IMPORTANCE Cohort studies have reported increased incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) among individuals with low vitamin D status. To date, randomized clinical trials of vitamin D supplementation have not found an effect, possibly because of using too low a dose of vitamin D. OBJECTIVE To examine whether monthly high-dose vitamin D supplementation prevents CVD in the general population. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThe Vitamin D Assessment Study is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that recruited participants mostly from family practices in Auckland, New Zealand, from April 5, 2011, through November 6, 2012, with follow-up until July 2015. Participants were community-resident adults aged 50 to 84 years. Of 47 905 adults invited from family practices and 163 from community groups, 5110 participants were randomized to receive vitamin D 3 (n = 2558) or placebo (n = 2552). Two participants retracted consent, and all others (n = 5108) were included in the primary analysis.INTERVENTIONS Oral vitamin D 3 in an initial dose of 200 000 IU, followed a month later by monthly doses of 100 000 IU, or placebo for a median of 3.3 years (range, 2.5-4.2 years). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome was the number of participants with incident CVD and death, including a prespecified subgroup analysis in participants with vitamin D deficiency (baseline deseasonalized 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] levels <20 ng/mL). Secondary outcomes were myocardial infarction, angina, heart failure, hypertension, arrhythmias, arteriosclerosis, stroke, and venous thrombosis. RESULTSOf the 5108 participants included in the analysis, the mean (SD) age was 65.9 (8.3) years, 2969 (58.1%) were male, and 4253 (83.3%) were of European or other ethnicity, with the remainder being Polynesian or South Asian. Mean (SD) baseline deseasonalized 25(OH)D concentration was 26.5 (9.0) ng/mL, with 1270 participants (24.9%) being vitamin D deficient. In a random sample of 438 participants, the mean follow-up 25(OH)D level was greater than 20 ng/mL higher in the vitamin D group than in the placebo group. The primary outcome of CVD occurred in 303 participants (11.8%) in the vitamin D group and 293 participants (11.5%) in the placebo group, yielding an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.02 (95% CI, 0.87-1.20). Similar results were seen for participants with baseline vitamin D deficiency and for secondary outcomes.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Monthly high-dose vitamin D supplementation does not prevent CVD. This result does not support the use of monthly vitamin D supplementation for this purpose. The effects of daily or weekly dosing require further study.

No abstract

Objectives: To assess the overall effect of vitamin D supplementation on risk of acute respiratory infection (ARI), and to identify factors modifying this effect. Design: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of vitamin D for ARI prevention using a random effects model. Pre-specified sub-group analyses were done to determine whether effects of vitamin D on risk of ARI varied according to baseline 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) concentration or dosing regimen. Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Standard RCT Number (ISRCTN) registry from inception to May 2020. Eligibility Criteria for Selecting Studies: Double-blind RCTs of supplementation with vitamin D or calcidiol, of any duration, were eligible if they were approved by a Research Ethics Committee and if ARI incidence was collected prospectively and pre-specified as an efficacy outcome. Results: We identified 40 eligible RCTs (total 30,956 participants, aged 0 to 95 years). Data were obtained for 29,841 (96.5%) of 30,909 participants in 39 studies. For the primary comparison of vitamin D supplementation vs. placebo, the intervention reduced risk of ARI overall (Odds Ratio [OR] 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.98; P for heterogeneity 0.009). No statistically significant effect of vitamin D was seen for any of the sub-groups defined by baseline 25(OH)D concentration. However, protective effects were seen for trials in which vitamin D was given using a daily dosing regimen (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.93); at daily dose equivalents of 400-1000 IU (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.89); and for a duration of ≤12 months (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.94). Vitamin D did not influence the proportion of participants experiencing at least one serious adverse event (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.08). Risk of bias within individual studies was assessed as being low for all but two trials. A funnel plot showed asymmetry, suggesting that small trials showing non-protective effects of vitamin D may have been omitted from the meta-analysis. Conclusions: Vitamin D supplementation was safe and reduced risk of ARI, despite evidence of significant heterogeneity across trials. The overall effect size may have been over-estimated due to publication bias. Protection was associated with administration of daily doses of 400-1000 IU vitamin D for up to 12 months. The relevance of these findings to COVID-19 is not known and requires investigation.

The objective of this study was to validate an 8-electrode bioimpedance analysis (BIA 8 ) device (BC-418; Tanita, Tokyo, Japan) for use in populations of European, Maori, Pacific Island, and Asian adolescents. Healthy adolescents (215 M, 216 F; 129 Pacific Island, 120 Asian, 91 Maori, and 91 European; age range 12-19 years) were recruited by purposive sampling of high schools in Auckland, New Zealand. Weight, height, sitting height, leg length, waist circumference, and whole-body impedance were measured. Fat mass (FM) and fat-free mass (FFM) derived from the BIA 8 manufacturer's equations were compared with measurements by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). DXA-measured FFM was used as the reference to develop prediction equations based on impedance. A double cross-validation technique was applied. BIA 8 underestimated FM by 2.06 kg (P < 0.0001) and percent body fat (%BF) by 2.84% (P < 0.0001), on average. However, BIA 8 tended to overestimate FM and %BF in lean and underestimate FM and %BF in fat individuals. Sex-specific equations developed showed acceptable accuracy on cross-validation. In the total sample, the best prediction equations were, for boys: FFM (kg) = 0.607 height (cm) 2 /impedance (Ω) + 1.542 age (y) + 0.220 height ( In conclusion, equations for fatness estimation using BIA 8 developed for our sample perform better than reliance on the manufacturer's estimates. The relationship between BIA and body composition in adolescents is ethnicity dependent.

BackgroundThe effects of monthly, high‐dose, long‐term (≥1‐year) vitamin D supplementation on central blood pressure (BP) parameters are unknown.Methods and ResultsA total of 517 adults (58% male, aged 50–84 years) were recruited into a double‐blinded, placebo‐controlled trial substudy and randomized to receive, for 1.1 years (median; range: 0.9–1.5 years), either (1) vitamin D3 200 000 IU (initial dose) followed 1 month later by monthly 100 000‐IU doses (n=256) or (2) placebo monthly (n=261). At baseline (n=517) and follow‐up (n=380), suprasystolic oscillometry was undertaken, yielding aortic BP waveforms and hemodynamic parameters. Mean deseasonalized 25‐hydroxyvitamin D increased from 66 nmol/L (SD: 24) at baseline to 122 nmol/L (SD: 42) at follow‐up in the vitamin D group, with no change in the placebo group. Despite small, nonsignificant changes in hemodynamic parameters in the total sample (primary outcome), we observed consistently favorable changes among the 150 participants with vitamin D deficiency (<50 nmol/L) at baseline. In this subgroup, mean changes in the vitamin D group (n=71) versus placebo group (n=79) were −5.3 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI], −11.8 to 1.3) for brachial systolic BP (P=0.11), −2.8 mm Hg (95% CI, −6.2 to 0.7) for brachial diastolic BP (P=0.12), −7.5 mm Hg (95% CI, −14.4 to −0.6) for aortic systolic BP (P=0.03), −5.7 mm Hg (95% CI, −10.8 to −0.6) for augmentation index (P=0.03), −0.3 m/s (95% CI, −0.6 to −0.1) for pulse wave velocity (P=0.02), −8.6 mm Hg (95% CI, −15.4 to −1.9) for peak reservoir pressure (P=0.01), and −3.6 mm Hg (95% CI, −6.3 to −0.8) for backward pressure amplitude (P=0.01).ConclusionsMonthly, high‐dose, 1‐year vitamin D supplementation lowered central BP parameters among adults with vitamin D deficiency but not in the total sample.Clinical Trial Registration URL: http://www.anzctr.org.au. Unique identifier: ACTRN12611000402943.

anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12611000402943.

Abstract Background Although adults with low vitamin D status are at increased risk of acute respiratory infection (ARI), randomized controlled trials of vitamin D supplementation have provided inconsistent results. Methods We performed a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of 5110 adults aged 50–84 years. In 2011–2012, participants were randomized to an initial oral dose of 200 000 IU vitamin D3 followed by 100 000 IU monthly (n = 2558) or placebo (n = 2552) until late 2013 (median follow-up, 1.6 years). Participants reported upper and lower ARIs on monthly questionnaires. Cox models analyzed time to first ARI (upper or lower) by treatment group. Results Participants’ mean age was 66 years and 58% were male; 83% were of European/other ethnicity, with the rest Maori, Polynesian, or South Asian. Mean (SD) baseline blood 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] level was 63 (24) nmol/L; 25% were &lt;50 nmol/L. In a random sample (n = 441), vitamin D supplementation increased mean 25(OH)D to 135 nmol/L at 3 years, while those on placebo remained at 63 nmol/L. During follow-up, 3737 participants reported ≥1 ARI: 74.1% in the vitamin D group versus 73.7% in the placebo group. The hazard ratio for vitamin D compared with placebo was 1.01 (95% CI, 0.94, 1.07). Similar results were seen in most subgroups, including those with baseline 25(OH)D &lt;50 nmol/L and in analyses of the upper/lower components of the ARI outcome. Conclusions Monthly high-dose vitamin D supplementation does not prevent ARI in older adults with a low prevalence of profound vitamin D deficiency at baseline. Whether effects of daily or weekly dosing differ requires further study. Clinical Trials Registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, identifier ACTRN12611000402943.

Although observational studies suggest positive vitamin D-lung function associations, randomized trials are inconsistent. We examined effects of vitamin D supplementation on lung function. We recruited 442 adults (50–84 years, 58% male) into a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Participants received, for 1.1 years (median; range = 0.9–1.5 years), either (1) vitamin D3 200,000 IU, followed by monthly 100,000 IU doses (n = 226); or (2) placebo monthly (n = 216). At baseline and follow-up, spirometry yielded forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1; primary outcome). Mean (standard deviation) 25-hydroxyvitamin D increased from 61 (24) nmol/L at baseline to 119 (45) nmol/L at follow-up in the vitamin D group, but was unchanged in the placebo group. There were no significant lung function improvements (vitamin D versus placebo) in the total sample, vitamin D-deficient participants or asthma/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) participants. However, among ever-smokers (n = 217), the mean (95% confidence interval) FEV1 increase in the vitamin D versus placebo was 57 (4, 109) mL (p = 0.03). FEV1 increases were larger among vitamin D-deficient ever-smokers (n = 54): 122 (8, 236) mL (p = 0.04). FEV1 improvements were largest among ever-smokers with asthma/COPD (n = 60): 160 (53, 268) mL (p = 0.004). Thus, vitamin D supplementation did not improve lung function among everyone, but benefited ever-smokers, especially those with vitamin D deficiency or asthma/COPD.