Abstract:Background: Numerous studies demonstrate associations between serum concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) and a variety of common disorders, including musculoskeletal, metabolic, cardiovascular, malignant, autoimmune, and infectious diseases. Although a causal link between serum 25(OH)D concentrations and many disorders has not been clearly established, these associations have led to widespread supplementation with vitamin D and increased laboratory testing for 25(OH)D in the general population. The benefit-risk ratio of this increase in vitamin D use is not clear, and the optimal vitamin D intake and the role of testing for 25(OH)D for disease prevention remain uncertain. Objective: To develop clinical guidelines for the use of vitamin D (cholecalciferol [vitamin D3] or ergocalciferol [vitamin D2]) to lower the risk of disease in individuals without established indications for vitamin D treatment or 25(OH)D testing. Methods: A multidisciplinary panel of clinical experts, along with experts in guideline methodology and systematic literature review, identified and prioritized 14 clinically relevant questions related to the use of vitamin D and 25(OH)D testing to lower the risk of disease. The panel prioritized randomized placebo-controlled trials in general populations (without an established indication for vitamin D treatment or 25[OH]D testing), evaluating the effects of empiric vitamin D administration throughout the lifespan, as well as in select conditions (pregnancy and prediabetes). The panel defined "empiric supplementation" as vitamin D intake that (a) exceeds the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRI) and (b) is implemented without testing for 25(OH)D. Systematic reviews queried electronic databases for publications related to these 14 clinical questions. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and guide recommendations. The approach incorporated perspectives from a patient representative and considered patient values, costs and resources required, acceptability and feasibility, and impact on health equity of the proposed recommendations. The process to develop this clinical guideline did not use a risk assessment framework and was not designed to replace current DRI for vitamin D. Results: The panel suggests empiric vitamin D supplementation for children and adolescents aged 1 to 18 years to prevent nutritional rickets and because of its potential to lower the risk of respiratory tract infections; for those aged 75 years and older because of its potential to lower the risk of mortality; for those who are pregnant because of its potential to lower the risk of preeclampsia, intra-uterine mortality, preterm birth, small-for-gestational-age birth, and neonatal mortality; and for those with high-risk prediabetes because of its potential to reduce progression to diabetes. Because the vitamin D doses in the included clinical trials varied considerably and many trial participants were allowed to continue their own vitamin D-containing supplements, the optimal doses for empiric vitamin D supplementation remain unclear for the populations considered. For nonpregnant people older than 50 years for whom vitamin D is indicated, the panel suggests supplementation via daily administration of vitamin D, rather than intermittent use of high doses. The panel suggests against empiric vitamin D supplementation above the current DRI to lower the risk of disease in healthy adults younger than 75 years. No clinical trial evidence was found to support routine screening for 25(OH)D in the general population, nor in those with obesity or dark complexion, and there was no clear evidence defining the optimal target level of 25(OH)D required for disease prevention in the populations considered; thus, the panel suggests against routine 25(OH)D testing in all populations considered. The panel judged that, in most situations, empiric vitamin D supplementation is inexpensive, feasible, acceptable to both healthy individuals and health care professionals, and has no negative effect on health equity. Conclusion: The panel suggests empiric vitamin D for those aged 1 to 18 years and adults over 75 years of age, those who are pregnant, and those with high-risk prediabetes. Due to the scarcity of natural food sources rich in vitamin D, empiric supplementation can be achieved through a combination of fortified foods and supplements that contain vitamin D. Based on the absence of supportive clinical trial evidence, the panel suggests against routine 25(OH)D testing in the absence of established indications. These recommendations are not meant to replace the current DRIs for vitamin D, nor do they apply to people with established indications for vitamin D treatment or 25(OH)D testing. Further research is needed to determine optimal 25(OH)D levels for specific health benefits.

Clinical Practice Guidelines of the Latin American Federation of Endocrinology for the use of vitamin D in the maintenance of bone health: recommendations for the Latin American context

Integrating Endocrine, Genomic, and Extra-Skeletal Benefits of Vitamin D into National and Regional Clinical Guidelines

Global Consensus Recommendations on Prevention and Management of Nutritional Rickets.

A Systematic Review Supporting the Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guidelines on Vitamin D

Evidence based Latin American Guidelines of clinical practice on prevention, diagnosis, management and treatment of glucocorticoid induced osteoporosis. A 2022 update

Clinical Practice in the Prevention, Diagnosis and Treatment of Vitamin D Deficiency: A Central and Eastern European Expert Consensus Statement

MANAGEMENT OF ENDOCRINE DISEASE: Current vitamin D status in European and Middle East countries and strategies to prevent vitamin D deficiency; a position statement of the European Calcified Tissue Society.

Optimisation of vitamin D status in global populations

Vitamin D Insufficiency and Epistemic Humility: An Endocrine Society Guideline Communication

Vitamin D Sources, Metabolism, and Deficiency: Available Compounds and Guidelines for Its Treatment

Vitamin D for the Prevention of Disease: An Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline

Role of vitamin D supplementation in the management of musculoskeletal diseases: update from an European Society of Clinical and Economical Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) working group

Global vitamin D status and determinants of hypovitaminosis D

Vitamin D and Chronic Kidney Disease Association with Mineral and Bone Disorder: An Appraisal of Tangled Guidelines

Association between 25-Hydroxyvitamin D, Parathyroid Hormone, Vitamin D and Calcium Intake, and Bone Density in Healthy Adult Women: A Cross-Sectional Analysis from the D-SOL Study

Assessment of the quality and content of clinical practice guidelines for vitamin D and for immigrants using the AGREE II instrument: global systematic review

Consensus Statement on Vitamin D Status Assessment and Supplementation: Whys, Whens, and Hows

Alert for the high prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in adolescents in a large Brazilian sample

When and How to Diagnose and Treat Vitamin D Deficiency in Adults: A Practical and Clinical Update

[Adequacy of the prescription of vitamin D in Primary Care]

Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D, parathyroid hormone, calcium intake, and bone mineral density in Spanish adults