Pharmacokinetic profile and effect on bone markers and muscle strength of two daily dosage regimens of calcifediol in osteopenic/osteoporotic postmenopausal women

Scientific and technical assistance to the evaluation of the safety of calcidiol monohydrate as a novel food

EFSA was asked by the European Commission to provide scientific assistance with respect to the EFSA adopted scientific opinion on 'Safety of calcidiol monohydrate produced by chemical synthesis as a novel food pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2015/2283', including its bioavailability as a metabolite of vitamin D3 when added for nutritional purposes to food supplements. On 5 July 2023, EFSA adopted the 'Scientific opinion on the tolerable upper intake level for vitamin D, including the derivation of a conversion factor for calcidiol monohydrate'. This opinion concerns an updated exposure assessment for vitamin D and proposes a conversion factor for calcidiol monohydrate into vitamin D3 of 2.5 for labelling purposes. In addition, in reference to the EFSA opinion on the safety of calcidiol monohydrate, the Commission had received a letter from the pharmaceutical company EirGen Pharma Ltd requesting a revision of this opinion based on new data concerning calcidiol. Based on the information and data considered in this scientific technical report, EFSA concludes that the novel food calcidiol monohydrate proposed for use in food supplements is a bioavailable source of the biologically active metabolite of vitamin D, i.e. 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D, that a conversion factor of 2.5 reflects the relative bioavailability of calcidiol vs vitamin D3 under the proposed conditions of use and use levels, and that it is safe under the proposed conditions of use and use levels, i.e. up to 10 μg/day for children ≥ 11 years old and adults, including pregnant and lactating women, and up to 5 μg/day for children 3-10 years of age.

Scientific opinion on the tolerable upper intake level for vitamin D, including the derivation of a conversion factor for calcidiol monohydrate

Following two requests from the European Commission (EC), the EFSA Panel on Nutrition, Novel Foods and Food Allergens (NDA) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the revision of the tolerable upper intake level (UL) for vitamin D and to propose a conversion factor (CF) for calcidiol monohydrate into vitamin D3 for labelling purposes. Vitamin D refers to ergocalciferol (vitamin D2), cholecalciferol (vitamin D3), and calcidiol monohydrate. Systematic reviews of the literature were conducted to assess the relative bioavailability of calcidiol monohydrate versus vitamin D3 on serum 25(OH)D concentrations, and for priority adverse health effects of excess vitamin D intake, namely persistent hypercalcaemia/hypercalciuria and endpoints related to musculoskeletal health (i.e. falls, bone fractures, bone mass/density and indices thereof). Based on the available evidence, the Panel proposes a CF for calcidiol monohydrates of 2.5 for labelling purposes. Persistent hypercalciuria, which may be an earlier sign of excess vitamin D than persistent hypercalcaemia, is selected as the critical endpoint on which to base the UL for vitamin D. A lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) of 250 μg/day is identified from two randomised controlled trials in humans, to which an uncertainty factor of 2.5 is applied to account for the absence of a no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL). A UL of 100 μg vitamin D equivalents (VDE)/day is established for adults (including pregnant and lactating women) and for adolescents aged 11-17 years, as there is no reason to believe that adolescents in the phase of rapid bone formation and growth have a lower tolerance for vitamin D compared to adults. For children aged 1-10 years, a UL of 50 μg VDE/day is established by considering their smaller body size. Based on available intake data, European populations are unlikely to exceed the UL, except for regular users of food supplements containing high doses of vitamin D.

Calcifediol: a review of its pharmacological characteristics and clinical use in correcting vitamin D deficiency

BACKGROUND

In addition to the role of vitamin D in bone mineralization, calcium and phosphate homeostasis, and skeletal health, evidence suggests an association between vitamin D deficiency and a wide range of chronic conditions. This is of clinical concern given the substantial global prevalence of vitamin D deficiency. Vitamin D deficiency has traditionally been treated with vitamin D₃ (cholecalciferol) or vitamin D₂ (ergocalciferol). Calcifediol (25-hydroxyvitamin D₃) has recently become available more widely.

METHODS

By means of targeted literature searches of PubMed, this narrative review overviews the physiological functions and metabolic pathways of vitamin D, examines the differences between calcifediol and vitamin D₃, and highlights clinical trials conducted with calcifediol in patients with bone disease or other conditions.

RESULTS

For supplemental use in the healthy population, calcifediol can be used at doses of up to 10 µg per day for children ≥ 11 years and adults and up to 5 µg/day in children 3-10 years. For therapeutic use of calcifediol under medical supervision, the dose, frequency and duration of treatment is determined according to serum 25(OH)D concentrations, condition, type of patient and comorbidities. Calcifediol differs pharmacokinetically from vitamin D₃ in several ways. It is independent of hepatic 25-hydroxylation and thus is one step closer in the metabolic pathway to active vitamin D. At comparable doses to vitamin D₃, calcifediol achieves target serum 25(OH)D concentrations more rapidly and in contrast to vitamin D₃, it has a predictable and linear dose-response curve irrespective of baseline serum 25(OH)D concentrations. The intestinal absorption of calcifediol is relatively preserved in patients with fat malabsorption and it is more hydrophilic than vitamin D₃ and thus is less prone to sequestration in adipose tissue.

CONCLUSION

Calcifediol is suitable for use in all patients with vitamin D deficiency and may be preferable to vitamin D₃ for patients with obesity, liver disease, malabsorption and those who require a rapid increase in 25(OH)D concentrations.

Treatment of Vitamin D Deficiency with Calcifediol: Efficacy and Safety Profile and Predictability of Efficacy

Calcifediol (25-OH-vitamin D3) is the prohormone of the vitamin D endocrine system. It is used to prevent and treat vitamin D deficiency. Calcifediol, as well as cholecalciferol (vitamin D3), is efficient and safe in the general population, although calcifediol has certain advantages over cholecalciferol, such as its rapid onset of action and greater potency. This review analyzed studies comparing the efficacy and safety of both calcifediol and cholecalciferol drugs in the short and long term (>6 months). Calcifediol was found to be more efficacious, with no increase in toxicity. We also assessed the predictability of both molecules. A 25OHD increase depends on the dose and frequency of calcifediol administration. In contrast, after cholecalciferol administration, 25OHD increase depends on more factors than dose and frequency of administration, also phenotypic aspects (such as obesity and malabsorption), and genotypic factors impacts in this increase.

Effect of Calcifediol on Physical Performance and Muscle Strength Parameters: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

There is general agreement that optimal vitamin D status is necessary for bones, muscles, and general health, particularly in older adults, who are at higher risk of negative consequences of vitamin D deficiency, including sarcopenia; vitamin D supplementation is proposed as a potential intervention to mitigate sarcopenia. Several RCTs have reported that calcifediol (25(OH)D) was more potent than cholecalciferol in increasing plasma 25(OH)D. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize the effects of calcifediol on physical performance and muscle strength. We searched databases from inception to 1 January 2022 for studies investigating calcifediol on physical performance or muscle strength parameters. We calculated the difference between the means of follow-up vs. baseline data using standardized mean differences (SMD) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs); a random-effect model was considered for all of the analyses. Seven RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. Calcifediol significantly improved gait speed (SMD = 2.500; 95%CI = 1.768−3.223; p < 0.0001); handgrip strength (n = 5446 participants, SMD = 0.532; 95%CI: 0.305−0.758; p < 0.0001; I2 = 20.2%); and leg extension (n = 4318 participants, SMD = 0.641; 95%CI: 0.346 to 0.935; p < 0.0001; I2 = 18.8%;) vs. baseline values. In conclusion, in this systematic review and meta-analysis, we observed that calcifediol may have a positive effect on muscle strength parameters, with less evidence on physical performance. These data further indicate the importance of vitamin D and, in particular, of calcifediol, not only on bone metabolism but also on muscle parameters and sarcopenia.