3.8 Article

Assessment of 25-hydroxyvitamin D and 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 concentrations in male and female multiple sclerosis patients and control volunteers

期刊

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS
卷 13, 期 5, 页码 670-672

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1352458506072666

关键词

1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D-3; 25-hydroxyvitamin D; multiple sclerosis; vitamin D

资金

  1. Medical Research Council [MC_U105960371] Funding Source: Medline
  2. MRC [MC_U105960371] Funding Source: UKRI
  3. Medical Research Council [MC_U105960371] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Populations with insufficient ultraviolet exposure and who consume diets low in vitamin D have low vitamin D status (plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentrations) and a reported higher incidence of multiple sclerosis (MS). The active form of vitamin D, 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D-3 (1,25(OH)(2)D-3), is an effective anti-inflammatory molecule. No research to date has assessed 1,25(OH)2D3 concentrations in individuals with MS. In this study, plasma concentrations of 25(OH)D, 1,25(OH)(2)D-3 and parathyroid hormone (PTH) were measured in 29 individuals with MS and 22 age- and sex-matched control volunteers. There were no significant differences in plasma PTH, 25(OH)D and 1,25(OH)2D3 concentrations between individuals with MS and control volunteers. Women with MS had significantly higher 25(OH)D and 1,25(OH)2D3 concentrations than men with MS (79.1 +/- 45.4 versus 50.2 +/- 15.3nmol/L, P=0.019 and 103.8 +/- 36.8 versus 70.4 +/- 28.7pmol/L, P=0.019, respectively). There was a significant positive correlation between 25(OH)D and 1,25(OH)(2)D-3 concentrations in all subjects (r=0.564, P=0.000), but secondary analysis revealed that the correlation was driven by women with MS (r=0.677, P=0.001). Significant sex differences in vitamin D metabolism were observed and were most marked in individuals with MS ' suggesting that vitamin D requirements may differ between the sexes, as well as by underlying disease state.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据