Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Vitamin D supplementation for cystic fibrosis

Esta versión no es la más reciente

Contraer todo Desplegar todo

Referencias

References to studies included in this review

Brown 2005 {published data only (unpublished sought but not used)}

Brown SA, Aris RM, Leigh MW, Retsch‐Bogart GZ, Caminiti MJ, Jennings‐Grant T, Lester GE, Ontjes DA. Baseline BMD status in children and young adults with CF: calcitriol intervention study [abstract]. Pediatric Pulmonology. 2005;40(Suppl 28):354.

Haworth 2004 {published data only}

Haworth CS, Jones A, Selby PL, Adams JE, Mawer EB, Webb AK. Randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trial investigating the effect of calcium and vitamin D supplementation on bone mineral density and bone metabolism in adults with cystic fibrosis [abstract]. Pediatric Pulmonology 2001;32(Suppl 22):330‐1.
Haworth CS, Jones AM, Adams JE, Selby PL, Webb AK. Randomised double blind placebo controlled trial investigating the effect of calcium and vitamin D supplementation on bone mineral density and bone metabolism in adult patients with cystic fibrosis. Journal of  Cystic Fibrosis 2004;3(4):233‐6.

Popescu 1998 {published data only}

Popescu M, Morris J, Hillman L. Calcium and vitamin D supplementation in CF children [abstract]. Pediatric Pulmonology 1998;26(Suppl 17):359.

References to studies excluded from this review

Aris 2000 {published data only}

Aris RM, Lester GE, Neuringer IP, Winders AW, Gott KK, Rea J, et al. Efficacy of pamidronate for osteoporosis in cystic fibrosis patients following lung transplantation [abstract]. Pediatric Pulmonology 1998;26(Suppl 17):365.
Aris RM, Lester GE, Renner JB, Winders A, Denene Blackwood A, Lark RK, et al. Efficacy of pamidronate for osteoporosis in patients with cystic fibrosis following lung transplantation. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2000;162(3 part 1):941‐6.
Aris RM, Ontjes DA, Winders AW, Blackwood D, Lester GE. Effect of pamidronate on bone biomarkers in post‐transplant osteoporotic cystic fibrosis patients [abstract]. Pediatric Pulmonology 1998;26(Suppl 17):364‐5.

Gronowitz 2003 {published data only}

Gronowitz E, Gilljam M, Hollsing A, Lindblad A, Larko O, Strandvik B. Ultraviolet B radiation improves serum levels of vitamin D in patients with cystic fibrosis (abstract). Pediatric Pulmonology 2003;36(Suppl 25):345.

References to studies awaiting assessment

Hillman 2008 {published data only}

Hillman LS, Cassidy JT, Popescu MF, Hewett JE, Kyger J, Robertson JD. Percent true calcium absorption, mineral metabolism, and bone mineralization in children with cystic fibrosis: effect of supplementation with vitamin D and calcium. Pediatric Pulmonology 2008;43(8):772‐80.

Judd 2008 {published data only}

Judd SE, Khazai N, Jeng L, Stecenko A, Wolfenden L, Tangpricha V. Evaluation of ergocalciferol, cholecalciferol or UVB light therapy to improve vitamin D status in cystic fibrosis: a prospective randomized study [abstract]. Pediatric Pulmonology 2008;43(Suppl 31):420.

Kumari 2009 {published data only (unpublished sought but not used)}

Kumari M, Colman L, Grossmann R, Wolfenden LL, Tangpricha V. High dose vitamin D supplementation in cystic fibrosis patients hospitalized for respiratory exacerbation. [abstract]. Pediatric Pulmonology 2009;44(Suppl 32):409.

Aris 2005

Aris RM, Merkel PA, Bachrach LK, Borowitz DS, Boyle MP, Elkin SL, et al. Consensus statement: Guide to bone health and disease in cystic fibrosis. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 2005;90(3):1888‐96.

Black 2005

Black PN, Scragg R. Relationship between serum 25‐hydroxyvitamin d and pulmonary function in the third national health and nutrition examination survey. Chest 2005;128(6):3792‐8.

Borowitz 2002

Borowitz D, Baker RD, Stallings V. Consensus report on nutrition for pediatric patients with cystic fibrosis. Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition 2002;35:246‐59.

Brenckmann 2001

Brenckmann C, Papaioannou A. Bisphosphonates for osteoporosis in people with cystic fibrosis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2001, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002010]

Cates 2003 [Computer program]

Cates C. Visual Rx. Online NNT Calculator. http://www.nntonline.net/: Cates C, 2003.

Chesney 1989

Chesney RW. Vitamin D: Can an Upper Limit be Defined?. Journal of Nutrition 1989;119(12 Suppl):1825‐8.

Deeks 2011

Deeks J, Higgins J, Altman D. Chapter 9 Analysing data and undertaking meta‐analysis. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.

Dimitri 2007

Dimitri P, Bishop N. Rickets. Paediatrics and Child Health 2007;17(7):279‐87.

Dodge 2006

Dodge JA, Turck D. Cystic fibrosis: nutritional consequences and management. Best Practice & Research. Clinical Gastroenterology 2006;20(3):531‐46.

Higgins 2003

Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta‐analyses. BMJ 2003;327(7414):557‐60.

Higgins 2011

Julian PT Higgins, Douglas G Altman and Jonathan AC Sterne on behalf of the Cochrane Statistical Methods Group and the Cochrane Bias Methods Group. Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011.

Holick 2007

Holick MF. Vitamin D deficiency. New England Journal of Medicine 2007;357(3):266‐81.

Holick 2008

Holick MF, Biancuzzo RM, Chen TC, Klein EK, Young A, Bibuld D, et al. Vitamin D2 is as effective as vitamin D3 in maintaining circulating concentrations of 25‐hydroxyvitamin D. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 2007;Dec 18:[Epub ahead of print]. [DOI: 10.1210/jc.2007‐2308]

Joiner 2000

Joiner TA, Foster C, Shape T. The many faces of vitamin D deficient rickets. Pediatrics in review 2000;21(9):296‐302.

NIH 2007

NIH. Office of Dietary Supplements. Dietary Supplement Fact Sheet: Vitamin D. http://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/vitamind.asp (accessed 31st October 2007).

O'Neil 2007

O'Neil C, Shevill E, Chang AB. Vitamin A supplementation for cystic fibrosis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006751.pub2]

RevMan 5 [Computer program]

The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 5.0.17 for Windows. Oxford, England: The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008:Chapter 8 of handbook.

Sethuraman 2006

Sethuraman U. Vitamins. Pediatric Review 2006;27(2):44‐55.

Sinaasappel 2002

Sinaasappel M, Stern M, Littlewood J, Wolfe S, Steinkamp G, Heijerman HG, et al. Nutrition in patients with cystic fibrosis: a European Consensus. Journal of Cystic Fibrosis 2002;1:51‐75.

UK CF Trust 2007

The UK Cystic Fibrosis Trust Bone Mineralisation Working Group. Bone mineralisation in cystic fibrosis. Report of the UK Cystic Fibrosis Trust Bone Mineralisation Working Group. Cystic Fibrosis Trust, February 2007.

Wagener 2003

Wagener JS, Headley AA. Cystic fibrosis: current trends in respiratory care. Respiratory Care 2003;48(3):234‐45.

Wharton 2003

Wharton B, Bishop N. Rickets. Lancet 2003;362(9393):1389‐400.

World Health Organization 1994

World Health Organization. Definition of osteoporosis. Assessment of Fracture Risk and Its Application to Screening for Postmenopausal Osteoporosis1994:1‐129.

Wright 2005

Wright RJ. Make no bones about it: increasing epidemiologic evidence links vitamin D to pulmonary function and COPD. Chest 2005;128(6):3781‐3.

Characteristics of studies

Characteristics of included studies [ordered by study ID]

Brown 2005

Methods

Randomised, parallel, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial.

Participants

54 (31 male, 23 female) pancreatic insufficient children and young adults with CF. Age range 8 ‐18 years (mean age 12.1 (SD 3.1) years), mean (SD) BMI 18.1 (2.9) kg/m2, mean (SD) FEV1 80 (20) % predicted, range 36 ‐ 129%.

Numbers in intervention and control groups not stated.

31 (18 male, 13 female) healthy sibling or community controls mean age 11.7 (2.9) years were recruited to assess BMD normative data.

Interventions

Participants randomised to 2 years supplementation with oral calcitriol (1,25 (OH)2D 0.25 mcg daily if under 45 kg, 0.5 mcg daily if weight was 45 kg or above) or placebo.

All participants continued their usual calcium (500 mg daily) and vitamin D (dose and preparation not specified).

Outcomes

Data only published for baseline/pre‐intervention characteristics and some adverse events.

BMD (whole body, lumbar spine, hip and radius; method not specified) measured at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 months.

Serum and urine chemistry (including calcium and phosphate), vitamin D and bone markers (not otherwise specified) measured at baseline, 3, 6, 12‐18 and 24 months.

Frequency of supplementation related complications.

Bone age at baseline, pubertal status and dietary intake recorded.

Funding source

National Institutes for Health, University of North Carolina General Clinical Research Centre, Cystic Fibrosis Foundation.

Exclusions

Corticosteroid use over 5 mg/day for 3 months, organ transplantation, nephrolithiasis or severe liver disease.

Study withdrawals and adverse events

32/54 completed the 2 years of the study period.

2 withdrawals due to persistent hypercalciuria, one each from placebo and intervention group. Nephrolithiasis in 2 (1 on calcitriol, 1 on placebo) presumed to be withdrawn as this is a specific exclusion in study protocol.

In calcitriol group: 1 asymptomatic mild hypercalcaemia.

In placebo group: 1 asymptomatic hyperphosphataemia.

Notes

Abstract of poster presented at 19th Annual North American CF Conference 2005.

No reply to email requesting further data.

No reference to season, latitude or compliance.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

Randomisation method not reported but states that participants were randomised by gender and age (8‐10, 11‐14,15‐18 yrs) to stratify for pubertal status.

Healthy siblings and community subjects recruited to assess normative BMD data.

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

No method reported.

Blinding (performance bias and detection bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

No method reported.

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Baseline/pre‐intervention data only. Numbers in each group not reported.

32/54 reported to complete study; only 4 withdrawals accounted for.

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All outcomes are recorded.

Other bias

Unclear risk

Follow up data not published.

No description of CF diagnosis method.

No reports of compliance with enzyme replacement or study medications.

No season or latitude specified.

Haworth 2004

Methods

Parallel, randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study over 12 months.

Single centre (Manchester adult CF unit).

Participants

31 pancreatic‐insufficient and osteopenic adults (over 18 years) with CF (confirmation of CF diagnosis by genetic testing).
No definition of pancreatic insufficiency.
BMD z score less than ‐1 (lumbar spine, proximal femur or distal forearm).

16 in intervention group (9 female, 7 males). Mean age 29.4 years; mean FEV1 66.1% predicted; mean BMI 23.0kg/m2).

15 in control group (7 females, 8 males) Mean age 25.9 years; mean FEV1 60.9% ; mean BMI 21.1kg/m2.

Interventions

Supplementation with 1g calcium and 800 IU vitamin D daily (Calichew D3 forte 1 tablet twice daily) or placebo for 12 months.

All participants continued standard daily vitamin D supplements (900 IU).

Outcomes

Outcomes measured at baseline and after 12 months.

BMD (DXA lumbar spine and total hip, peripheral CT distal forearm)
Biochemical markers of bone turnover (25‐OHD, PTH, osteocalcin, bone specific alkaline phosphatase, urinary crosslinks).

Funding source

UK Cystic Fibrosis Trust.

Exclusions

No exclusion criteria reported.

Study withdrawals and adverse events

1 withdrawal (female) from vitamin D supplementation group due to pregnancy.

No adverse events reported.

Notes

8 participants in each intervention had corticosteroids during study period, but dose not reported. Compliance ‐ treatment group 3.1 days/week, controls 3.7 days/week.

Prof Howarth was contacted and replied but was unable to provide any unpublished data

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

No details of randomisation.

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

No description of allocation concealment.

Blinding (performance bias and detection bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Method notes double blinding although no details of blinding or method used.

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Low risk

1 study withdrawal due to pregnancy in intervention group, although this wasn't a specified exclusion criteria. Thus good follow‐up rate (97%).

All others enrolled completed study period.

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Low risk

All defined outcomes are reported.

Other bias

Unclear risk

All subjects were participants of a longitudinal BMD study preceding this study.

Only 31/55 eligible participants enrolled, no specifics given for those who declined to participate.

Popescu 1998

Methods

Double‐blind, randomised, cross‐over study.

Participants

22 children with CF (mean 9.3 years, range 6.1 ‐ 12.2 years). No disease status indicators reported ‐ authors comment that all were "mildly affected".

Interventions

Supplementation with 1g calcium, 1600 IU vitamin D, 1g calcium and 1600 IU vitamin D and placebo each for 6 months with a 3‐month washout period between interventions.

Outcomes

Outcomes reported at baseline and at 9 months (after 6 months of intervention and 3 month washout period): BMD (lumbar spine, femoral neck, distal radius and whole body; method not described).

Outcomes reported at baseline and at 6 months of supplementation: serum and urine chemistry, 25‐OHD, 1,25‐(OH)2D, PTH, bone turnover markers (osteocalcin, bone specific alkaline phosphatase).

Funding source

None declared.

Exclusions

None reported.

Study withdrawals and adverse events

No withdrawals and no adverse events reported.

Notes

Abstract of poster presented at 12th annual North American CF conference.

No inclusion criteria, no numbers of eligible participants stated.

No reporting of method of CF diagnosis, rates of pancreatic insufficiency, nutrition or growth parameters.

Abstract was more than 10 years ago and a search using authors' name did not reveal full publication. We could not find authors and hence not contacted.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Unclear risk

No description given.

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

No description given.

Blinding (performance bias and detection bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

No information given.

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

All data in methods are reported; no reporting of number of children enrolled or eligible.

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

High risk

Data after only 9 months of a 36‐month study.

Other bias

Unclear risk

No funding source identified. No reporting of disease severity or respiratory/other confounding illnesses or nutritional status.

BMD: bone mineral density
BMI: body mass index
CF: cystic fibrosis
CT: computerised tomography
DXA: dual energy X‐ray absorptiometry
FEV1: forced expiratory volume at one second

g: gram
IU: international units
PTH: parathyroid hormone
SD: standard deviation
25 (OH) D: 25‐hydroxyvitamin D

1,25(OH)2D: 1,25‐dihydroxyvitamin D

Characteristics of excluded studies [ordered by study ID]

Study

Reason for exclusion

Aris 2000

Intervention (pamidronate, a bisphosphonate) does not meet review inclusion criteria

Gronowitz 2003

Intervention (Ultraviolet B radiation) does not meet review inclusion criteria

Characteristics of studies awaiting assessment [ordered by study ID]

Hillman 2008

Methods

Double‐blinded randomized cross‐over trial with 4 arms. Single centre in USA.

Participants

15 children aged 7 to 13, remained on standard medication (including pancreatic enzymes and ADEK vitamins). Children on oral or glucocorticoids were excluded.

Interventions

4x 6 month treatments (including placebo) with 3‐month washout period between each.

Placebo vs calcium (1g) vs vitamin D (1,600 IU) vs calcium (1g) plus vitamin D (1,600 IU)

Outcomes

Blood and urine collected at beginning and end of each treatment.

DXA performed at baseline, the beginning of each period and at 36 months (9 months between DXA ‐ 6 month treatment plus washout).

Calcium absorption at end of each period.

Also, serum calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, parathyroid hormone, 25‐hydroxyvitamin D, 1,25‐dihydroxyvitamin D, osteocalcin, bone alkaline phosphatase, tartrate resistant acid phosphatase, urine calcium/creatinine ratio.

Notes

Judd 2008

Methods

Randomized (in blocks of 6) cross‐over trial with 3 arms. Single centre in USA

Participants

30 adults (16 ‐ 70 years old) with CF and with screening 25‐hydroxyvitamin D levels between 10 nd 40 ng/ml randomized; 18 completed trial.

Exclusion criteria: renal or hepatic disease, history of skin cancer, treatment with more than 2000 IU of vitamin D or prednisone or a history of more than 6 hospitalizations in past year.

Interventions

Treatment 1: cholecalciferol 50,000 IU once a week for 12 weeks

Treatment 2: ergocalciferol 50,000 IU once a week for 12 weeks

Treatment 3: UV light therapy given for 3 ‐ 10 mins 5 times per week for 12 weeks

Outcomes

Notes

Kumari 2009

Methods

Randomised (in blocks of 6) to intervention or placebo

Participants

30 adults (age over 18 years old) with CF and hospitalised with acute respiratory exacerbation

Interventions

250,000 IU vitamin D3 or placebo as single dose within 48 hours of hospital admission

Exclusion criteria: current therapy with high dose vitamin D (over 2000 IU daily) or admission for serious terminal illness

Outcomes

Blood collected for 25‐hydroxyvitamin D level at randomization and hospital discharge, results reported for the first 12 of 30 enrolled participants

Notes

Abstract only. Trial completed, paper submitted for editorial review and consideration of publication

CF: cystic fibrosis
IU: international units
UV: ultra‐violet
vs: versus

Data and analyses

Open in table viewer
Comparison 1. Vitamin D versus placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Serum calcium change (mmol/L) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 1 Serum calcium change (mmol/L).

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 1 Serum calcium change (mmol/L).

2 Vitamin D level (25‐OHD) pg/ml Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 2 Vitamin D level (25‐OHD) pg/ml.

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 2 Vitamin D level (25‐OHD) pg/ml.

2.1 Up to 12 months

2

41

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐2.79 [‐7.25, 1.67]

3 Vitamin D level (1, 25 (OH)2 D) pg/ml Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 3 Vitamin D level (1, 25 (OH)2 D) pg/ml.

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 3 Vitamin D level (1, 25 (OH)2 D) pg/ml.

3.1 Up to 12 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Parathyroid hormone levels (change from baseline) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 4 Parathyroid hormone levels (change from baseline).

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 4 Parathyroid hormone levels (change from baseline).

5 Parathyroid hormone levels (pg/ml) (absolute) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 5 Parathyroid hormone levels (pg/ml) (absolute).

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 5 Parathyroid hormone levels (pg/ml) (absolute).

5.1 Up to 12 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Open in table viewer
Comparison 2. Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Whole body bone mineral content (% change) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 1 Whole body bone mineral content (% change).

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 1 Whole body bone mineral content (% change).

1.1 Up to 12 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2 Lumbar spine z score Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 2 Lumbar spine z score.

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 2 Lumbar spine z score.

2.1 Up to 12 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3 Lumbar spine bone mineral density (% change) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 3 Lumbar spine bone mineral density (% change).

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 3 Lumbar spine bone mineral density (% change).

3.1 Up to 12 months

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Hip bone mineral density (% change) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 4 Hip bone mineral density (% change).

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 4 Hip bone mineral density (% change).

5 Distal forearm bone mineral density (% change) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.5

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 5 Distal forearm bone mineral density (% change).

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 5 Distal forearm bone mineral density (% change).

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 1 Serum calcium change (mmol/L).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 1 Serum calcium change (mmol/L).

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 2 Vitamin D level (25‐OHD) pg/ml.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 2 Vitamin D level (25‐OHD) pg/ml.

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 3 Vitamin D level (1, 25 (OH)2 D) pg/ml.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 3 Vitamin D level (1, 25 (OH)2 D) pg/ml.

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 4 Parathyroid hormone levels (change from baseline).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 4 Parathyroid hormone levels (change from baseline).

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 5 Parathyroid hormone levels (pg/ml) (absolute).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Vitamin D versus placebo, Outcome 5 Parathyroid hormone levels (pg/ml) (absolute).

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 1 Whole body bone mineral content (% change).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 1 Whole body bone mineral content (% change).

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 2 Lumbar spine z score.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 2 Lumbar spine z score.

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 3 Lumbar spine bone mineral density (% change).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 3 Lumbar spine bone mineral density (% change).

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 4 Hip bone mineral density (% change).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 4 Hip bone mineral density (% change).

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 5 Distal forearm bone mineral density (% change).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.5

Comparison 2 Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density, Outcome 5 Distal forearm bone mineral density (% change).

Comparison 1. Vitamin D versus placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Serum calcium change (mmol/L) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 Vitamin D level (25‐OHD) pg/ml Show forest plot

2

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

2.1 Up to 12 months

2

41

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐2.79 [‐7.25, 1.67]

3 Vitamin D level (1, 25 (OH)2 D) pg/ml Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 Up to 12 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Parathyroid hormone levels (change from baseline) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5 Parathyroid hormone levels (pg/ml) (absolute) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5.1 Up to 12 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Vitamin D versus placebo
Comparison 2. Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Whole body bone mineral content (% change) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 Up to 12 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2 Lumbar spine z score Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2.1 Up to 12 months

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3 Lumbar spine bone mineral density (% change) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 Up to 12 months

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Hip bone mineral density (% change) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5 Distal forearm bone mineral density (% change) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 2. Post‐hoc analysis: Bone mineral density