0.18-1.36; P=0.01) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (0.42 mg/dL; 95% CI, 0.08-0.76; P=0.02) but nonsignificant changes in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (0.32 mg/dL; 95% CI, -0.01 to 0.66; P=0.06) and triglycerides (0.04 mg/dL; 95% CI, -2.16 to 2.23 mg/dL; P=0.97).

CONCLUSIONS

Although vitamin D deficiency is associated with an unfavorable lipid profile in cross-sectional analyses, correcting for a deficiency might not translate into clinically meaningful changes in lipid concentrations; however, data from intervention trials are required to confirm these findings.

Vitamin D supplementation for prevention of mortality in adults

BACKGROUND

The available evidence on vitamin D and mortality is inconclusive.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of vitamin D for prevention of mortality in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, the Science Citation Index Expanded, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (to January 2011). We scanned bibliographies of relevant publications and asked experts and pharmaceutical companies for additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials that compared vitamin D at any dose, duration, and route of administration versus placebo or no intervention. Vitamin D could have been administered as supplemental vitamin D (vitamin D(3) (cholecalciferol) or vitamin D(2) (ergocalciferol)) or an active form of vitamin D (1α-hydroxyvitamin D (alfacalcidol) or 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (calcitriol)).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Six authors extracted data independently. Random-effects and fixed-effect model meta-analyses were conducted. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated the risk ratios (RR). To account for trials with zero events, meta-analyses of dichotomous data were repeated using risk differences (RD) and empirical continuity corrections. Risk of bias was considered in order to minimise risk of systematic errors. Trial sequential analyses were conducted to minimise the risk of random errors.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty randomised trials with 94,148 participants provided data for the mortality analyses. Most trials included elderly women (older than 70 years). Vitamin D was administered for a median of two years. More than one half of the trials had a low risk of bias. Overall, vitamin D decreased mortality (RR 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 1.00, I(2) = 0%). When the different forms of vitamin D were assessed separately, only vitamin D(3) decreased mortality significantly (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.91 to 0.98, I(2) = 0%; 74,789 participants, 32 trials) whereas vitamin D(2), alfacalcidol, or calcitriol did not. Trial sequential analysis supported our finding regarding vitamin D(3), corresponding to 161 individuals treated to prevent one additional death. Vitamin D(3) combined with calcium increased the risk of nephrolithiasis (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.34, I(2) = 0%). Alfacalcidol and calcitriol increased the risk of hypercalcaemia (RR 3.18, 95% CI 1.17 to 8.68, I(2) = 17%). Data on health-related quality of life and health economics were inconclusive.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Vitamin D in the form of vitamin D(3) seems to decrease mortality in predominantly elderly women who are mainly in institutions and dependent care. Vitamin D(2), alfacalcidol, and calcitriol had no statistically significant effect on mortality. Vitamin D(3) combined with calcium significantly increased nephrolithiasis. Both alfacalcidol and calcitriol significantly increased hypercalcaemia.

Vitamin D and cardiovascular outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Several studies found association between vitamin D levels and hypertension, coronary artery calcification, and heart disease.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to summarize the evidence on the effect of vitamin D on cardiovascular outcomes.

DESIGN AND METHODS

We searched electronic databases from inception through August 2010 for randomized trials. Reviewers working in duplicate and independently extracted study characteristics, quality, and the outcomes of interest. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool the relative risks (RR) and the weighted mean differences across trials.

RESULTS

We found 51 eligible trials with moderate quality. Vitamin D was associated with nonsignificant effects on the patient-important outcomes of death [RR, 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.93, 1.00; P = 0.08], myocardial infarction (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.93, 1.13; P = 0.64), and stroke (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.88, 1.25; P = 0.59). These analyses were associated with minimal heterogeneity. There were no significant changes in the surrogate outcomes of lipid fractions, glucose, or diastolic or systolic blood pressure. The latter analyses were associated with significant heterogeneity, and the pooled estimates were trivial in absolute terms.

CONCLUSIONS

Trial data available to date are unable to demonstrate a statistically significant reduction in mortality and cardiovascular risk associated with vitamin D. The quality of the available evidence is low to moderate at best.

Maternal vitamin D status during pregnancy and body composition and cardiovascular risk markers in Indian children: the Mysore Parthenon Study

BACKGROUND

Metabolic consequences of vitamin D deficiency have become a recent research focus. Maternal vitamin D status is thought to influence musculoskeletal health in children, but its relation with offspring metabolic risk is not known.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to examine the association between maternal vitamin D status and anthropometric variables, body composition, and cardiovascular risk markers in Indian children.

DESIGN

Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] concentrations were measured at 28-32 wk gestation in 568 women who delivered at Holdsworth Memorial Hospital, Mysore, India. Anthropometric variables, glucose and insulin concentrations, blood pressure, and fasting lipid concentrations were measured in the offspring at 5 and 9.5 y of age. Muscle-grip strength was measured by using a hand-held dynamometer at age 9.5 y. Arm-muscle area was calculated as a measure of muscle mass. Fasting insulin resistance was calculated by using the homeostasis model assessment equation.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven percent of women had vitamin D deficiency [serum 25(OH)D concentration <50 nmol/L]. At ages 5 and 9.5 y, children born to vitamin D-deficient mothers had smaller arm-muscle area in comparison with children born to mothers without deficiency (P < 0.05). There was no difference in grip strength between offspring of women with and without vitamin D deficiency. At 9.5 y, children of vitamin D-deficient mothers had higher fasting insulin resistance than did children of nondeficient women (P = 0.04). There were no associations between maternal vitamin D status and other offspring risk factors at either age.

CONCLUSION

Intrauterine exposure to low 25(OH)D concentrations is associated with less muscle mass and higher insulin resistance in children.

The relationship of vitamin D deficiency to statin myopathy

OBJECTIVE

Our goal was to examine the interaction between vitamin D and statins and the possible role of vitamin D deficiency in statin myopathy.

BACKGROUND

The vitamin D receptor is present in skeletal muscle and vitamin D deficiency can cause myopathy. Statins (3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-CoA reductase inhibitors) are generally well tolerated, but have been associated with a spectrum of skeletal muscle complaints, ranging from myalgia and asymptomatic mild elevations of creatine kinase (CK) to rhabdomyolysis. There has been recent interest in the possible interaction between statin myopathy and vitamin D deficiency. We performed a systematic medical literature review to examine this possible relationship.

METHODS

We identified English language articles relating statins, vitamin D and statin myopathy via a PubMed search through July 2010. Articles pertinent to the topic were reviewed in detail.

RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS

Our review suggests that some but not all statins increase 25(OH) D levels. Two cross sectional studies have associated vitamin D deficiency with statin-associated myalgias, and suggested that that increasing vitamin D levels can reverse the myalgia. Nevertheless, given the quality and paucity of studies examining this possibility, additional studies are needed to examine the potential role of vitamin D deficiency in statin myopathy. It is presently premature to recommend vitamin D supplementation as treatment for statin associated muscle complaints in the absence of low vitamin D levels although such supplementation could be tried in patients with deficient or reduced vitamin D levels.

Vitamin D and cardiometabolic health: a review of the evidence

The cardiometabolic syndrome (MetS) is a clustering of related metabolic abnormalities including abdominal adiposity, insulin resistance, hypertension, dyslipidaemia and increased inflammatory and thrombotic markers, which is linked to increased risk of type 2 diabetes, CVD and overall mortality. Several cross-sectional and prospective studies have shown an association between low vitamin D status, as indicated by concentrations of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (s25(OH)D), and increased prevalence of the MetS and individual CVD risk factors. These epidemiological observations are supported by mechanistic studies but experimental data are limited. The available data from intervention studies are largely confounded as most vitamin D supplementation trials were mainly carried out to explore the role of Ca in CVD and include Ca in the treatment arms. Inadequate consideration of seasonal effects on s25(OH)D concentrations is also a common design flaw in most studies. Further complications arise from shared risk factors such as adiposity and ageing, which predispose individuals to exhibit both a more pronounced risk profile and relatively lower s25(OH)D concentrations. In conclusion, while epidemiological associations are promising and a rationale for low vitamin D status as a potentially modifiable risk factor for CVD is supported by mechanistic data, suitable experimental data from appropriately designed trials are just beginning to emerge. As yet, this body of literature is too immature to draw firm conclusions on the role of vitamin D in CVD prevention. Carefully controlled vitamin D trials in well-described population groups using intervention doses that are titrated against target s25(OH)D concentrations could yield potentially valuable outcomes that may have a positive impact on CVD risk modification.

Simvastatin does not affect vitamin d status, but low vitamin d levels are associated with dyslipidemia: results from a randomised, controlled trial

Objectives. Statin drugs act as inhibitors of the 3-hydroxy-3methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase enzyme early in the mevalonate pathway, thereby reducing the endogenous cholesterol synthesis. In recent studies, it has been suggested from epidemiological data that statins also may improve vitamin D status, as measured by increased plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) levels. We now report the results from a randomised controlled trial on effects of simvastatin on plasma 25OHD levels. Design and Methods. We randomised 82 healthy postmenopausal women to one year of treatment with either simvastatin 40 mg/d or placebo and performed measurement at baseline and after 26 and 52 weeks of treatment. The study was completed by 77 subjects. Results. Compared with placebo, plasma levels of cholesterol and low-density lipoproteins decreased in response to treatment with simvastatin, but our study showed no effect of simvastatin on vitamin D status. However, plasma levels of triglycerides were inversely associated with tertiles of plasma 25OHD levels and changes in plasma triglycerides levels correlated inversely with seasonal changes in vitamin D status. Conclusion. Our data do not support a pharmacological effect of statins on vitamin D status, but do suggest that vitamin D may influence plasma lipid profile and thus be of importance to cardiovascular health.

Use of calcium supplements and the risk of coronary heart disease in 52-62-year-old women: The Kuopio Osteoporosis Risk Factor and Prevention Study

BACKGROUND

To analyse prospectively the effect of calcium or calcium+D supplementation on coronary heart disease (CHD) in 52-62-year-old women.

METHODS AND RESULTS

10,555 52-62-year-old women from the population-based Kuopio Osteoporosis Risk Factor and Prevention Study (OSTPRE) who did not have CHD at baseline were followed for nearly 7 years in 1994-2001. Information about use of calcium supplements and health events was obtained from two repeated questionnaires in 1989 and 1994. Information about causes of death during the follow-up was obtained from the Statistics Finland. Information about CHD and other disease morbidity before and during the follow-up was obtained from the Registry of Specially Refunded Drugs of the Finnish Social Insurance Institution (SII). Cox's proportional-hazards models were used to estimate the risk of CHD morbidity related to the use of calcium supplements. At baseline, 2723 women reported current use of calcium or calcium+D supplementation. During the follow-up, CHD was diagnosed in 513 women. Compared to non-users of calcium/calcium+D supplements, the multivariate adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of CHD was 1.24 (95% CI 1.02-1.52) in women who used these supplements. The multivariate adjusted HR for CHD morbidity in postmenopausal women who used calcium/calcium+D supplements was 1.26 (95% CI 1.01-1.57).

CONCLUSIONS

Calcium or calcium+D supplementation appears to increase the risk of CHD among women before old age.

Meta-analysis: effect of hormone-replacement therapy on components of the metabolic syndrome in postmenopausal women

AIM

To quantify the effects of hormone-replacement therapy (HRT) on components of the metabolic syndrome in postmenopausal women.

METHODS

Comprehensive searches of electronic databases were performed from April 1966 to October 2004. We included randomized controlled trials that were of at least 8 weeks duration and evaluated the effect of HRT on metabolic, inflammatory or thrombotic components. Insulin resistance was calculated by homeostasis model assessment (HOMA-IR). Subgroup analysis evaluated the effects for transdermal and oral treatment and for diabetic and non-diabetic women.

RESULTS

Pooled results of 107 trials showed that HRT reduced abdominal fat [-6.8% (CI, -11.8 to -1.9%)], HOMA-IR [-12.9% (CI, -17.1 to -8.6%)] and new-onset diabetes [relative risk 0.7 (CI, 0.6-0.9)] in women without diabetes. In women with diabetes, HRT reduced fasting glucose [-11.5% (CI, -18.0 to -5.1%)] and HOMA-IR [-35.8% (CI, -51.7 to -19.8%)]. HRT also reduced low-density lipoprotein/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio [-15.7% (CI, -18.0 to -13.5%)], lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] [-25.0% [CI, -32.9 to -17.1%)], mean blood pressure [-1.7% (CI, -2.9 to -0.5%)], E-selectin [-17.3% (CI, -22.4 to -12.1%)], fibrinogen [-5.5% (CI, -7.8 to -3.2%)] and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 [-25.1% (CI, -33.6 to -15.5%)]. Oral agents produced larger beneficial effects than transdermal agents, but increased C-reactive protein (CRP) [37.6% (CI, 17.4-61.3%)] and decreased protein S [-8.6% CI, -13.1 to -4.1%)], while transdermal agents had no effect.

CONCLUSIONS

HRT reduces abdominal obesity, insulin resistance, new-onset diabetes, lipids, blood pressure, adhesion molecules and procoagulant factors in women without diabetes and reduced insulin resistance and fasting glucose in women with diabetes. Oral agents adversely affected CRP and protein S, while transdermal agents had no effects.

Oestrogen and progestogen hormone replacement therapy for peri-menopausal and post-menopausal women: weight and body fat distribution

BACKGROUND

Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is commonly prescribed to treat menopausal symptoms and to prevent post-menopausal bone loss. However, many women are concerned about hormonal replacement therapy because they believe that such treatment will result in weight gain. The effect of HRT on weight and body fat distribution has not yet been examined in systematic reviews. It is an important topic since many women decline oestrogen therapy due to their concerns about resultant weight gain, and thus forego its potential therapeutic benefits.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of unopposed oestrogen or combined oestrogen and progestogen hormone replacement therapy (HRT) upon the weight and body fat distribution of perimenopausal and postmenopausal women.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The search strategy of the Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group was used for the identification of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Computerised searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Current Contents, Biological Abstracts and CINAHL were performed. Attempts were made to identify trials from citation lists of review articles and relevant papers already obtained. In most cases, first authors of each eligible trial were contacted for additional information. All those trials that had been located as at August 1998 were examined for eligibility.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised, placebo or no treatment controlled trials that detailed the effect of HRT on weight or body fat distribution, including studies where HRT was combined with other therapy such as diet, supplements or exercise. Studies were eligible for consideration even though the main focus of the trial may have been on another aspect of HRT. Previous HRT use should have ceased at least one month (in the case of patches, cream or gel) or three months (for oral preparations or subcutaneous pellets) before commencement of the study.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Twenty two RCTs were identified that fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this review. The results of one trial were not available in a form that allowed it to be included in the meta-analysis; however, it has been included in the text of the review for discussion. Twenty four RCTs are awaiting assessment pending additional information from first authors. Two reviewers extracted the data independently, and the weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes were estimated from the data. Results for unopposed oestrogen and combined oestrogen were analysed separately, and the effect of each treatment regimen on body weight, BMI, waist-hip ratio, fat mass and skinfold measurement was examined where available. The effect of differing dosage levels on these parameters was also examined.

MAIN RESULTS

Outcomes were evaluated separately for unopposed oestrogen and oestrogen/progestogen regimens. Statistical analysis was performed using the weighted mean difference for continuous outcomes as recommended by the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group. No statistically significant difference was found in mean weight gain between those using unopposed oestrogen and non-HRT users (0.66 kg, 95% CI -0.62, 1.93). No significant difference was found in mean weight gain between those using oestrogen/progestogen therapy and non-HRT users (-0.47 kg, 95% CI -1.63, 0.69). Insufficient data exist to enable meta-analysis of the effect of unopposed oestrogen on BMI. The reviewers found no statistically significant difference in mean BMI increase between those using oestrogen/progestogen and non-HRT users (-0.50, 95% CI -1.06, 0.06). Insufficient data exist to enable meta-analysis of the effect of HRT on waist-hip ratio, fat mass or skinfold thickness.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence of no effect of unopposed oestrogen or combined oestrogen on body weight, indicating that these regimens do not cause extra weight gain in addition to that normally gained at menopause. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)

HRT and Vit D in prevention of non-vertebral fractures in postmenopausal women; a 5 year randomized trial

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the incidence of new non-vertebral fractures during HRT or low-dose vitamin (Vit) D3 supplementation in a 5-year prospective trial.

METHODS

A total of 464 early postmenopausal women, (a subgroup of the Kuopio Osteoporosis Study, n = 13,100) were randomized to four groups: (1) HRT, a sequential combination of 2 mg estradiol valerate and 1 mg cyproterone acetate; (2) Vit D (300 IU/day and 100 IU/day during the fifth years); (3) HRT + Vit D; and (4) placebo. Lumbar (L2-4) and femoral neck bone mineral densities (BMD) were determined by dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) at baseline, after 2.5 and 5 years of treatment. All new symptomatic non-vertebral, radiographically defined fractures were recorded.

RESULTS

Altogether, 368 women (79%) completed the 5 year treatment. In all, 32 women had 39 non-vertebral fractures during a mean of 4.3 year follow-up (HRT 4, Vit D 10, HRT + Vit D 8 and placebo 17). The reduction in the incidence of new non-vertebral fractures was significant in women with HRT alone (P = 0.032) when adjusted by baseline BMD and previous fractures; observed also with the intention-to-treat principle (P = 0.048). When the HRT groups were pooled, HRT showed a significantly lower incidence of new non-vertebral fractures (P = 0.042) than women receiving placebo and also after adjusting as above (P = 0.016); both in valid-case and in the intention-to-treat analysis. In the Vit D group, the fracture incidence was non-significantly decreased (P = 0.229) in comparison with the placebo group. The estimated risk of new non-vertebral fractures among women treated with HRT alone was 0.29 (95% CI, 0.10-0.90) and with Vit D 0.47 (95% CI, 0.20-1.14) and with HRT + Vit D 0.44 (95% CI, 0.17-1.15), in comparison with the placebo group (adjusted by femoral BMD and previous fractures).

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first prospective trial confirming the beneficial effect of HRT on prevention of peripheral fractures in non-osteoporotic postmenopausal women. The effect of low-dose Vit D remains to be proved.

Postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy and autoantibodies against oxidized LDL

OBJECTIVES

Oxidative modification of low-density lipoprotein (oxLDL) has been suggested to play an important role in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis, and autoantibodies against oxLDL have recently found to reflect this process. The antioxidant effect and inhibition of LDL oxidation may be one of the cardioprotective mechanisms of postmenopausal estrogen therapy.

METHODS

The effects of postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy (HRT) on the concentrations of serum lipids and oxLDL autoantibodies were studied in a population-based prospective 1-year study with 64 early postmenopausal women (mean age 52.2 +/- 0.4 (S.E.M.) years). The participants were randomized into two treatment groups: HRT-group: Sequential combination of 2 mg estradiol valerate and 1 mg cyproterone acetate alone or in combination with vitamin D3, 300 IU/day + calcium lactate, 500 mg/day (n = 31) and the non-HRT-group: Calcium lactate, 500 mg/day alone or in combination with vitamin D3, 300 IU/day (n = 33). The groups were well matched regarding age, body mass index and baseline serum lipid concentrations.

RESULTS

The serum concentrations of total cholesterol and LDL-cholesterol decreased in the HRT-group (4.1%, P = 0.05 and 6.4%, P = 0.03, respectively, paired t-test) but did not change in the non-HRT-group. No changes in the serum concentrations of HDL-cholesterol or triglycerides were observed. Additionally, no changes in oxLDL autoantibody concentrations were observed in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Although 1-year HRT lowered serum total- and LDL-cholesterol levels, it did not influence oxLDL antibody titers. On the basis of the present results we cannot question the possibility of there being beneficial effects of HRT on the oxidative modification of LDL. However, this effect is not reflected in the levels of oxLDL autoantibodies.

Biochemical bone markers and bone mineral density during postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy with and without vitamin D3: a prospective, controlled, randomized study

The effects of postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and vitamin D on the serum concentrations of three bone biochemical markers and their associations with bone mineral density (BMD) were studied in a population-based 1-yr follow-up study. A total of 72 healthy postmenopausal women were randomized into 4 treatment groups: HRT group (sequential combination of 2 mg estradiol valerate and 1 mg cyproterone acetate), D group (vitamin D3, 300 IU/day), HRT+D group (both of the above), and placebo group (calcium lactate, 500 mg/day). Serum concentrations of osteocalcin (OC) and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BAP) were measured as biochemical markers of bone formation, and serum type I collagen carboxy-terminal telopeptide was measured as a marker of bone resorption at baseline and after 6 and 12 months of treatment. To investigate the associations of these markers with BMD, lumbar (L2-L4) and femoral neck BMDs were determined by dual x-ray absorptiometry at baseline and after 2.5 yr of treatment. In both hormone groups, the serum concentrations of the three bone metabolic markers had decreased after 12 months. Those of OC decreased by 29.2% (P = 0.017) in the HRT group and by 37.3% (P = 0.004) in the HRT+D group, and BAP concentrations decreased by 34.4% (P < 0.001) in the HRT group and by 36.2% (P < 0.001) in the HRT+D group. Serum type I collagen carboxy-terminal telopeptide concentrations had decreased by 21.6% (P = 0.012) in HRT group and by 14.1% (P = 0.011) in the HRT+D group. In the D group, the serum concentrations of BAP had decreased by 11.7% (P = 0.040) after 12 months, but the other two markers showed no change. The only change seen in the placebo group was a 19.2% increase in OC concentrations (P = 0.041) after 6 months, but at 12 months, the mean OC level was similar to that at baseline. After 2.5 yr, both lumbar and femoral BMD had decreased in the D group [2.1% (P = 0.022) and 3.6% (P = 0.019), respectively] and in the placebo group [3.3% (P = 0.009) and 2.7% (P = 0.010), respectively], whereas no significant changes occurred in the hormone groups. There were significant inverse correlations between the changes in lumbar and femoral BMDs and changes in all three biochemical markers (r = -0.240 through -0.336; P = 0.005-0.064). Our results suggest that HRT counteracts the biochemical changes caused by increased bone turnover associated with menopause. Importantly, the changes in bone markers correlate with long term changes in BMDs of lumbar spine and femoral neck. Low dose vitamin D treatment, however, seems to have only marginal effects on bone metabolism in early postmenopausal healthy women.

Vitamin D and HRT: no benefit additional to that of HRT alone in prevention of bone loss in early postmenopausal women. A 2.5-year randomized placebo-controlled study

The study was designed to examine the effect of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and low-dose bone loss in non-osteoporotic early postmenopausal women and to determine whether Vit D supplementation can give additional benefit to an already optimized estrogen regimen. The effects of HRT and Vit D on bone mineral density (BMD) were studied in postmenopausal women in a 2.5-year randomized placebo-controlled study. The study population was a subgroup of the Kuopio Osteoporosis Risk Factor and Prevention Study (OSTPRE) (n = 13100). A total of 464 early postmenopausal women were randomized to four groups: (1) HRT (a sequential combination of 2 mg estradiol valerate and 1 mg cyproterone acetate (E2Val/CPA); (2) vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol, 300 IU/day); (3) HRT + Vit D; and (4) placebo (calcium lactate; 93 mg Ca2+/day). Lumbar (L1-4) and femoral neck BMD were determined by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry before and after 2.5 years of treatment. After 2.5 years, lumbar BMD had increased by 1.8% in the HRT group (p > 0.001) and by 1.4% in the HRT + Vit D group (p = 0.002), whereas lumbar BMD had decreased by 3.5% (p < 0.001) in the Vit D group and by 3.7% (p < 0.001) in the placebo group. The loss of femoral neck BMD was lower in the HRT (-0.3%) and the HRT + Vit D (0.9%) groups compared with the Vit D (-2.4%) and the placebo groups (-3.7%). This study confirms the beneficial effect of HRT on BMD. It also shows that low-dose vitamin D supplementation has only a minor effect in the prevention of osteoporosis in non-osteoporotic early postmenopausal women and does not give any benefit additional to that of HRT alone.