Cargando…

Controversies Surrounding Vitamin D: Focus on Supplementation and Cancer

There has recently been a huge number of publications concerning various aspects of vitamin D, from the physiological to therapeutic fields. However, as a consequence of this very fast-growing scientific area, some issues still remain surrounded by uncertainties, without a final agreement having bee...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Minisola, Salvatore, Ferrone, Federica, Danese, Vittoria, Cecchetti, Veronica, Pepe, Jessica, Cipriani, Cristiana, Colangelo, Luciano
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6352116/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30641860
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16020189
_version_ 1783390754200092672
author Minisola, Salvatore
Ferrone, Federica
Danese, Vittoria
Cecchetti, Veronica
Pepe, Jessica
Cipriani, Cristiana
Colangelo, Luciano
author_facet Minisola, Salvatore
Ferrone, Federica
Danese, Vittoria
Cecchetti, Veronica
Pepe, Jessica
Cipriani, Cristiana
Colangelo, Luciano
author_sort Minisola, Salvatore
collection PubMed
description There has recently been a huge number of publications concerning various aspects of vitamin D, from the physiological to therapeutic fields. However, as a consequence of this very fast-growing scientific area, some issues still remain surrounded by uncertainties, without a final agreement having been reached. Examples include the definitions of vitamin D sufficiency and insufficiency, (i.e., 20 vs. 30 ng/mL), the relationship between 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) and parathyroid hormone, (i.e., linear vs. no linear), the referent to consider, (i.e., total vs. free determination), the utility of screening versus universal supplementation, and so on. In this review, the issues related to vitamin D supplementation in subjects with documented hypovitaminosis, and the role of vitamin D in cancer will be concisely considered. Daily, weekly, or monthly administration of cholecalciferol generally leads to essentially similar results in terms of an increase in 25(OH)D serum levels. However, we should also consider possible differences related to a number of variables, (i.e., efficiency of intestinal absorption, binding to vitamin D binding protein, and so on). Thus, adherence to therapy may be more important than the dose regimen chosen in order to allow long-term compliance in a sometimes very old population already swamped by many drugs. It is difficult to draw firm conclusions at present regarding the relationship between cancer and vitamin D. In vitro and preclinical studies seem to have been more convincing than clinical investigations. Positive results in human studies have been mainly derived from post-hoc analyses, secondary end-points or meta-analyses, with the last showing not a decrease in cancer incidence but rather in mortality. We must therefore proceed with a word of caution. Until it has been clearly demonstrated that there is a causal relationship, these positive “non-primary, end-point results” should be considered as a background for generating new hypotheses for future investigations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6352116
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63521162019-02-01 Controversies Surrounding Vitamin D: Focus on Supplementation and Cancer Minisola, Salvatore Ferrone, Federica Danese, Vittoria Cecchetti, Veronica Pepe, Jessica Cipriani, Cristiana Colangelo, Luciano Int J Environ Res Public Health Review There has recently been a huge number of publications concerning various aspects of vitamin D, from the physiological to therapeutic fields. However, as a consequence of this very fast-growing scientific area, some issues still remain surrounded by uncertainties, without a final agreement having been reached. Examples include the definitions of vitamin D sufficiency and insufficiency, (i.e., 20 vs. 30 ng/mL), the relationship between 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) and parathyroid hormone, (i.e., linear vs. no linear), the referent to consider, (i.e., total vs. free determination), the utility of screening versus universal supplementation, and so on. In this review, the issues related to vitamin D supplementation in subjects with documented hypovitaminosis, and the role of vitamin D in cancer will be concisely considered. Daily, weekly, or monthly administration of cholecalciferol generally leads to essentially similar results in terms of an increase in 25(OH)D serum levels. However, we should also consider possible differences related to a number of variables, (i.e., efficiency of intestinal absorption, binding to vitamin D binding protein, and so on). Thus, adherence to therapy may be more important than the dose regimen chosen in order to allow long-term compliance in a sometimes very old population already swamped by many drugs. It is difficult to draw firm conclusions at present regarding the relationship between cancer and vitamin D. In vitro and preclinical studies seem to have been more convincing than clinical investigations. Positive results in human studies have been mainly derived from post-hoc analyses, secondary end-points or meta-analyses, with the last showing not a decrease in cancer incidence but rather in mortality. We must therefore proceed with a word of caution. Until it has been clearly demonstrated that there is a causal relationship, these positive “non-primary, end-point results” should be considered as a background for generating new hypotheses for future investigations. MDPI 2019-01-11 2019-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6352116/ /pubmed/30641860 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16020189 Text en © 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Minisola, Salvatore
Ferrone, Federica
Danese, Vittoria
Cecchetti, Veronica
Pepe, Jessica
Cipriani, Cristiana
Colangelo, Luciano
Controversies Surrounding Vitamin D: Focus on Supplementation and Cancer
title Controversies Surrounding Vitamin D: Focus on Supplementation and Cancer
title_full Controversies Surrounding Vitamin D: Focus on Supplementation and Cancer
title_fullStr Controversies Surrounding Vitamin D: Focus on Supplementation and Cancer
title_full_unstemmed Controversies Surrounding Vitamin D: Focus on Supplementation and Cancer
title_short Controversies Surrounding Vitamin D: Focus on Supplementation and Cancer
title_sort controversies surrounding vitamin d: focus on supplementation and cancer
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6352116/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30641860
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16020189
work_keys_str_mv AT minisolasalvatore controversiessurroundingvitamindfocusonsupplementationandcancer
AT ferronefederica controversiessurroundingvitamindfocusonsupplementationandcancer
AT danesevittoria controversiessurroundingvitamindfocusonsupplementationandcancer
AT cecchettiveronica controversiessurroundingvitamindfocusonsupplementationandcancer
AT pepejessica controversiessurroundingvitamindfocusonsupplementationandcancer
AT ciprianicristiana controversiessurroundingvitamindfocusonsupplementationandcancer
AT colangeloluciano controversiessurroundingvitamindfocusonsupplementationandcancer