Effect of vitamin D supplementation on blood pressure:a systematic review and meta-analysis incorporating individual patient data

D-PRESSURE Collaboration: et al.[Importance]: Low levels of vitamin D are associated with elevated blood pressure (BP) and future cardiovascular events. Whether vitamin D supplementation reduces BP and which patient characteristics predict a response remain unclear.[Objective]: To systematically review whether supplementation with vitamin D or its analogues reduce BP.[Data Sources]: We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and http://www.ClinicalTrials.com augmented by a hand search of references from the included articles and previous reviews. Google was searched for gray literature (ie, material not published in recognized scientific journals). No language restrictions were applied. The search period spanned January 1, 1966, through March 31, 2014.[Study Selection]: We included randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials that used vitamin D supplementation for a minimum of 4 weeks for any indication and reported BP data. Studies were included if they used active or inactive forms of vitamin D or vitamin D analogues. Cointerventions were permitted if identical in all treatment arms.[Data Extraction and Synthesis]: We extracted data on baseline demographics, 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels, systolic and diastolic BP (SBP and DBP), and change in BP from baseline to the final follow-up. Individual patient data on age, sex, medication use, diabetes mellitus, baseline and follow-up BP, and 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels were requested from the authors of the included studies. For trial-level data, between-group differences in BP change were combined in a random-effects model. For individual patient data, between-group differences in BP at the final follow up, adjusted for baseline BP, were calculated before combining in a random-effects model.[Main Outcomes and Measures]: Difference in SBP and DBP measured in an office setting.[Results]: We included 46 trials (4541 participants) in the trial-level meta-analysis. Individual patient data were obtained for 27 trials (3092 participants). At the trial level, no effect of vitamin D supplementation was seen on SBP (effect size, 0.0 [95% CI, −0.8 to 0.8] mm Hg; P = .97; I2 = 21%) or DBP (effect size, −0.1 [95% CI, −0.6 to 0.5] mm Hg; P = .84; I2 = 20%). Similar results were found analyzing individual patient data for SBP (effect size, −0.5 [95% CI, −1.3 to 0.4] mm Hg; P = .27; I2 = 0%) and DBP (effect size, 0.2 [95% CI, −0.3 to 0.7] mm Hg; P = .38; I2 = 0%). Subgroup analysis did not reveal any baseline factor predictive of a better response to therapy.[Conclusions and Relevance]: Vitamin D supplementation is ineffective as an agent for lowering BP and thus should not be used as an antihypertensive agent.Peer reviewe

Effects of Vitamin D supplementation on markers for cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes:An individual participant data meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background Evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the causal role of vitamin D on noncommunicable disease outcomes is inconclusive. Objective The aim of this study was to investigate whether there are beneficial or harmful effects of cholecalciferol (vitamin D 3) supplementation according to subgroups of remeasured serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] on cardiovascular and glucometabolic surrogate markers with the use of individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis of RCTs. Design Twelve RCTs (16 wk to 1 y of follow-up) were included. For standardization, 25(OH)D concentrations for all participants (n = 2994) at baseline and postintervention were re-measured in bio-banked serum samples with the use of a certified liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method traceable to a reference measurement procedure. IPD meta-analyses were performed according to subgroups of remeasured 25(OH)D. Main outcomes were blood pressure and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). Secondary outcomes were LDL, HDL, and total cholesterol and triglycerides; parathyroid hormone (PTH); fasting glucose, insulin, and C-peptide; and 2-h glucose. In secondary analyses, other potential effect modifiers were studied. Results Remeasurement of 25(OH)D resulted in a lower mean 25(OH)D concentration in 10 of 12 RCTs. Vitamin D supplementation had no effect on the main outcomes of blood pressure and HbA1c. Supplementation resulted in 10-20% lower PTH concentrations, irrespective of the 25(OH)D subgroups. The subgroup analyses according to achieved 25(OH)D concentrations showed a significant decrease in LDL-cholesterol concentrations after vitamin D supplementation in 25(OH)D subgroups with <75, <100, and <125 nmol of -0.10 mmol/L (95% CI: -0.20, -0.00 mmol/L), -0.10 mmol/L (95% CI: -0.18, -0.02 mmol/L), and -0.07 mmol/L (95% CI: -0.14, -0.00 mmol/L), respectively. Patient features that modified the treatment effect could not be identified. Conclusions For the main outcomes of blood pressure and HbA1c, the data support no benefit for vitamin D supplementation. For the secondary outcomes, in addition to its effect on PTH, we observed indications for a beneficial effect of vitamin D supplementation only on LDL cholesterol, which warrants further investigation