Download PDF
Osteologie 2015; 24(04): 225-230
DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1622070
Labordiagnostik bei metabolischen Knochenerkrankungen
Schattauer GmbH

Sinn und Unsinn der Vitamin-D- Bestimmung

Analytische Bestimmung von Vitamin D, optimaler Status und SupplementationCurrent status on 25(OH) vitamin D measurementtarget levels and supplementation
M. E. Kraenzlin
1   Endonet Basel, Schweiz
,
C. Meier
1   Endonet Basel, Schweiz
2   Klinik für Endokrinologie, Diabetologie und Metabolismus Universitätsspital Basel, Schweiz
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

eingereicht: 27 October 2015

angenommen: 03 November 2015

Publication Date:
02 January 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

In den letzten Jahren ist das Interesse an Vitamin D stark gestiegen, dies aufgrund der nachgewiesenen Wirkung von Vitamin D auf den Mineralstoffwechsel und die neuromuskulären Funktionen, aber auch aufgrund anderer, pleiotroper Effekte. Die Konsequenz dieses gesteigerten Interesses spiegelt sich in der zunehmenden Verordnung für die Bestimmung des 25(OH)-Vitamin-D-Spiegels wider, um den Vitamin-D-Versorgungsstatus zu erfassen und um über eine allfällige Vitamin-D-Supplementation zu entscheiden. Die 25(OH)D-Messung wird aber durch verschiede Faktoren beeinflusst. Einerseits die Variabilität und die Tatsache, dass andere Vitamin-D-Metaboliten, wie das 3-epimer von 25(OH)D einen gemessenen Wert für das 25(OH)D beeinflussen können. Ein weiterer Störfaktor für die 25(OH)D-Bestimmung kann der Vitamin-D-Metabolit 24,25(OH)2-D sein. Aufgrund dieser Interferenzen und Variabilität der Vitamin-D-Bestimmung ist es nicht erstaunlich, dass unterschiedliche Assays auch unterschiedliche 25(OH)D-Resultate ergeben, was es schwierig macht, einen genauen Schwellenwert für den Vitamin-D-Mangel bzw. für die Vitamin-D-Insuffizienz zu definieren. Aus diesem Grunde sind auch Anstrengungen im Gange, die Vitamin-D-Bestimmung zu standardisieren. Eine liberale Anwendung einer 25(OH)D-Messung ist nicht zu empfehlen. Es scheint aber vernünftig bei Patienten, die ein erhöhtes Risiko für einen Vitamin-D-Mangel, ein erhöhtes Sturz- oder Frakturrisiko aufweisen, das 25(OH)D zu bestimmen.

Summary

Over the past years interest in vitamin D is growing because of its effect on bone and neuromuscular function and more recently because of its pleitropic effects. Measurement of circulating 25(OH)D concentration is accepted as the best clinical indicator of an individual’s vitamin D status. As such, 25(OH)D measurement is increasingly being obtained by clinicians who utilize this value to assess a patients vitamin D status, and subsequently make decisions regarding supplementation. However, 25(OH)D measurements are affected by other vitamin D metabolites such as the 3-epimer of 25(OH)D and 24,25(OH)2D. A substantial within assay variation in 25(OH)D measurement and between-assay variability has been recognized. Furthermore, existing 25(OH)D assays may include other vitamin D metabolites such as the 3-epimer of 25(OH)D and 24,25(OH)2D. This assay variation confounds attempts to define what constitutes the diagnosis of vitamin D deficiency. Efforts to standardize vitamin D measurement are ongoing. Liberal 25(OH)D measurements are not recommended. However, it does seem reasonable to measure 25(OH)D in those patients identified as being at risk for vitamin D deficiency and in those at risk for falls and fractures.

Schlüsselwörter

Vitamin D - 25(OH)D-Messung - Assay-Variabilität - Vitamin-D-Mangel - Vitamin-D-Supplementation

Keywords

Vitamin D - 25(OH) measurement - assay variability - vitamin D deficiency - vitamin D supplementation
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Holick MF. Vitamin D deficiency. N Engl J Med 2007; 357 (03) 266-281.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Bischoff-Ferrari HA, Dawson-Hughes B, Staehelin HB. et al. Fall prevention with supplemental and active forms of vitamin D: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Br Med J 2009; 339: b3692.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Ascherio A, Munger KL, White R. et al. Vitamin D as an Early Predictor of Multiple Sclerosis Activity and Progression. JAMA Neurol 2014; 71: 306-314.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Battault S, Whiting SJ, Peltier SL. et al. Vitamin D metabolism, functions and needs: from science to health claims. Eur J Nutr 2013; 52 (02) 429-441.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 White JH. Vitamin D metabolism and signaling in the immune system. Rev Endocr Metab Disord 2012; 13 (01) 21-29.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Olliver M, Spelmink L, Hiew J. et al. Immunomodulatory Effects of Vitamin D on Innate and Adaptive Immune Responses to Streptococcus pneumoniae. J Infect Dis 2013; 208: 1474-1481.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Guessous I. Role of Vitamin D deficiency in extraskeletal complications: predictor of health outcome or marker of health status?. Biomed Res Int 2015; 2015: 563403.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Chiu KC, Chu A, Go VL, Saad MF. Hypovitaminosis D is associated with insulin resistance and beta cell dysfunction. Am J Clin Nutr 2004; 79 (05) 820-825.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Binkley N, Wiebe D. Clinical controversies in vitamin D: 25(OH)D measurement, target concentration, and supplementation. J Clin Densitom 2013; 16 (04) 402-408.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Souberbielle JC, Cavalier E. Supplementation, optimal status, and analytical determination of vitamin D: where are we standing in 2012?. Anticancer Agents Med Chem 2013; 13 (01) 36-44.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Binkley N, Sempos CT. Standardizing Vitamin D Assays: The Way Forward. J Bone Miner Res 2014; 29: 1709-1714.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Sempos CT, Vesper HW, Phinney KW. et al. Vitamin D status as an international issue: national surveys and the problem of standardization. Scand J Clin Lab Invest Suppl 2012; 243: 32-40.
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Holick MF. Vitamin D Status: Measurement, Interpretation, and Clinical Application. Ann Epidemiol 2008; 19: 73-78.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Holick MF, Siris ES, Binkley N. et al. Prevalence of Vitamin D inadequacy among postmenopausal North American women receiving osteoporosis therapy. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2005; 90 (06) 3215-3224.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Bailey D, Veljkovic K, Yazdanpanah M, Adeli K. Analytical measurement and clinical relevance of vitamin D(3) C3-epimer. Clin Biochem 2013; 46 (03) 190-196.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Binkley N, Sempos CT. Standardizing vitamin D assays: the way forward. J Bone Miner Res 2014; 29 (08) 1709-1714.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Chapuy MC, Preziosi P, Maamer M. et al. Prevalence of vitamin D insufficiency in an adult normal population. Osteoporos Int 1997; 07: 439-443.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Lips P, Chapuy MC, Dawson-Hughes B. et al. An international comparison of serum 25-hydroxy- vitamin D measurements. Osteoporos Int 1999; 09 (05) 394-397.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Binkley N, Krueger DC, Morgan S, Wiebe D. Current status of clinical 25-hydroxyvitamin D measurement: an assessment of between-laboratory agreement. Clin Chim Acta 2010; 411 (23–24) 1976-1982.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Heijboer AC, Blankenstein MA, Kema IP, Buijs MM. Accuracy of 6 routine 25-hydroxyvitamin D assays: influence of vitamin D binding protein concentration. Clin Chem 2012; 58 (03) 543-548.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Sanders KM, Stuart AL, Williamson EJ. et al. Annual high-dose oral vitamin D and falls and fractures in older women: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2010; 303 (18) 1815-1822.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Boudou P, Taieb J, Mathian B. et al. Comparison of progesterone concentration determination by 12 non-isotopic immunoassays and gas chromatography/mass spectrometry in 99 human serum samples. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 2001; 78 (01) 97-104.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Binkley N, Krueger D, Cowgill CS. et al. Assay variation confounds the diagnosis of hypovitaminosis D: a call for standardization. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2004; 89 (07) 3152-3157.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Barake M, Daher RT, Salti I. et al. 25-hydroxyvitamin D assay variations and impact on clinical decision making. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2012; 97 (03) 835-843.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Bischoff-Ferrari H, Keller U, Burckhardt P. et al. Empfehlung der Eidgenössischen Ernährungskommission zur Vitamin D Zufuhr für die Schweizer Bevölkerung. Swiss Medical Forum 2012; 12: 775-778.
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Rizzoli R, Boonen S, Brandi ML. et al. Vitamin D supplementation in elderly or postmenopausal women: a 2013 update of the 2008 recommendations from the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis (ESCEO). Curr Med Res Opin 2013; 29 (04) 305-313.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Ross AC, Manson JE, Abrams SA. et al. The 2011 report on dietary reference intakes for calcium and vitamin D from the Institute of Medicine: what clinicians need to know. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2011; 96 (01) 53-58.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Dawson-Hughes B, Mithal A, Bonjour JP. et al. IOF position statement: vitamin D recommendations for older adults. Osteoporos Int 2010; 21 (07) 1151-1154.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Holick MF, Binkley NC, Bischoff-Ferrari HA. et al. Evaluation, Treatment, and Prevention of Vitamin D Deficiency: an Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2011; 96: 1911-1930.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Heaney RP, Holick MF. Why the IOM recommendations for vitamin D are deficient. J Bone Miner Res 2011; 26 (03) 455-457.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Rosen CJ, Gallagher JC. The 2011 IOM report on vitamin D and calcium requirements for north america: clinical implications for providers treating patients with low bone mineral density. J Clin Densitom 2011; 14 (02) 79-84.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Rosen CJ, Taylor CL. Common misconceptions about vitamin D - implications for clinicians. Nat Rev Endocrinol 2013; 09 (07) 434-438.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Hollis BW. Comparison of commercially available (125)I-based RIA methods for the determination of circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D. Clin Chem 2000; 46 (10) 1657-1661.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Gallagher JC, Sai A, Templin T, Smith L. Dose response to vitamin D supplementation in postmenopausal women: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2012; 156 (06) 425-437.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Heaney RP, Davies KM, Chen TC. et al. Human serum 25-hydroxycholecalciferol response to extended oral dosing with cholecalciferol. Am J Clin Nutr 2003; 77: 204-210.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Ish-Shalom S, Segal E, Salganik T. et al. Comparison of Daily, Weekly, and Monthly Vitamin D3 in Ethanol Dosing Protocols for Two Months in Elderly Hip Fracture Patients. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2008; 93: 3430-3435.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar