3.8 Review

Vitamin D: Bolus Is Bogus-A Narrative Review

Journal

JBMR PLUS
Volume 5, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jbm4.10567

Keywords

PTH/VIT D/FGF23; CELL/TISSUE SIGNALING; ENDOCRINE PATHWAYS; CLINICAL TRIALS; NUTRITION; AGING

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This review summarizes the impact of high bolus doses versus daily doses of vitamin D on levels of 25(OH)D and 1,25(OH)(2)D, as well as on factors blocking vitamin D functions. It also discusses the role of bolus versus daily dosing of vitamin D in various health outcomes, highlighting potential biases in health recommendations based on different dosing trials.
In this review we summarize the impact of bolus versus daily dosing of vitamin D on 25(OH)D and 1,25(OH)(2)D levels, as well as on key countervailing factors that block vitamin D functions at the cellular level. Further, we discuss the role of bolus versus daily dosing of vitamin D for several health outcomes, including respiratory infections and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), rickets, falls and fractures, any cancer, and cancer-related mortality. This discussion appears timely because bolus doses continue to be tested for various disease outcomes despite a growing amount of evidence suggesting lack of efficacy or even detrimental effects of bolus dosing of vitamin D for outcomes where daily dosing at modest levels was effective in the vitamin D deficient. As a result, these discordant results may bias health recommendations for vitamin D if the recommendations are based on meta-analyses combining both daily and bolus dosing trials. (C) 2021 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available