Mandy Wan1,2, Anish Patel2, Jignesh P Patel2,3, Greta Rait4, Stuart A Jones2, Rukshana Shroff5. 1. Pharmacy Department, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, Evelina London Children's Hospital, London, UK. 2. Institute of Pharmaceutical Science, King's College London, London, UK. 3. Department of Haematological Medicine, King's College Hospital Foundation NHS Trust, London, UK. 4. Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University of College London, London, UK. 5. Renal Unit, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate the type (licensed vs unlicensed) and cost of preparations used to fulfil vitamin D prescriptions in England over time, and to compare measured vitamin D content of selected vitamin D preparations against labelled claim. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of vitamin D prescription data in primary care in England (2008-2018). Laboratory analysis of 13 selected vitamin D preparations. RESULTS: Alongside a rise in the number of oral licensed colecalciferol preparations from 0 to 27 between 2012 and 2018, the proportion of vitamin D prescriptions in which licensed vitamin D preparations were supplied increased from 11.8 to 54.2%. However, the use of unlicensed food supplements (dose strength 400-50 000 IU) remained high, accounting for 39.7% of vitamin D prescriptions in 2018. The two licensed preparations showed mean (±SD) vitamin D content of 90.9 ± 0.7% and 90.5 ± 3.9% of the labelled claimed amount, meeting the British Pharmacopeia specification for licensed medicines (90-125% of labelled claim). The 11 food supplements showed vitamin D content ranging from 41.2 ± 10.6% to 165.3 ± 17.8% of the labelled claim, with eight of the preparations failing to comply with the food supplement specification (80-150% of labelled claim). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the increasing availability of quality assured licensed preparations, food supplements continued to be used interchangeably with licensed preparations to fulfil vitamin D prescriptions. Food supplements, manufactured under less stringent quality standards, showed wide variations between measured and declared vitamin D content, which could lead to the risk of under- and over-dosing.
AIM: To evaluate the type (licensed vs unlicensed) and cost of preparations used to fulfil vitamin D prescriptions in England over time, and to compare measured vitamin D content of selected vitamin D preparations against labelled claim. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of vitamin D prescription data in primary care in England (2008-2018). Laboratory analysis of 13 selected vitamin D preparations. RESULTS: Alongside a rise in the number of oral licensed colecalciferol preparations from 0 to 27 between 2012 and 2018, the proportion of vitamin D prescriptions in which licensed vitamin D preparations were supplied increased from 11.8 to 54.2%. However, the use of unlicensed food supplements (dose strength 400-50 000 IU) remained high, accounting for 39.7% of vitamin D prescriptions in 2018. The two licensed preparations showed mean (±SD) vitamin D content of 90.9 ± 0.7% and 90.5 ± 3.9% of the labelled claimed amount, meeting the British Pharmacopeia specification for licensed medicines (90-125% of labelled claim). The 11 food supplements showed vitamin D content ranging from 41.2 ± 10.6% to 165.3 ± 17.8% of the labelled claim, with eight of the preparations failing to comply with the food supplement specification (80-150% of labelled claim). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the increasing availability of quality assured licensed preparations, food supplements continued to be used interchangeably with licensed preparations to fulfil vitamin D prescriptions. Food supplements, manufactured under less stringent quality standards, showed wide variations between measured and declared vitamin D content, which could lead to the risk of under- and over-dosing.