4.3 Review

Vitamin D supplementation in elderly or postmenopausal women: a 2013 update of the 2008 recommendations from the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis (ESCEO)

Journal

CURRENT MEDICAL RESEARCH AND OPINION
Volume 29, Issue 4, Pages 305-313

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1185/03007995.2013.766162

Keywords

Bone health; Guidance; Osteoporosis; Supplementation; Vitamin D

Funding

  1. Merck Sharp and Dohme
  2. Eli Lilly
  3. Amgen
  4. Novartis
  5. Servier
  6. Nycomed
  7. Nestle
  8. Danone
  9. GlaxoSmithKline
  10. Merck
  11. Ono
  12. Roche
  13. Sanofi-Aventis
  14. Warner Chilcott
  15. Fondazione F.I.R.M.O. (Fondazione Italiana Ricerca Malattie Ossee)
  16. Merck Sharpe Dohme
  17. Glaxo
  18. Wyeth
  19. Procter and Gamble
  20. IBSA
  21. Merck Sharp Dohme
  22. Theramex
  23. Pfizer
  24. Rottapharm
  25. Daiichi-Sankyo
  26. Glaxo SmithKline
  27. Daiichi Sankyo
  28. Lilly
  29. MSD
  30. Merckle
  31. NPS
  32. UCB
  33. Genevrier
  34. Teijin
  35. Teva
  36. Ebewee Pharma
  37. Zodiac
  38. Analis
  39. Novo-Nordisk
  40. Bristol Myers Squibb
  41. European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis (ESCEO)
  42. Medical Research Council [MC_UU_12011/1, MC_UP_A620_1014, MC_U147585824, U1475000001] Funding Source: researchfish
  43. National Institute for Health Research [NF-SI-0508-10082] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Vitamin D insufficiency has deleterious consequences on health outcomes. In elderly or postmenopausal women, it may exacerbate osteoporosis. Scope: There is currently no clear consensus on definitions of vitamin D insufficiency or minimal targets for vitamin D concentrations and proposed targets vary with the population. In view of the potential confusion for practitioners on when to treat and what to achieve, the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis (ESCEO) convened a meeting to provide recommendations for clinical practice, to ensure the optimal management of elderly and postmenopausal women with regard to vitamin D supplementation. Findings: Vitamin D has both skeletal and extra-skeletal benefits. Patients with serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25-(OH)D) levels <50 nmol/L have increased bone turnover, bone loss, and possibly mineralization defects compared with patients with levels >50 nmol/L. Similar relationships have been reported for frailty, nonvertebral and hip fracture, and all-cause mortality, with poorer outcomes at <50 nmol/L. Conclusion: The ESCEO recommends that 50 nmol/L (i.e. 20 ng/mL) should be the minimal serum 25-(OH)D concentration at the population level and in patients with osteoporosis to ensure optimal bone health. Below this threshold, supplementation is recommended at 800 to 1000 IU/day. Vitamin D supplementation is safe up to 10,000 IU/day (upper limit of safety) resulting in an upper limit of adequacy of 125 nmol/L 25-(OH)D. Daily consumption of calcium-and vitamin-D-fortified food products (e.g. yoghurt or milk) can help improve vitamin D intake. Above the threshold of 50 nmol/L, there is no clear evidence for additional benefits of supplementation. On the other hand, in fragile elderly subjects who are at elevated risk for falls and fracture, the ESCEO recommends a minimal serum 25-(OH)D level of 75 nmol/L (i.e. 30 ng/mL), for the greatest impact on fracture.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available