Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
, 340, b5463

Patient Level Pooled Analysis of 68 500 Patients From Seven Major Vitamin D Fracture Trials in US and Europe

Collaborators
Meta-Analysis

Patient Level Pooled Analysis of 68 500 Patients From Seven Major Vitamin D Fracture Trials in US and Europe

DIPART (Vitamin D Individual Patient Analysis of Randomized Trials) Group. BMJ.

Abstract

Objectives: To identify participants' characteristics that influence the anti-fracture efficacy of vitamin D or vitamin D plus calcium with respect to any fracture, hip fracture, and clinical vertebral fracture and to assess the influence of dosing regimens and co-administration of calcium.

Design: Individual patient data analysis using pooled data from randomised trials.

Data sources: Seven major randomised trials of vitamin D with calcium or vitamin D alone, yielding a total of 68 517 participants (mean age 69.9 years, range 47-107 years, 14.7% men).

Study selection: Studies included were randomised studies with at least one intervention arm in which vitamin D was given, fracture as an outcome, and at least 1000 participants.

Data synthesis: Logistic regression analysis was used to identify significant interaction terms, followed by Cox's proportional hazards models incorporating age, sex, fracture history, and hormone therapy and bisphosphonate use.

Results: Trials using vitamin D with calcium showed a reduced overall risk of fracture (hazard ratio 0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.86 to 0.99, P=0.025) and hip fracture (all studies: 0.84, 0.70 to 1.01, P=0.07; studies using 10 microg of vitamin D given with calcium: 0.74, 0.60 to 0.91, P=0.005). For vitamin D alone in daily doses of 10 microg or 20 microg, no significant effects were found. No interaction was found between fracture history and treatment response, nor any interaction with age, sex, or hormone replacement therapy.

Conclusion: This individual patient data analysis indicates that vitamin D given alone in doses of 10-20 microg is not effective in preventing fractures. By contrast, calcium and vitamin D given together reduce hip fractures and total fractures, and probably vertebral fractures, irrespective of age, sex, or previous fractures.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: BA receives consulting fees from Novartis, serves on advisory boards for Amgen and Nycomed, and receives lecture fees from Eli Lilly and Procter & Gamble. TM receives research funding and speakers’ fees from Merck, Procter & Gamble, Roche, Eli Lilly, Shire, ProStrakan, and Servier. FA has received honorariums for lectures and advisory panels from Shire, Celltech, ProStrakan, and Merck. CC has served in a consultant capacity to the Alliance for Better Bone Health, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Amgen, GlaxoSmithKline, Roche, and Servier. DT has received research funding from Shire Pharmaceuticals. ALC serves on advisory boards for studies funded by Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, and Sanofi-Aventis. KB has received consultancy fees from Servier, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Nycomed, and Osteologix, as well as speakers’ fees from Eli Lilly, Novartis, and Servier and research grants from Merck Sharp & Dohme. RMF has served as an adviser to Procter & Gamble, Sanofi, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Lilly, Servier, Nycomed, Shire, and Prostrakan.

Figures

None
Fig 1 Flow chart of analysis. RCT=randomised controlled trial
None
Fig 2 Interaction tests on logistic regression base model, 36 months intention to treat scenario. Each panel shows summary of 10 separate interaction analyses, testing statistical significance of each treatment by covariate interaction term added to base model. Coefficients differing significantly from 1.0 indicate presence of interaction (non-proportional hazards) between covariate and treatment; coefficients below 1.0 indicate greater treatment response (lower risk of fracture), and coefficients above 1.0 indicate smaller treatment response (higher risk of fracture). HRT=hormone replacement therapy
None
Fig 3 Cumulative fracture incidence for vitamin D (darker lines) and controls (lighter lines). Vitamin D and calcium studies and vitamin D studies are shown separately. Inset shows treatment effect and 95% confidence intervals. CaD=calcium and vitamin D; D=vitamin D
None
Fig 4 Cumulative hip fracture incidence for vitamin D (darker lines) and controls (lighter lines). Vitamin D and calcium studies and vitamin D studies are shown separately. Inset shows treatment effect and 95% confidence intervals. CaD=calcium and vitamin D; D=vitamin D
None
Fig 5 Sensitivity analysis: influence of removing individual studies from analysis. CaD=calcium and vitamin D trials; D=vitamin D trials; w/o=without

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 102 PubMed Central articles

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Johansen A, Evans RJ, Stone MD, Richmond PW, Lo SV, Woodhouse KW. Fracture incidence in England and Wales: a study based on the population of Cardiff. Injury 1997;28:655-60. - PubMed
    1. Holroyd C, Cooper C, Dennison E. Epidemiology of osteoporosis. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab 2008;22:671-85. - PubMed
    1. Brennan SJ, Johansen A, Butler J, Stone M, Richmond P, Jones S, et al. Place of residence and risk of fracture in older people: a population-based study of over 65-year-olds in Cardiff. Osteoporos Int 2003;14:515-9. - PubMed
    1. Aspray TJ, Stevenson P, Abdy SE, Rawlings DJ, Holland T, Francis RM. Low bone mineral density measurements in care home residents—a treatable cause of fractures. Age Ageing 2006;35:37-41. - PubMed
    1. Holick MF. Vitamin D deficiency. N Engl J Med 2007;357:266-81. - PubMed

Publication types

Grant support

Feedback