When and How to Evaluate Vitamin D Status? A Viewpoint from the Belgian Bone Club
- PMID: 39125269
- PMCID: PMC11313844
- DOI: 10.3390/nu16152388
When and How to Evaluate Vitamin D Status? A Viewpoint from the Belgian Bone Club
Abstract
Low serum vitamin D levels have been associated with a variety of health conditions which has led the medical community but also the general population to evaluate vitamin D status quite liberally. Nevertheless, there remain questions about the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of such a broad and untargeted approach. This review therefore aims to summarize the current evidence and recommendations on when and how to evaluate vitamin D status in human health and disease. For the general population, most guidelines do not recommend universal screening but suggest a targeted approach in populations at risk. Also, some guidelines do not even recommend evaluating vitamin D status when vitamin D substitution is indicated anyway, such as in children or patients receiving anti-osteoporosis drugs. In those guidelines that recommend the screening of vitamin D status, serum 25(OH)D levels are universally proposed as the preferred screening tool. However, little attention is given to analytical considerations and almost no guidelines discuss the timing and frequency of screening. Finally, there is the known variability in diagnostic thresholds for defining vitamin D insufficiency and deficiency. Overall, the existing guidelines on the evaluation of vitamin D status differ broadly in screening strategy and screening implementation, and none of these guidelines discusses alternative screening modes, for instance, the vitamin metabolic ratio. Efforts to harmonize these different guidelines are needed to enhance their efficacy and cost-effectiveness.
Keywords: cost-effectiveness; screening guidelines; vitamin D.
Conflict of interest statement
S.G.: none; B.L.: received lecture fees from UCB; E.G.: received consultancy or lecture fees from Amgen, Novartis, Oripharm, Takeda, UCB and Will Pharma outside the submitted work; J.-J.B.: received consulting or lecture fees from Amgen, Cole Pharma, Sandoz and grant from UCB;.M.R.L.: received consultancy or lecture fees from Alexion, A.M. Pharma, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Galapagos, Kyowa Kirin, Menarini, Oripharm, Pharmanovia, Takeda, Sandoz, UCB and Will Pharma; L.I.: received consulting or lecture fees and grant from UCB; O.B.: received consulting or lecture fees from Amgen, Aptissen, Biophytis, IBSA, Mylan, Novartis, Orifarm, Sanofi, UCB and Viatris outside the submitted work; S.R.: has received consulting or lecture fees from Vyatris, Abbott, Theramex, and grants from Bayer, UCB; E.C.: received consultancy fees from DiaSorin, IDS, Fujirebio, Roche Diagnostics and lecture fees from Orifarm.
References
-
- Sanchez-Rodriguez D., Bergmann P., Body J.J., Cavalier E., Gielen E., Goemaere S., Lapauw B., Laurent M.R., Rozenberg S., Honvo G., et al. The Belgian Bone Club 2020 guidelines for the management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Maturitas. 2020;139:69–89. doi: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2020.05.006. - DOI - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical