CONTEXT: It has been proposed that serum free 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] may better reflect vitamin D action than total 25(OH)D. An ELISA for serum free 25(OH)D has recently become available, permitting direct assay. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether serum free 25(OH)D provides additional information in relation to calcium absorption and other biomarkers of vitamin D action compared to total serum 25(OH)D. SETTING: Ambulatory research setting in a teaching hospital. OUTCOME: Serum free 25(OH)D measured in a previously performed study of varied doses of vitamin D3 (placebo and 800, 2000, and 4000 IU) on calcium absorption, PTH, procollagen type 1 N-terminal propeptide, and C-terminal telopeptides of type I collagen. Free 25(OH)D was measured by ELISA. Calcium absorption was measured at baseline and at 10 weeks using stable dual calcium isotopes. RESULTS: Seventy-one subjects completed this randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Baseline group mean free and total 25(OH)D varied from 4.7 ± 1.8 to 5.4 ± 1.5 pg/mL, and from 23.7 ± 5.9 to 25.9 ± 6.1 ng/mL, respectively. Participants assigned to the 4000-IU dose arm achieved free 25(OH)D levels of 10.4 pg/mL and total 25(OH)D levels of 40.4 ng/mL. Total and free 25(OH)D were highly correlated at baseline and after increasing vitamin D dosing (r = 0.80 and 0.85, respectively). Free 25(OH)D closely reflected changes in total 25(OH)D. PTH was similarly correlated at baseline and follow-up with total and free 25(OH)D. Serum C-terminal telopeptides of type I collagen had a moderate positive correlation with total and free 25(OH)D at follow-up. The serum 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D change increased significantly with the change in 25(OH)D but not with the change in free 25(OH)D. CONCLUSION: There was no advantage from measuring free over total 25(OH)D in assessing the response of calcium absorption, PTH, and markers of bone turnover to vitamin D. Free 25(OH)D responded to increasing doses of vitamin D in a similar fashion to total 25(OH)D.
RCT Entities:
CONTEXT: It has been proposed that serum free 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] may better reflect vitamin D action than total 25(OH)D. An ELISA for serum free 25(OH)D has recently become available, permitting direct assay. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether serum free 25(OH)D provides additional information in relation to calcium absorption and other biomarkers of vitamin D action compared to total serum 25(OH)D. SETTING: Ambulatory research setting in a teaching hospital. OUTCOME: Serum free 25(OH)D measured in a previously performed study of varied doses of vitamin D3 (placebo and 800, 2000, and 4000 IU) on calcium absorption, PTH, procollagen type 1 N-terminal propeptide, and C-terminal telopeptides of type I collagen. Free 25(OH)D was measured by ELISA. Calcium absorption was measured at baseline and at 10 weeks using stable dual calcium isotopes. RESULTS: Seventy-one subjects completed this randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Baseline group mean free and total 25(OH)D varied from 4.7 ± 1.8 to 5.4 ± 1.5 pg/mL, and from 23.7 ± 5.9 to 25.9 ± 6.1 ng/mL, respectively. Participants assigned to the 4000-IU dose arm achieved free 25(OH)D levels of 10.4 pg/mL and total 25(OH)D levels of 40.4 ng/mL. Total and free 25(OH)D were highly correlated at baseline and after increasing vitamin D dosing (r = 0.80 and 0.85, respectively). Free 25(OH)D closely reflected changes in total 25(OH)D. PTH was similarly correlated at baseline and follow-up with total and free 25(OH)D. Serum C-terminal telopeptides of type I collagen had a moderate positive correlation with total and free 25(OH)D at follow-up. The serum 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D change increased significantly with the change in 25(OH)D but not with the change in free 25(OH)D. CONCLUSION: There was no advantage from measuring free over total 25(OH)D in assessing the response of calcium absorption, PTH, and markers of bone turnover to vitamin D. Free 25(OH)D responded to increasing doses of vitamin D in a similar fashion to total 25(OH)D.
Authors: John F Aloia; Ruban Dhaliwal; Albert Shieh; Mageda Mikhail; Melissa Fazzari; Louis Ragolia; Steven A Abrams Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2013-12-11 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: J B Schwartz; J Lai; B Lizaola; L Kane; P Weyland; N A Terrault; N Stotland; D Bikle Journal: J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol Date: 2013-11-15 Impact factor: 4.292
Authors: Camille E Powe; Michele K Evans; Julia Wenger; Alan B Zonderman; Anders H Berg; Michael Nalls; Hector Tamez; Dongsheng Zhang; Ishir Bhan; S Ananth Karumanchi; Neil R Powe; Ravi Thadhani Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-11-21 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Rene F Chun; Bradford E Peercy; Eric S Orwoll; Carrie M Nielson; John S Adams; Martin Hewison Journal: J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol Date: 2013-10-04 Impact factor: 4.292
Authors: Janice B Schwartz; J Christopher Gallagher; Rolf Jorde; Vivian Berg; Jennifer Walsh; Richard Eastell; Amy L Evans; Simon Bowles; Kim E Naylor; Kerry S Jones; Inez Schoenmakers; Michael Holick; Eric Orwoll; Carrie Nielson; Martin Kaufmann; Glenville Jones; Roger Bouillon; Jennifer Lai; Davide Verotta; Daniel Bikle Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2018-09-01 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Michael T Yin; Ellen S Chan; Todd T Brown; Pablo Tebas; Grace A McComsey; Kathleen M Melbourne; Andrew Napoli; William R Hardin; Heather J Ribaudo; Edgar T Overton Journal: AIDS Date: 2017-11-13 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Lauren A Burt; Emma O Billington; Marianne S Rose; Duncan A Raymond; David A Hanley; Steven K Boyd Journal: JAMA Date: 2019-08-27 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Albert Shieh; Rene F Chun; Christina Ma; Sten Witzel; Briana Meyer; Brandon Rafison; Leon Swinkels; Tonnie Huijs; Sam Pepkowitz; Brett Holmquist; Martin Hewison; John S Adams Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2016-05-18 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Naweed S Alzaman; Bess Dawson-Hughes; Jason Nelson; David D'Alessio; Anastassios G Pittas Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2016-05-18 Impact factor: 7.045