4.7 Article

Effect of Two Different Doses of Vitamin D Supplementation on Metabolic Profiles of Insulin-Resistant Patients with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome

Journal

NUTRIENTS
Volume 9, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu9121280

Keywords

vitamin D supplementation; hormonal profiles; insulin-resistant; polycystic ovary syndrome

Funding

  1. AUMS

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study was carried out to evaluate the effects of vitamin D supplementation on the metabolic profiles of insulin-resistant subjects with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). This randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted on 90 insulin-resistant women with PCOS. Participants were randomly assigned to three groups to intake either 4000 IU of vitamin D or 1000 IU of vitamin D or placebo (n = 30 each group) daily for 12 weeks. Vitamin D supplementation (4000 IU), compared with vitamin D (1000 IU) and placebo, led to significant reductions in total testosterone (-0.2 +/- 0.2 vs. -0.1 +/- 0.6 and +0.1 +/- 0.2 ng/mL, respectively, p = 0.02), free androgen index (FAI) (-0.06 +/- 0.12 vs. -0.02 +/- 0.12 and +0.004 +/- 0.04, respectively, p = 0.04), hirsutism (-1.1 +/- 1.1 vs. -0.8 +/- 1.2 and -0.1 +/- 0.4, respectively, p = 0.001) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) (-0.7 +/- 1.4 vs. -0.5 +/- 0.9 and +0.5 +/- 2.4 mg/L, respectively, p = 0.01). In addition, we found significant elevations in mean change of sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) (+19.1 +/- 23.0 vs. +4.5 +/- 11.0 and +0.7 +/- 10.4 nmol/L, respectively, p < 0.001) and total antioxidant capacity (TAC) (+130 +/- 144 vs. +33 +/- 126 and -36 +/- 104 mmol/L, respectively, p < 0.001) in the high-dose vitamin D group compared with low-dose vitamin D and placebo groups. Overall, high-dose vitamin D administration for 12 weeks to insulin-resistant women with PCOS had beneficial effects on total testosterone, SHBG, FAI, serum hs-CRP and plasma TAC levels compared with low-dose vitamin D and placebo groups.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available