The use of vitamin D for patients with inflammatory bowel diseases

As vitamin D (VD) plays an essential role in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), this systematic review aimed to update the participation of this vitamin in the prevention or remission of these diseases. This review has included studies in MEDLINE-PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. The authors have followed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis) guidelines. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, twenty-two randomized clinical trials were selected. In total, 1,209 patients were included in this systematic review: 1034 received only VD and 175 received VD in combination with calcium. The average doses of VD supplementation were from oral 400 IU daily to 10,000 IU per kilogram of body weight. Single injection of 300,000 IU of VD was also used. Several studies have shown the crucial role that VD plays in the therapeutic approach of IBD due to its effects on the immune system. It effectively decreased inflammatory cytokines such as TNF-α and IFN-γ (p<0.05) and provided a reduction in disease activity assessed through different scores such as Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) (p<0.05) and Ulcerative Colitis Disease Activity Index (UCDAI) (p<0.05). Unfortunately, the available clinical trials are not standardized for of doses and routes of administration. Existing meta-analyses are biased because they compare studies using different doses or treatments in combination with different drugs or supplements such as calcium. Even though VD has crucial effects on inflammatory processes, there is still a need for standardized studies to establish how the supplementation should be performed and the doses to be administered.

Chicoric Acid Effectively Mitigated Dextran Sulfate Sodium (DSS)-Induced Colitis in BALB/c Mice by Modulating the Gut Microbiota and Fecal Metabolites

Chicoric acid (CA) has been reported to exhibit biological activities; it remains unclear, however, whether CA could regulate colitis via modulation of the gut microbiota and metabolites. This study aimed to assess CA's impact on dextran sulfate sodium (DSS)-induced colitis, the gut microbiota, and metabolites. Mice were induced with 2.5% DSS to develop colitis over a 7-day period. CA was administered intragastrically one week prior to DSS treatment and continued for 14 days. The microbial composition in the stool was determined using 16S rRNA sequencing, while non-targeted metabolomics was employed to analyze the metabolic profiles of each mouse group. The results show that CA effectively alleviated colitis, as evidenced by an increased colon length, lowered disease activity index (DAI) and histological scores, and decreased tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) expression levels. CA intervention restored the structure of gut microbiota. Specifically, it decreased the abundance of Bacteroidetes and Cyanobacteria at the phylum level and Bacteroides, Rosiarcus, and unclassified Xanthobacteraceae at the genus level, and increased the abundance of unclassified Lachnospiraceae at the genus level. Metabolomic analysis revealed that CA supplementation reversed the up-regulation of asymmetric dimethylarginine, N-glycolylneuraminic acid, and N-acetylneuraminic acid, as well as the down-regulation of phloroglucinol, thiamine, 4-methyl-5-thiazoleethanol, lithocholic acid, and oxymatrine induced by DSS. Our current research provides scientific evidence for developing CA into an anti-colitis functional food ingredient. Further clinical trials are warranted to elucidate the efficacy and mechanism of CA in treating human inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

Vitamin D for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

Vitamin D possesses immunomodulatory properties and has been implicated in the pathogenesis and severity of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Animal studies and emerging epidemiological evidence have demonstrated an association between vitamin D deficiency and worse disease activity. However, the role of vitamin D for the treatment of IBD is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of vitamin D supplementation as a treatment for IBD.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was Jun 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in people of all ages with active or inactive IBD comparing any dose of vitamin D with another dose of vitamin D, another intervention, placebo, or no intervention. We defined doses as: vitamin D (all doses), any-treatment-dose vitamin D (greater than 400 IU/day), high-treatment-dose vitamin D (greater than 1000 IU/day), low-treatment-dose vitamin D (400 IU/day to 1000 IU/day), and supplemental-dose vitamin D (less than 400 IU/day).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. clinical response for people with active disease, 2. clinical relapse for people in remission, 3. quality of life, and 4. withdrawals due to adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were 5. disease activity at end of study, 6. normalisation of vitamin D levels at end of study, and 7. total serious adverse events. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 22 RCTs with 1874 participants. Study duration ranged from four to 52 weeks. Ten studies enroled people with Crohn's disease (CD), five enroled people with ulcerative colitis (UC), and seven enroled people with CD and people with UC. Seventeen studies included adults, three included children, and two included both. Four studies enroled people with active disease, six enroled people in remission, and 12 enroled both. We assessed each study for risk of bias across seven individual domains. Five studies were at low risk of bias across all seven domains. Ten studies were at unclear risk of bias in at least one domain but with no areas of high risk of bias. Seven studies were at high risk of bias for blinding of participants and assessors. Vitamin D (all doses) versus placebo or no treatment Thirteen studies compared vitamin D against placebo or no treatment. We could not draw any conclusions on clinical response for UC as the certainty of the evidence was very low (risk ratio (RR) 4.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.51 to 10.57; 1 study, 60 participants). There were no data on CD. There may be fewer clinical relapses for IBD when using vitamin D compared to placebo or no treatment (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.96; 3 studies, 310 participants). The certainty of the evidence was low. We could not draw any conclusions on quality of life for IBD (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.13, 95% CI -3.10 to 2.83 (the SMD value indicates a negligent decrease in quality of life, and the corresponding CIs indicate that the effect can range from a large decrease to a large increase in quality of life); 2 studies, 243 participants) or withdrawals due to adverse events for IBD (RR 1.97, 95% CI 0.18 to 21.27; 12 studies, 1251 participants; note 11 studies reported withdrawals but recorded 0 events in both groups. Thus, the RR and CIs were calculated from 1 study rather than 12). The certainty of the evidence was very low. High-treatment-dose vitamin D versus low-treatment-dose vitamin D Five studies compared high treatment vitamin D doses against low treatment vitamin D doses. There were no data on clinical response. There may be no difference in clinical relapse for CD (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.01; 1 study, 34 participants). The certainty of the evidence was low. We could not draw any conclusions on withdrawals due to adverse events for IBD as the certainty of the evidence was very low (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.06 to 13.08; 3 studies, 104 participants; note 2 studies reported withdrawals but recorded 0 events in both groups. Thus, the RR and CIs were calculated from 1 study rather than 3). The data on quality of life and disease activity could not be meta-analysed, were of very low certainty, and no conclusions could be drawn. Any-treatment-dose vitamin D versus supplemental-dose vitamin D Four studies compared treatment doses of vitamin D against supplemental doses. There were no data on clinical response and relapse. There were no data on quality of life that could be meta-analysed. We could not draw any conclusions on withdrawals due to adverse events for IBD as the certainty of the evidence was very low (RR 3.09, 95% CI 0.13 to 73.17; 4 studies, 233 participants; note 3 studies reported withdrawals but recorded 0 events in both groups. Thus, the RR and CIs were calculated from 1 study rather than 4).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There may be fewer clinical relapses when comparing vitamin D with placebo, but we cannot draw any conclusions on differences in clinical response, quality of life, or withdrawals, due to very low-certainty evidence. When comparing high and low doses of vitamin D, there were no data for clinical response, but there may be no difference in relapse for CD. We cannot draw conclusions on the other outcomes due to very low certainty evidence. Finally, comparing vitamin D (all doses) to supplemental-dose vitamin D, there were no data on clinical relapse or response, and we could not draw conclusions on other outcomes due to very low certainty evidence or missing data. It is difficult to make any clear recommendations for future research on the basis of the findings of this review. Future studies must be clear on the baseline populations, the purpose of vitamin D treatment, and, therefore, study an appropriate dosing strategy. Stakeholders in the field may wish to reach consensus on such issues prior to new studies.

Effects of vitamin D supplementation on blood markers in ulcerative colitis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Observational studies have shown that vitamin D levels are inversely related to ulcerative colitis activity, yet evidence from population interventions remains inconsistent. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials to clarify the effect of vitamin D on blood markers in patients with ulcerative colitis.

METHODS

The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang databases were searched for studies published before June 2020. Information was collected regarding serum vitamin D levels, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP), and Ca (calcium), and parathyroid hormone (PTH), and ulcerative colitis disease activity index (UCDAI) research data.

RESULTS

Seven studies (n = 539) were included in the meta-analysis. Vitamin D supplementation resulted in significant improvements in the serum vitamin D levels (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.69, 95% CI (0.36, 1.03), P < 0.001), ESR (weighted mean difference (WMD) = - 1.10, 95% CI (- 1.97, - 0.24), P = 0.01), CRP (SMD = - 0.43, 95% CI (- 0.67, - 0.20), P = 0.0003), and Ca (SMD = 0.92, 95% CI (0.09, 1.74), P = 0.03) but not in other outcomes. According to subgroup analysis, supplementation with vitamin D at a dose of ≥ 300,000 IU/day can improve serum vitamin D levels. Supplementation with a sufficient dose of vitamin D in a short period of time can also improve serum vitamin D levels. According to GRADE method evaluation, the evidence quality was classified as low for the Serum Vitamin D Level and ESR, and very low for the CRP, PTH, Ca, and UCDAI.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with placebo control interventions, vitamin D supplementation seemed to be an effective intervention for patients with ulcerative colitis. Different doses of vitamin D and durations of intervention produce different effects. However, due to the limitation of the quality of the included studies, the above conclusions still need to be verified by more high-quality studies and weak clinical recommendations.