Literature DB >> 21454797

First-trimester circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels and development of gestational diabetes mellitus.

Mahlatse Makgoba1, Scott M Nelson, Makrina Savvidou, Claudia-Martina Messow, Kypros Nicolaides, Naveed Sattar.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between first-trimester maternal serum levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25-OH-D) as measured by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry and development of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a case-control study involving 248 women in the first-trimester of pregnancy, 90 of whom developed GDM and 158 remained normoglycemic.
RESULTS: Although booking 25-OH-D levels correlated negatively with 2-h glucose post-oral glucose tolerance test and positively with HDL cholesterol, as well as with ethnicity, obesity, and smoking (all P < 0.05), there were no statistically significant differences in baseline maternal mean 25-OH-D levels between those who subsequently developed GDM, 18.9 ng/mL (SD 10.7) and those who remained normoglycemic, 19.0 ng/mL (10.7) (P = 0.874), even after adjustment for possible confounders including sampling month (P = 0.784).
CONCLUSIONS: Our large and well-phenotyped prospective study did not find evidence of an association between first-trimester maternal levels of 25-OH-D and subsequent development of GDM.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21454797      PMCID: PMC3114479          DOI: 10.2337/dc10-2264

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diabetes Care        ISSN: 0149-5992            Impact factor:   19.112


Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) markedly increases risk of type 2 diabetes in later life (1). Lower 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25-OH-D) concentrations have been inversely associated with maternal glycemia (2), insulin resistance (3), and increased risk of GDM (4). However, further studies are needed to examine the relevant associations, given its topicality and potential for clinical impact. This is even more so the case given that the nonpregnant arena results of observational studies and trials of 25-OH-D in diabetes conflict, with eight trials showing no effect of 25-OH-D supplementation on glycemia or incident diabetes (5). Using a well-phenotyped population of first-trimester women (6), we recently demonstrated that GDM can be predicted from simple clinical and laboratory parameters. We subsequently measured 25-OH-D on available samples and sought to examine the relationship of first-trimester 25-OH-D levels with development of GDM.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We used first-trimester blood samples from 90 women who subsequently developed GDM and 158 control subjects. GDM was defined by at least one abnormal plasma glucose value following the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) with normal values of <6 and <7.8 mmol/L for the fasting and 2-h postprandial samples, respectively (World Health Organization criteria). Maternal first-trimester serum 25-OH-D3 and D2 were measured using an automated solid-phase extraction procedure with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) (7). The lower limit of sensitivity was 4 nmol/L for 25-OH-D3 and 7.5 nmol/L for 25-OH-D2. Within- and between-assay precision was below 10%. Results are reported as total 25-OH-D (25-OH-D2 + 25-OH-D3). A comprehensive description of prospective recruitment and exclusion criteria and the lipid and metabolic parameters measured have previously been reported (6). Variables are summarized as mean (SD), median (quartiles), or n (%) per category; groups have been compared using t tests, Wilcoxon tests, or Fisher exact tests as appropriate and using logistic regression analyses adjusting for different variables. Linear regression analysis has been used to assess the association between log-transformed 25-OH-D and demographic and medical history variables. Associations of glucose, lipid, and blood pressure measures with log-transformed 25-OH-D have also been assessed with linear regression, with and without adjustment for potentially confounding demographic and medical history variables. All analyses have been carried out in R (version 2.11.0) (http://www.R-project.org). P values are not corrected for multiple testing and should be considered descriptive.

RESULTS

Women who developed GDM had a greater BMI, a prior history of GDM, and a family history of type 2 diabetes (Table 1). They also had higher systolic blood pressure, but there were no relevant differences in parity, smoking history, or method of conception. However, booking 25-OH-D levels did not differ significantly between case and control subjects in univariate analyses or after adjustment for confounders, and inclusion of 25-OH-D did not enhance first-trimester prediction of GDM (data not shown). Restriction of analyses to women with no history of GDM did not alter conclusions, and separate examination by ethnic or BMI groups did not either. There were also no relevant differences in proportions of women who had deficient or insufficient 25-OH-D levels (Table 1).
Table 1

Characteristics of mothers with GDM vs. control mothers

Missing valuesControl mothersMothers with GDMPunivariatePadjusted1Padjusted2
n15890
Maternal age (years)0/033.1 ± 4.734.2 ± 4.90.104*0.4150.415
Maternal BMI at 12 weeks (kg/m2)0/025.2 ± 4.030.0 ± 7.9<0.001<0.001<0.001
Ethnicity0/00.7350.9010.901
 White108 (68.4%)58 (64.4%)
 Black31 (19.6%)23 (25.6%)
 Asian12 (7.6%)6 (6.7%)
 Other7 (4.4%)3 (3.3%)
Parity0/01.000
 Nulliparous67 (42.4%)38 (42.2%)
 Parous91 (57.6%)52 (57.8%)
Previous GDM0/0<0.001
 No158 (100%)69 (76.6%)
 Yes0 (0.0%)21 (23.3%)
Family history of diabetes0/0<0.0010.0370.037
 No141 (89.2%)55 (61.1%)
 Yes17 (10.8%)35 (38.9%)
Smoker0/00.7950.8840.884
 No148 (93.7%)83 (92.2%)
 Yes10 (6.3%)7 (7.8%)
Gestational age at booking (days)0/087.5 ± 3.087.4 ± 3.60.916*0.8860.886
Systolic blood pressure (mmHg)37/20112.5 ± 15.8118.5 ± 11.60.003*0.0390.039
Diastolic blood pressure (mmHg)37/2070.2 ± 8.571.7 ± 7.20.218*0.1670.167
Sex1/00.3560.7300.730
 Female77 (49.0%)50 (55.6%)
 Male80 (51.0%)40 (44.4%)
Birth weight (g)1/03,403.1 ± 571.43,283.6 ± 481.90.081*0.3880.388
Gestation at OGTT (weeks)028.0 ± 4.6
OGTT
 Fasting/2-h glucose (mmol/L)0/35.3 ± 1.8/9.1 ± 1.8
 HbA1c (%)115.8 ± 0.9
Total cholesterol (mmol/L)0/04.62 ± 0.764.86 ± 0.900.033*0.7800.780
HDL cholesterol (mmol/L)^0/01.74 (0.35)1.58 (0.38) 0.001*0.0090.009
Triglyceride (mmol/L)^0/01.20 (0.95–1.56)1.38 (1.08–2.01)0.002*0.4230.423
25-OH-D (ng/mL)0/019.0 ± 10.718.9 ± 10.70.874 0.7840.784
25-OH-D (nmol/L)0/047.6 ± 26.747.2 ± 26.70.8630.7820.782
Deficient 25-OH-D (<25 nmol/L)
 No0/0122 (77.2%)72 (80.0%)0.6350.8640.864
 Yes36 (22.8%)18 (20.0%)
Insufficient 25-OH-D (<50 nmol/L)0/00.5020.742 0.742
 No68 (43.0%)34 (37.8%)
 Yes90 (57.0%)56 (62.2%)
Months of sampling0/06.4 ± 3.36.8 ± 3.20.426* 0.3140.314

Data are means ± SD, median (interquartile range), or n (%). Padjusted1, logistic regression adjusted for maternal age, BMI, gestational age at sampling, smoking, ethnicity, parity, conception status, and previous GDM; 25-OH-D levels additionally adjusted for month of sampling. Padjusted2, women without previous GDM (nulliparous or previous pregnancies without GDM) logistic regression adjusted for maternal age, BMI, gestational age at sampling, smoking, ethnicity, parity, and conception status; 25-OH-D levels additionally adjusted for month of sampling.

*t test.

†Wilcoxon test.

‡Fisher exact test.

^Log-transformed for regression analysis.

Characteristics of mothers with GDM vs. control mothers Data are means ± SD, median (interquartile range), or n (%). Padjusted1, logistic regression adjusted for maternal age, BMI, gestational age at sampling, smoking, ethnicity, parity, conception status, and previous GDM; 25-OH-D levels additionally adjusted for month of sampling. Padjusted2, women without previous GDM (nulliparous or previous pregnancies without GDM) logistic regression adjusted for maternal age, BMI, gestational age at sampling, smoking, ethnicity, parity, and conception status; 25-OH-D levels additionally adjusted for month of sampling. *t test. †Wilcoxon test. ‡Fisher exact test. ^Log-transformed for regression analysis. In univariate association analyses, 25-OH-D levels were positively associated with maternal age (2.7% per year; P = 0.001) and negatively with BMI at 12 weeks’ gestation (−1.8% per kg/m2; P = 0.004). 25-OH-D was lower in smokers (P = 0.012), black and Asian women (P < 0.001 and P = 0.003, respectively), and women with a family history of diabetes (P = 0.017). 25-OH-D was positively associated with HDL cholesterol (P = 0.004) and negatively associated with fasting glucose (P = 0.009), 2-h glucose (P = 0.002), and HbA1c (P = 0.002) at 28 weeks’ gestation (Supplementary Table 1). After adjustment for booking month, age, BMI, smoking, ethnicity, and family history of diabetes, 25-OH-D levels remained negatively correlated only with 2-h glucose and positively associated with HDL cholesterol in the entire group and women without prior GDM (Supplementary Table 2).

CONCLUSIONS

Using a very well-phenotyped cohort, we found that first-trimester maternal 25-OH-D levels, despite being associated with 2-h glucose levels (independently of age, obesity, smoking, and ethnicity, etc.), are not significantly associated with the development of GDM. A single study has demonstrated an independent association of 25-OH-D at 16 weeks’ gestation with GDM as defined by American Diabetes Association criteria (4); however, 25-OH-D deficiency was much less prevalent and 25-OH-D levels were determined by immunoassay, a methodology subsequently dropped by the Centers for Disease Control in favor of LC-MS/MS as a result of the poor specificity of immunoassays compared with chromatographic methods (8). Whether these differences underlie the differences in findings is unclear. It is also unclear why 25-OH-D levels continue to correlate with 2-h OGTT levels despite lack of baseline difference in 25-OH-D levels in women who do and do not develop GDM. The potential for residual confounding must be borne in mind. However, given that our study was larger (90 incident cases vs. 57 in that of Zhang et al. [4]), used more robust LC-MS/MS, and was conducted about 4 weeks earlier in gestation, lack of difference in first-trimester 25-OH-D is of relevance and suggests a need to caution against recommending greater 25-OH-D supplementation in pregnancy, at least as a mechanism to lessen risk for GDM. Although there was no evidence of a relation of 25-OH-D with GDM, the prevalence of 25-OH-D deficiency (~20%) within our inner-city multiethnic population was notable. In the early 1990s, 90% of white pregnant mothers in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents And Children (ALSPAC) study had 25-OH-D concentrations <50 nmol/L during winter and spring; 28% were seriously deficient (<25 nmol/L), and virtually no one reached 75 nmol/L (considered optimal) (9), with similar estimates found in other comparable pregnancy cohorts (10,11). Since then, despite significant public health efforts to ensure that all pregnant women achieve 25-OH-D intakes of 10 μg/day (400 IU/day) (12), there appears to have been little positive impact on hypovitaminosis D prevalence. That noted, 25-OH-D levels do not appear to have worsened considerably, at least as judged by comparing the present data with the aforementioned ALSPAC findings. This observation suggests that factors other than 25-OH-D deficiency (i.e., rising obesity rates in pregnancy in particular) likely explain rising GDM rates. To resolve uncertainties about vitamin D and pregnancy outcomes, there is a need for well-conducted and adequately powered studies of vitamin D intake in pregnancy. Until such time, the current study goes against a major role for vitamin D deficiency in the pathogenesis of GDM.
  11 in total

Review 1.  Systematic review: Vitamin D and cardiometabolic outcomes.

Authors:  Anastassios G Pittas; Mei Chung; Thomas Trikalinos; Joanna Mitri; Michael Brendel; Kamal Patel; Alice H Lichtenstein; Joseph Lau; Ethan M Balk
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2010-03-02       Impact factor: 25.391

2.  UK Food Standards Agency Workshop Consensus Report: the choice of method for measuring 25-hydroxyvitamin D to estimate vitamin D status for the UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey.

Authors:  Anne de la Hunty; A Michael Wallace; Sigrid Gibson; Heli Viljakainen; Christel Lamberg-Allardt; Margaret Ashwell
Journal:  Br J Nutr       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 3.718

3.  Maternal vitamin D deficiency, ethnicity and gestational diabetes.

Authors:  R J Clifton-Bligh; P McElduff; A McElduff
Journal:  Diabet Med       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 4.359

4.  Hypovitaminosis D prevalence and determinants among African American and white women of reproductive age: third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988-1994.

Authors:  Shanna Nesby-O'Dell; Kelley S Scanlon; Mary E Cogswell; Cathleen Gillespie; Bruce W Hollis; Anne C Looker; Chris Allen; Cindy Doughertly; Elaine W Gunter; Barbara A Bowman
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 7.045

5.  Correlation between vitamin D3 deficiency and insulin resistance in pregnancy.

Authors:  Zhila Maghbooli; Arash Hossein-Nezhad; Farzaneh Karimi; Ali-Reza Shafaei; Bagher Larijani
Journal:  Diabetes Metab Res Rev       Date:  2008 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.876

6.  Type 2 diabetes mellitus after gestational diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Leanne Bellamy; Juan-Pablo Casas; Aroon D Hingorani; David Williams
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2009-05-23       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Predicting ambient ultraviolet from routine meteorological data; its potential use as an instrumental variable for vitamin D status in pregnancy in a longitudinal birth cohort in the UK.

Authors:  Adrian Sayers; Kate Tilling; Barbara J Boucher; Kate Noonan; Jon H Tobias
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2009-06-29       Impact factor: 7.196

8.  Maternal vitamin D status during pregnancy and child outcomes.

Authors:  C R Gale; S M Robinson; N C Harvey; M K Javaid; B Jiang; C N Martyn; K M Godfrey; C Cooper
Journal:  Eur J Clin Nutr       Date:  2007-02-21       Impact factor: 4.016

9.  First-trimester prediction of gestational diabetes mellitus: examining the potential of combining maternal characteristics and laboratory measures.

Authors:  Makrina Savvidou; Scott M Nelson; Mahlatse Makgoba; Claudia-Martina Messow; Naveed Sattar; Kypros Nicolaides
Journal:  Diabetes       Date:  2010-09-28       Impact factor: 9.461

10.  Maternal plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations and the risk for gestational diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Cuilin Zhang; Chunfang Qiu; Frank B Hu; Robert M David; Rob M van Dam; Alexander Bralley; Michelle A Williams
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2008-11-18       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  43 in total

Review 1.  Vitamin D in pregnancy: current concepts.

Authors:  Rachel P Urrutia; John M Thorp
Journal:  Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 1.927

Review 2.  Relevance of vitamin D in reproduction.

Authors:  Janelle Luk; Saioa Torrealday; Genevieve Neal Perry; Lubna Pal
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2012-07-23       Impact factor: 6.918

3.  Vitamin D deficiency in pregnancy and gestational diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Heather H Burris; Sheryl L Rifas-Shiman; Ken Kleinman; Augusto A Litonjua; Susanna Y Huh; Janet W Rich-Edwards; Carlos A Camargo; Matthew W Gillman
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-06-01       Impact factor: 8.661

4.  Plasma concentrations of lipids during pregnancy and the risk of gestational diabetes mellitus: A longitudinal study.

Authors:  Wei Bao; Sharon Dar; Yeyi Zhu; Jing Wu; Shristi Rawal; Shanshan Li; Natalie L Weir; Michael Y Tsai; Cuilin Zhang
Journal:  J Diabetes       Date:  2017-09-29       Impact factor: 4.006

5.  Early-pregnancy maternal vitamin D status and maternal hyperglycaemia.

Authors:  L E Tomedi; H N Simhan; L M Bodnar
Journal:  Diabet Med       Date:  2013-06-13       Impact factor: 4.359

6.  Early pregnancy vitamin D status and risk for adverse maternal and infant outcomes in a bi-ethnic cohort: the Behaviors Affecting Baby and You (B.A.B.Y.) Study.

Authors:  Carrie J Nobles; Glenn Markenson; Lisa Chasan-Taber
Journal:  Br J Nutr       Date:  2015-10-28       Impact factor: 3.718

7.  Vitamin D Status and Gestational Diabetes: Effect of Smoking Status during Pregnancy.

Authors:  Linda Dodds; Christy G Woolcott; Hope Weiler; Anne Spencer; Jean-Claude Forest; B Anthony Armson; Yves Giguère
Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol       Date:  2016-02-05       Impact factor: 3.980

Review 8.  Vitamin D and gestational diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Heather H Burris; Carlos A Camargo
Journal:  Curr Diab Rep       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 4.810

Review 9.  Maternal vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy.

Authors:  Elizabeth M Curtis; Rebecca J Moon; Nicholas C Harvey; Cyrus Cooper
Journal:  Br Med Bull       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 4.291

10.  Is vitamin D status relevant to metabolic syndrome?

Authors:  Barbara J Boucher
Journal:  Dermatoendocrinol       Date:  2012-04-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.