summary
The antifracture benefits of vitamin D have been questioned by several recent trials,1- 4 leading to uncertainty among patients and physicians regarding recommendations for vitamin D supplementation. Two 2007 meta-analyses5,6 included most of these trials and concluded that vitamin D may not reduce fractures significantly or may do so only in combination with calcium and primarily among institutionalized older individuals. A third 2007 meta-analysis7 concluded that calcium with or without vitamin D may reduce total fracture risk by 12%, a result that was questioned by a more recent meta-analysis8 of high-quality trials of calcium supplementation alone in which calcium had a neutral effect on nonvertebral fractures and a possible adverse effect on hip fracture risk. Apart from the mixed data on calcium, the recent meta-analyses with vitamin D did not consider heterogeneity by received dose (incorporating adherence) or achieved level of 25-hydroxyvitamin D. A dose-response relationship between vitamin D and fracture reduction is supported by epidemiologic data showing a significant positive trend between serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations and hip bone density9 and lower extremity strength.10,11 In addition, greater antifracture efficacy with higher achieved 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels was documented in an earlier meta-analysis of high-quality primary prevention trials with supplemental vitamin D.12 Factors that may obscure a benefit of vitamin D are low adherence to treatment,2 low dose of vitamin D, or the use of less potent ergocalciferol (vitamin D2).13,14 Furthermore, open study design trials1 may bias results toward the null because vitamin D supplementation is available over the counter.
abstract
"BACKGROUND:
Antifracture efficacy with supplemental vitamin D has been questioned by recent trials.
METHODS:
We performed a meta-analysis on the efficacy of oral supplemental vitamin D in preventing nonvertebral and hip fractures among older individuals (> or =65 years). We included 12 double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for nonvertebral fractures (n = 42 279) and 8 RCTs for hip fractures (n = 40 886) comparing oral vitamin D, with or without calcium, with calcium or placebo. To incorporate adherence to treatment, we multiplied the dose by the percentage of adherence to estimate the mean received dose (dose x adherence) for each trial.
RESULTS:
The pooled relative risk (RR) was 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77-0.96) for prevention of nonvertebral fractures and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.78-1.05) for the prevention of hip fractures, but with significant heterogeneity for both end points. Including all trials, antifracture efficacy increased significantly with a higher dose and higher achieved blood 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels for both end points. Consistently, pooling trials with a higher received dose of more than 400 IU/d resolved heterogeneity. For the higher dose, the pooled RR was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.72-0.89; n = 33 265 subjects from 9 trials) for nonvertebral fractures and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.69-0.97; n = 31 872 subjects from 5 trials) for hip fractures. The higher dose reduced nonvertebral fractures in community-dwelling individuals (-29%) and institutionalized older individuals (-15%), and its effect was independent of additional calcium supplementation.
CONCLUSION:
Nonvertebral fracture prevention with vitamin D is dose dependent, and a higher dose should reduce fractures by at least 20% for individuals aged 65 years or older."
LINK - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19307517