-
Medicine Jun 2023Correction of calcium, phosphorus, and parathyroid hormone disorders is the standard of treatment in nondialysis patients with chronic kidney disease-mineral and bone... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of tonifying kidney and strengthen bone therapy on nondialysis patients with chronic kidney disease-mineral and bone disorder.
BACKGROUND
Correction of calcium, phosphorus, and parathyroid hormone disorders is the standard of treatment in nondialysis patients with chronic kidney disease-mineral and bone disorder (CKD-MBD). However, the side effects and adverse reactions are still the main problems. Moreover, the lack of protection of kidney function in the treatment dramatically affects patients' health. Although Traditional Chinese Medicine, specifically tonifying kidney and strengthen bone (TKSB) therapy, is wildly applied to patients with CKD-MBD in China, the evidence of TKSB therapy in the treatment of CKD-MBD is limited. Thus, we conducted this meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TKSB therapy combined with Western medicine (WM) for nondialysis patients with CKD-MBD.
METHODS
Two investigators conducted systematic research of randomized controlled trials of TKSB therapy for CKD-MBD from 7 electronic databases. Methodological quality evaluations were performed using the Cochrane collaboration tool, and data analysis was conducted by RevMan v5.3 software and STATA v15.0.
RESULTS
In total, 8 randomized controlled trials involving 310 patients met the criteria of meta-analysis. The complete results showed that compared with WM alone, TKSB treatment could improve the clinical efficacy rate (risk ratio = 4.49, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [2.64, 7.61], P .00001), calcium (weighted mean difference [WMD] = 0.11, 95% CI: [0.08, 0.14], P < .00001), serum creatinine (WMD = 45.58, 95% CI: [32.35, 58.8], P < .00001) phosphorus (WMD = 0.11, 95% CI: [0.08, 0.13], P < .00001), parathyroid hormone (WMD = 16.72, 95% CI: [12.89, 20.55], P < .00001), blood urea nitrogen levels (WMD = 0.95, 95% CI: [0.26, 1.64], P = .007) on nondialysis patients with CKD-MBD, which was beneficial to improve the patients' bone metabolic state and renal function. In addition, evidence shows that, compared with WM alone, TKSB treatment is safe and does not increase side effects.
CONCLUSION
The systematic review found that TKSB therapy combined with WM has a positive effect on improving renal function and correcting bone metabolism disorder in nondialysis patients with CKD-MBD, which shows that Traditional Chinese Medicine is effective and safe in treating CKD-MBD. However, more high-quality, large-sample, multicenter clinical trials should be conducted to assess the safety and efficacy of TKSB therapy in treating nondialysis patients with CKD-MBD.Systematic review registration: INPLASY2020120086.
Topics: Humans; Calcium; Calcium, Dietary; Chronic Kidney Disease-Mineral and Bone Disorder; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Kidney; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Parathyroid Hormone; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37352066
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000034044 -
International Urology and Nephrology May 2024Mineral and bone disease in children with chronic kidney disease can cause abnormalities in calcium, phosphorus, parathyroid hormone, and vitamin D and when left... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Mineral and bone disease in children with chronic kidney disease can cause abnormalities in calcium, phosphorus, parathyroid hormone, and vitamin D and when left untreated can result in impaired growth, bone deformities, fractures, and vascular calcification. Cinacalcet is a calcimimetic widely used as a therapy to reduce parathyroid hormone levels in the adult population, with hypocalcemia among its side effects. The analysis of safety in the pediatric population is questioned due to the scarcity of randomized clinical trials in this group.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the onset of symptomatic hypocalcemia or other adverse events (serious or non-serious) with the use of cinacalcet in children and adolescents with mineral and bone disorder in chronic kidney disease.
DATA SOURCES AND STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
The bibliographic search identified 2699 references from 1927 to August/2023 (57 LILACS, 44 Web of Science, 686 PubMed, 131 Cochrane, 1246 Scopus, 535 Embase). Four references were added from the bibliography of articles found and 12 references from the gray literature (Clinical Trials). Of the 77 studies analyzed in full, 68 were excluded because they did not meet the following criteria: population, types of studies, medication, publication types and 1 article that did not present results (gray literature).
PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS
There were 149 patients aged 0-18 years old with Chronic Kidney Disease and mineral bone disorder who received cinacalcet.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS
Nine eligible studies were examined for study type, size, intervention, and reported outcomes.
RESULTS
There was an incidence of 0.2% of fatal adverse events and 16% of serious adverse events (p < 0.01 and I = 69%), in addition to 10.7% of hypocalcemia, totaling 45.7% of total adverse events.
LIMITATIONS
There was a bias in demographic information and clinical characteristics of patients in about 50% of the studies and the majority of the studies were case series.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS
If used in the pediatric population, the calcimimetic cinacalcet should be carefully monitored for serum calcium levels and attention to possible adverse events, especially in children under 50 months.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER (PROSPERO REGISTER)
CRD42019132809.
Topics: Adolescent; Child; Child, Preschool; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Bone Diseases; Calcimimetic Agents; Calcium; Chronic Kidney Disease-Mineral and Bone Disorder; Cinacalcet; Hyperparathyroidism, Secondary; Hypocalcemia; Minerals; Parathyroid Hormone; Renal Dialysis; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic
PubMed: 37964112
DOI: 10.1007/s11255-023-03844-2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2020Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a genetic chronic haemolytic and pro-inflammatory disorder. With increased catabolism and deficits in energy and nutrient intake,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a genetic chronic haemolytic and pro-inflammatory disorder. With increased catabolism and deficits in energy and nutrient intake, individuals with SCD suffer multiple macro- and micro-nutritional deficiencies, including vitamin D deficiency. This is an update of a previous review.
OBJECTIVES
To investigate the effects of vitamin D supplementation in children and adults with SCD and to compare different dose regimens. To determine the effects of vitamin D supplementation on general health (e.g. growth status and health-related quality of life), on musculoskeletal health (including bone mineral density, pain crises, bone fracture and muscle health), on respiratory health (including lung function, acute chest syndrome, acute exacerbation of asthma and respiratory infections) and the safety of vitamin D supplementation.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Haemoglobinopathies Trials Register, compiled from electronic database searches and handsearching of journals and conference abstract books. Date of last search: 19 March 2020. We also searched database such as PubMed, clinical trial registries and the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews. Date of last search: 14 January 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing oral administration of any form of vitamin D supplementation at any dose and for any duration to another type or dose of vitamin D or placebo or no supplementation in people with SCD, of all ages, gender, and phenotypes.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. They used the GRADE guidelines to assess the quality of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
Vitamin D versus placebo One double-blind RCT (n = 39) compared oral vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) supplementation (20 participants) to placebo (19 participants) for six weeks. Only 25 participants completed the full six months of follow-up. The study had a high risk of bias due to incomplete outcome data, but a low risk of bias for randomisation, allocation concealment, blinding (of participants, personnel and outcome assessors) and selective outcome reporting; and an unclear risk of other biases. Vitamin D supplementation probably led to higher serum 25(OH)D levels at eight weeks, mean difference (MD) 29.79 (95% confidence interval (CI) 26.63 to 32.95); at 16 weeks, MD 12.67 (95% CI 10.43 to 14.90); and at 24 weeks, MD 15.52 (95% CI 13.50 to 17.54) (moderate-quality evidence). There was little or no difference in adverse events (tingling of lips or hands) between the vitamin D and placebo groups, risk ratio 3.16 (95% CI 0.14 to 72.84) (low-quality evidence). Vitamin D supplementation probably caused fewer pain days compared to the placebo group at eight weeks, MD -10.00 (95% CI -16.47 to -3.53) (low-quality evidence), but probably led to a lower (worse) health-related quality of life score (change from baseline in physical functioning PedsQL scores); at both 16 weeks, MD -12.56 (95% CI -16.44 to -8.69) and 24 weeks, MD -12.59 (95% CI -17.43 to -7.76), although this may not be the case at eight weeks (low-quality evidence). Vitamin D supplementation regimens compared Two double-blind RCTs (83 participants) compared different regimens of vitamin D. One RCT (n = 62) compared oral vitamin D3 7000 IU/day to 4000 IU/day for 12 weeks, while the second RCT (n = 21) compared oral vitamin D3 100,000 IU/month to 12,000 IU/month for 24 months. Both RCTs had low risk of bias for blinding (of participants, personnel and outcome assessors) and incomplete outcome data, but the risk of selective outcome reporting bias was high. The bias from randomisation and allocation concealment was low in one study but not in the second. There was an unclear risk of other biases. When comparing oral vitamin D 100,000 IU/month to 12,000 IU/month, the higher dose may have resulted in higher serum 25(OH)D levels at one year, MD 16.40 (95% CI 12.59 to 20.21) and at two years, MD 18.96 (95% CI 15.20 to 22.72) (low-quality evidence). There was little or no difference in adverse events between doses (low-quality evidence). There were more episodes of acute chest syndrome in the high-dose group, at one year, MD 0.27 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.52) but there was little or no difference at two years, MD 0.09 (95% CI -0.04 to 0.22) (moderate-quality evidence). At one year and two years there was also little or no difference between the doses in the presence of pain (moderate-quality evidence) or forced expiratory volume in one second % predicted. However, the high-dose group had lower values for % predicted forced vital capacity at both one and two years, MD -7.20% predicted (95% CI -14.15 to -0.25) and MD -7.10% predicted (95% CI -14.03 to -0.17), respectively. There were little or no differences between dose regimens in the muscle health of either hand or the dominant hand. The study comparing oral vitamin D3 7000 IU/day to 4000 IU/day (21 participants) did not provide data for analysis, but median serum 25(OH)D levels were reported to be lower in the low-dose group at both six and 12 weeks. At 12 weeks the median serum parathyroid hormone level was lower in the high-dose group.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We included three RCTs of varying quality. We consider that the current evidence presented in this review is not of sufficient quality to guide clinical practice. Until further evidence becomes available, clinicians should consider the relevant existing guidelines for vitamin D supplementation and dietary reference intakes for calcium and vitamin D. Well-designed RCTs of parallel design, are required to determine the effects and the safety of vitamin D supplementation as well as to assess the relative benefits of different doses in children and adults with SCD.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Anemia, Sickle Cell; Bias; Child; Cholecalciferol; Humans; Pain; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors; Vitamin D; Vitamin D Deficiency
PubMed: 32462740
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010858.pub3 -
Orthopaedic Surgery Oct 2021To provide a systematic review about the efficacy and safety of romosozumab and teriparatide for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To provide a systematic review about the efficacy and safety of romosozumab and teriparatide for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.
METHOD
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched from electronic databases, including PubMed (1996 to June 2019), Embase (1980 to June 2019), Cochrane Library (CENTRAL, June 2019), Web of Science (1998 to June 2019), and others. The primary outcomes included the following: the percentage change in bone mineral density of lumbar spine and total hip from baseline at month 6 and month 12 in each group. The secondary outcomes included the following: the percentage change in bone mineral density of femoral neck from baseline at month 6 and month 12 in each group and the incidence of adverse events at month 12 in each group.
RESULTS
Four studies containing 1304 patients met our selection criteria. The result of our analysis indicated that romosozumab showed better effects in improving BMD of lumbar spine (month 6: MD = 3.54, 95% CI [3.13, 3.94], P<0.001; month 12: MD = 4.93, 95% CI [4.21, 5.64], P<0.001), total hip (month 6: MD = 2.27, 95% CI [0.62, 3.91], P = 0.007; month 12: MD = 3.17, 95% CI [2.68, 3.65], P<0.001), and femoral neck (month 6: MD = 2.30, 95% CI [0.51, 4.08], P = 0.01; month 12: MD = 3.04, 95% CI [2.29, 3.78], P<0.001). Also, the injection-site reaction was less (month 12: RR = 2.84, 95% CI [1.22, 6.59], P = 0.02), but there were no significant difference in the incidence of serious adverse events (month 12: RR = 0.78, 95% CI [0.46, 1.33], P = 0.37) and death (month 12: RR = 0.61, 95% CI [0.08, 4.62], P = 0.63).
CONCLUSION
Based on the available studies, our current results demonstrate that romosozumab was better than teriparatide both in terms of efficacy and side effects.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal; Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Humans; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Teriparatide
PubMed: 34643048
DOI: 10.1111/os.13136 -
PloS One 2020Paricalcitol, a new vitamin D receptor activator (VDRA), is reported to be more effective than other VDRAs in reducing calcium and phosphorus levels in patients... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
A comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety of paricalcitol versus other vitamin D receptor activators in patients undergoing hemodialysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 15 randomized controlled trials.
Paricalcitol, a new vitamin D receptor activator (VDRA), is reported to be more effective than other VDRAs in reducing calcium and phosphorus levels in patients undergoing hemodialysis. However, the efficacy and safety of paricalcitol remain controversial. This analysis compares paricalcitol with other VDRAs in patients undergoing hemodialysis. We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CNKI up to April 22, 2019. Standardized mean difference (SMD), risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) values were estimated to compare the outcomes of the groups. Two reviewers extracted data and assessed trial quality independently. All statistical analyses were performed using the standard statistical procedures of RevMan 5.2 and Stata 12.0. Fifteen studies (N = 110,544) were included in this meta-analysis. Of these studies, 11 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 4 were non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs). Patients receiving paricalcitol experienced better overall survival (OS) than patients receiving other VDRAs, with a pooled hazard ratio of 0.86 (95% CI 0.80-0.91; P < 0.00001). Intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) levels were significantly reduced in the paricalcitol group compared to the group receiving other VDRAs, with a pooled SMD of -0.53 (95% CI -0.89- -0.16; P = 0.004). There was a significant increase in serum calcium levels from baseline in the paricalcitol group compared to the other VDRAs group when limiting the analysis to RCTs, with a pooled SMD of 2.14 (95% CI 0.90-3.38; P = 0.0007). Changes in serum calcium levels were significantly lower in the paricalcitol group when the analysis was limited to NRSIs, with a pooled SMD of -0.85 (95% CI -1.34--0.35; P = 0.0008). The NSRI analysis also showed a significant reduction in serum phosphorus levels in the paricalcitol group, with a pooled SMD of -0.57 (95% CI -1.00--0.13; P = 0.01). No significant differences were observed in the incidence of hypercalcemia, hyperphosphatemia, or adverse events. Generally, paricalcitol seems superior to other VDRAs in reducing mortality and iPTH levels in patients undergoing hemodialysis. However, the comparative effectiveness of paricalcitol in reducing serum calcium and phosphorus levels needs further exploration. No significant difference was found in the rate of adverse events.
Topics: Calcium; Disease-Free Survival; Ergocalciferols; Female; Humans; Male; Parathyroid Hormone; Phosphorus; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Receptors, Calcitriol; Renal Dialysis; Survival Rate
PubMed: 32470067
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233705 -
Atherosclerosis Mar 2020
Topics: Adult; Aged; Bone Density; Calcitonin; Calcium; Calcium, Dietary; Cardiovascular Diseases; Cardiovascular System; Dietary Supplements; Drug Interactions; Female; Humans; Male; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Middle Aged; Myocardial Infarction; Nutritional Requirements; Observational Studies as Topic; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Parathyroid Hormone; Vascular Calcification; Vitamin D
PubMed: 32033778
DOI: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2020.01.008 -
Clinical Therapeutics Jan 2022The efficacy comparison of osteoporosis treatments can be hindered by the absence of head-to-head trials; instead, network meta-analyses (NMAs) have been used to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
The efficacy comparison of osteoporosis treatments can be hindered by the absence of head-to-head trials; instead, network meta-analyses (NMAs) have been used to determine comparative effectiveness. This study was the first to investigate the impact of time point-specific NMAs of osteoporosis treatments on variability in treatments' onset of action caused by their different mechanisms of actions and trial designs.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of treatments for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, including romosozumab (ROMO), teriparatide (TPTD), abaloparatide (ABL), alendronate (ALN), risedronate (RIS), ibandronate (IB), zoledronic acid/zoledronate (ZOL), denosumab (DEN), and raloxifene (RLX), on at least 1 fracture or bone mineral density (BMD) outcome. Of 100 RCTs identified in 5 databases, 27 RCTs were included for NMAs of new vertebral, nonvertebral, and hip fracture outcomes at 12, 24, and 36 months, and 47 RCTs were included for NMAs of BMD outcomes at lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck to compare the relative efficacy of osteoporosis treatments. Quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.
FINDINGS
For vertebral fractures, TPTD (83.63%), ABL (69.11%), and ROMO/ALN (78.70%) had the highest probability to be the most effective treatment at 12, 24, and 36 months, respectively. ROMO/ALN had the highest probability (54.4%, 64.69%, and 90.29%, respectively) to be the most effective treatment for nonvertebral fractures at 12, 24, and 36 months. For hip fractures, ROMO/ALN (46.31%), ABL (61.1%), and DEN (55.21%) had the highest probability to be the most effective treatment at 12, 24, and 36 months, respectively. ROMO had the highest probability (76.06%, 44.19%, and 51.78%, respectively) to be the most effective treatment for BMD outcomes at lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck.
IMPLICATIONS
The importance of indirectly comparing available osteoporosis treatments using time point-specific NMAs was confirmed because indirect comparison results differed substantially across time points.
Topics: Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Female; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Osteoporosis; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Osteoporotic Fractures; Teriparatide; Zoledronic Acid
PubMed: 35058055
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2021.11.015 -
Scandinavian Journal of Surgery : SJS :... May 2024One of the most common complications of total thyroidectomy is post-operative transient or persistent hypoparathyroidism that can cause symptomatic hypocalcaemia. To... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
One of the most common complications of total thyroidectomy is post-operative transient or persistent hypoparathyroidism that can cause symptomatic hypocalcaemia. To prevent this complication, shorten the period of hospitalization and reduce morbidity, routine supplementation of oral vitamin D and calcium has been suggested. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to critically assess the association between pre-operative calcitriol supplementation and post-operative hypocalcaemia.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trial studies were identified by searching PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases up to 30 March 2023. Screening of titles, abstracts, and full texts of articles were performed, and data were extracted for a meta-analysis.
RESULTS
This meta-analysis includes data from nine randomized controlled trials with a total of 1259 patients but with significant heterogeneity. The results demonstrate that calcium levels were higher in patients who had pre-operative calcitriol supplementation, with a weighted mean difference (WMD) 0.18 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.00, 0.37). Pre-operative calcitriol supplementation did not lead to significant changes in parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels, with WMD -0.49 (95% CI: -1.91, 0.94).
CONCLUSION
Pre-operative calcitriol supplementation leads to higher calcium levels, but the high heterogeneity of the included studies (79% to 98.7%) could affect the results.
PubMed: 38785032
DOI: 10.1177/14574969241251899 -
PloS One 2020Giving patients anti-osteoporotic agents peri-operatively is a well-accepted strategy to increase fusion rate and prevent complications. The purpose of this study was to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Giving patients anti-osteoporotic agents peri-operatively is a well-accepted strategy to increase fusion rate and prevent complications. The purpose of this study was to investigate effectiveness of teriparatide and bisphosphonate on fusion surgery of thoracic and lumbar spine.
METHODS
We searched EMBASE and PubMed for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and prospective comparative studies using teriparatide or bisphosphonate in peri-operative spinal fusion surgery. Our synthesized data of fusion rate, Oswestry disability index (ODI), and adverse event in contrast-based network meta-analysis. Pooled results were presented in risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS
Our search hit eight RCTs and three prospective studies with 676 patients receiving spinal surgery. Pooled result showed that teriparatide+Denosumab leads to significantly higher fusion rate than placebo (RR, 2.84; 95% CI: 1.22 to 6.60) and bisphosphonate (RR, 2.59; 95% CI: 1.13 to 5.96). We did not observe significant finding among placebo, teriparatide, and bisphosphonate in the two network models.
CONCLUSION
This is the first network meta-analysis providing an overview of the use of teriparatide and bisphosphonate for spinal fusion surgery. Teriparatide treatments are worth to be consider for spinal fusion surgery.
Topics: Bone Density Conservation Agents; Calcium-Regulating Hormones and Agents; Diphosphonates; Humans; Lumbar Vertebrae; Spinal Diseases; Spinal Fusion; Teriparatide; Thoracic Vertebrae; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32870946
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0237566 -
Frontiers in Medicine 2020Observational studies have shown that vitamin D levels are inversely related to rheumatoid arthritis activity, yet evidence from population interventions remains...
Observational studies have shown that vitamin D levels are inversely related to rheumatoid arthritis activity, yet evidence from population interventions remains inconsistent. The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang databases were searched for studies published before June 2020. Information was collected about the pain visual analog scale (VAS), Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28), serum vitamin D level, tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count (SJC), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP), and parathyroid hormone (PTH) research data. Six studies ( = 438) were included in the meta-analysis. Vitamin D supplementation resulted in a significant improvement in the DAS28 (weighted mean difference (WMD) = -0.41, 95% CI (-0.59, -0.23), < 0.001), ESR (WMD = -3.40, 95% CI (-6.62, -0.18), = 0.04) and TJC (WMD = -1.44, 95% CI (-2.74, -0.14), = 0.03) but not in other outcomes. According to the subgroup analyses, VAS and serum vitamin D were improved in the European ethnic subgroups. TJC and serum vitamin D were improved in the Asian ethnic subgroups. TJC and serum vitamin D were improved in the duration ≤ 12 w subgroups, and the VAS and DAS28 in the duration > 12 w subgroup were different from those of the control group. With a vitamin D dose ≤50,000 IU, only serum vitamin D and TJC improved, and with a vitamin D dose> 50,000 IU, the VAS and DAS28 improved. Compared with placebo control interventions, vitamin D supplementation seemed to be an effective intervention for patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Different doses of vitamin D and durations of intervention produce different effects.
PubMed: 33195358
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2020.596007