Effect of two prophylactic bolus vitamin D dosing regimens (1000 IU/day vs. 400 IU/day) on bone mineral content in new-onset and infrequently-relapsing nephrotic syndrome: a randomised clinical trial

Vitamin D supplementation in children and young adults with persistent proteinuria secondary to glomerular disease

BACKGROUND

Vitamin D deficiency is common in glomerular disease. Supplementation may be ineffective due to ongoing urinary losses of vitamin D binding protein. We sought to determine if daily cholecalciferol supplementation would increase vitamin D concentrations in children with glomerular disease and persistent proteinuria, without adverse effects.

METHODS

Eighteen participants at least 5 years of age with primary glomerular disease and urine protein:creatinine ratio ≥ 0.5 were enrolled from four pediatric nephrology practices to receive cholecalciferol supplementation: 4,000 IU or 2,000 IU per day for serum 25 hydroxyvitamin vitamin D (25OHD) concentrations < 20 ng/mL and 20 ng/mL to < 30 ng/mL, respectively. Measures of vitamin D and mineral metabolism were obtained at baseline and weeks 6 and 12. Multivariable generalized estimating equation (GEE) regression estimated mean percent changes in serum 25OHD concentration.

RESULTS

Median baseline 25OHD was 12.8 ng/mL (IQR 9.3, 18.9) and increased to 27.8 ng/mL (20.5, 36.0) at week 6 (p < 0.001) without further significant increase at week 12. A total of 31% of participants had a level ≥ 30 ng/mL at week 12. Supplementation was stopped in two participants at week 6 for mildly elevated calcium and phosphorus, respectively, with subsequent declines in 25OHD of > 20 ng/mL. In the adjusted GEE model, 25OHD was 102% (95% CI: 64, 141) and 96% (95% CI: 51, 140) higher versus baseline at weeks 6 and 12, respectively (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Cholecalciferol supplementation in vitamin D deficient children with glomerular disease and persistent proteinuria safely increases 25OHD concentration. Ideal dosing to fully replete 25OHD concentrations in this population remains unknown.

CLINICAL TRIAL

NCT01835639. A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information.

Effects of oral vitamin D supplementation on linear growth and other health outcomes among children under five years of age

BACKGROUND

Vitamin D is a secosteroid hormone that is important for its role in calcium homeostasis to maintain skeletal health. Linear growth faltering and stunting remain pervasive indicators of poor nutrition status among infants and children under five years of age around the world, and low vitamin D status has been linked to poor growth. However, existing evidence on the effects of vitamin D supplementation on linear growth and other health outcomes among infants and children under five years of age has not been systematically reviewed.

OBJECTIVES

To assess effects of oral vitamin D supplementation on linear growth and other health outcomes among infants and children under five years of age.

SEARCH METHODS

In December 2019, we searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, 14 other electronic databases, and two trials registries. We also searched the reference lists of relevant publications for any relevant trials, and we contacted key organisations and authors to obtain information on relevant ongoing and unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs assessing the effects of oral vitamin D supplementation, with or without other micronutrients, compared to no intervention, placebo, a lower dose of vitamin D, or the same micronutrients alone (and not vitamin D) in infants and children under five years of age who lived in any country.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

Out of 75 studies (187 reports; 12,122 participants) included in the qualitative analysis, 64 studies (169 reports; 10,854 participants) contributed data on our outcomes of interest for meta-analysis. A majority of included studies were conducted in India, USA, and Canada. Two studies reported for-profit funding, two were categorised as receiving mixed funding (non-profit and for-profit), five reported that they received no funding, 26 did not disclose funding sources, and the remaining studies were funded by non-profit funding. Certainty of evidence varied between high and very low across outcomes (all measured at endpoint) for each comparison. Vitamin D supplementation versus placebo or no intervention (31 studies) Compared to placebo or no intervention, vitamin D supplementation (at doses 200 to 2000 IU daily; or up to 300,000 IU bolus at enrolment) may make little to no difference in linear growth (measured length/height in cm) among children under five years of age (mean difference (MD) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.37 to 1.68; 3 studies, 240 participants; low-certainty evidence); probably improves length/height-for-age z-score (L/HAZ) (MD 0.11, 95% CI 0.001 to 0.22; 1 study, 1258 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); and probably makes little to no difference in stunting (risk ratio (RR) 0.90, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.01; 1 study, 1247 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). In terms of adverse events, vitamin D supplementation results in little to no difference in developing hypercalciuria compared to placebo (RR 2.03, 95% CI 0.28 to 14.67; 2 studies, 68 participants; high-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether vitamin D supplementation impacts the development of hypercalcaemia as the certainty of evidence was very low (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.90; 2 studies, 367 participants). Vitamin D supplementation (higher dose) versus vitamin D (lower dose) (34 studies) Compared to a lower dose of vitamin D (100 to 1000 IU daily; or up to 300,000 IU bolus at enrolment), higher-dose vitamin D supplementation (200 to 6000 IU daily; or up to 600,000 IU bolus at enrolment) may have little to no effect on linear growth, but we are uncertain about this result (MD 1.00, 95% CI -2.22 to 0.21; 5 studies, 283 participants), and it may make little to no difference in L/HAZ (MD 0.40, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.86; 2 studies, 105 participants; low-certainty evidence). No studies evaluated stunting. As regards adverse events, higher-dose vitamin D supplementation may make little to no difference in developing hypercalciuria (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.35; 6 studies, 554 participants; low-certainty evidence) or in hypercalcaemia (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.89 to 2.18; 5 studies, 986 participants; low-certainty evidence) compared to lower-dose vitamin D supplementation. Vitamin D supplementation (higher dose) + micronutrient(s) versus vitamin D (lower dose) + micronutrient(s) (9 studies) Supplementation with a higher dose of vitamin D (400 to 2000 IU daily, or up to 300,000 IU bolus at enrolment) plus micronutrients, compared to a lower dose (200 to 2000 IU daily, or up to 90,000 IU bolus at enrolment) of vitamin D with the same micronutrients, probably makes little to no difference in linear growth (MD 0.60, 95% CI -3.33 to 4.53; 1 study, 25 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). No studies evaluated L/HAZ or stunting. In terms of adverse events, higher-dose vitamin D supplementation with micronutrients, compared to lower-dose vitamin D with the same micronutrients, may make little to no difference in developing hypercalciuria (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.48; 1 study, 86 participants; low-certainty evidence) and probably makes little to no difference in developing hypercalcaemia (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.90, 1.11; 2 studies, 126 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Four studies measured hyperphosphataemia and three studies measured kidney stones, but they reported no occurrences and therefore were not included in the comparison for these outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence suggests that oral vitamin D supplementation may result in little to no difference in linear growth, stunting, hypercalciuria, or hypercalcaemia, compared to placebo or no intervention, but may result in a slight increase in length/height-for-age z-score (L/HAZ). Additionally, evidence suggests that compared to lower doses of vitamin D, with or without micronutrients, vitamin D supplementation may result in little to no difference in linear growth, L/HAZ, stunting, hypercalciuria, or hypercalcaemia. Small sample sizes, substantial heterogeneity in terms of population and intervention parameters, and high risk of bias across many of the included studies limit our ability to confirm with any certainty the effects of vitamin D on our outcomes. Larger, well-designed studies of long duration (several months to years) are recommended to confirm whether or not oral vitamin D supplementation may impact linear growth in children under five years of age, among both those who are healthy and those with underlying infectious or non-communicable health conditions.

Three-monthly bolus vitamin D supplements (1000 vs 400 IU/day) for prevention of bone loss in children with difficult-to-treat nephrotic syndrome: a randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Nephrotic syndrome (NS) in children is one of the most common chronic diseases with a remitting and relapsing course. Glucocorticoids (prednisolone) are considered to be the treatment of choice but are associated with osteoporosis. There are no uniform consensus guidelines regarding the optimum dose of calcium and vitamin D for osteoprotection. Some authorities suggest a daily dose of 1000 IU vitamin D for children for osteoprotection, while others suggest a daily dose of 400 IU.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of three-monthly bolus vitamin D supplementation (1000 vs 400 IU/day) to prevent bone loss in children with difficult-to-treat NS (DTNS).

METHODS

In this parallel-group, open-label, randomised clinical trial, 60 children aged 1-18 years with DTNS [37 with frequently relapsing NS (FRNS), 13 steroid-dependent NS (SDNS) and 10 steroid-resistant NS (SRNS)] were enrolled and block randomised in a 1:1 allocation ratio to receive 1000 IU/day vitamin D (Group A, n = 30) or 400 IU/day (Group B, n = 30), administered as three-monthly bolus supplemental doses. In Group A, vitamin D (cholecalciferol, Calcirol®sachet) was administered as a stat dose of 90,000 IU every three months (calculated for a period of three months at 1000 IU/day). In Group B, vitamin D (cholecalciferol) was administered as a stat dose of 36,000 IU every three months (calculated for a period of three months at 400 IU/day). The proportionate change in bone mineral content (BMC) was studied by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan in both groups after vitamin D supplementation by analysing the values of BMC obtained 12 months apart (baseline vs. after 12 months).

RESULTS

Sixty children were randomised to receive vitamin D at a dose of either 1000 IU/day (Group A) or 400 IU/day (Group B). The two groups were comparable in their baseline clinical and laboratory parameters (including BMC and bone mineral density (BMD)). The distribution of the three types of NS (FRNS, SDNS and SRNS) was also comparable in both groups. In Group A, there were 19, 6 and 5 children with FRNS, SDNS and SRNS, respectively, and in Group B there were 18, 7 and 5 children with FRNS, SDNS and SRNS, respectively. The proportionate change in BMC was not significantly different between the two groups (median proportionate change in BMC in Group A 13.36% vs 11.59% in Group B, p = 0.22). Overall, BMC increased in both groups (96.7% in each). Only one (3.3%) patient in each group exhibited bone loss. None of the patients had a urinary calcium:creatinine ratio >0.2 at the end of the study.

CONCLUSION

Three-monthly bolus vitamin D dosing regimens administered either as 1000 or 400 IU/day prevent bone loss in children with DTNS who require long-term steroids. Overall, three-monthly bolus supplemental prophylactic vitamin D, either 1000 or 400 IU/day, would seem to be an effective strategy for preventing bone loss in children with DTNS, as evidenced by the extremely low rates of bone loss (3.3% in each group), and is useful for delivering optimal care to children with DTNS. However, since this study was designed as an equivalence trial and not a superiority trial, further studies are required to demonstrate the superiority of the former regimen over the latter.

ABBREVIATIONS

BMC, bone mineral content; BMD, bone mineral density; DEXA, dual energy X-ray absorptiometry; DTNS, difficult-to-treat nephrotic syndrome; FRNS, frequently relapsing nephrotic syndrome; IFRNS, infrequently relapsing nephrotic syndrome; iPTH, intact parathyroid hormone; NS, nephrotic syndrome; SDNS, steroid-dependent nephrotic syndrome; SRNS steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome.