|Former: Atención Farmacéutica|
|Journal edited by Rasgo Editorial since 1983|
Maruxa Hernández Corredoira
EDITOR IN CHIEF
Manuela Velázquez Prieto
Tomás Casasín Edo
María B. Badía Tahull
Lluís Campins Bernadas
Juan Carlos Juárez Giménez
Carles Quiñones Ribas
Volume 22 - Issue 4, October-December 2020
DIFFICULTIES IN MEASURING VITAMIN D STATUS AND THERAPEUTIC MAGNITUDE
FERREIRA ALFAYA FRANCISCO JAVIER, CURA YASMÍN, GALLEGO MUÑOZ CRISTÓBAL
Introduction: Despite that deficient vitamin D status is recognized in the general population, extraordinary difficulties exist in its assessment. In recent years, the number of trials evaluating vitamin D-based therapies in new pathologies has risen, but these limitations have not been resolved. The aim of this work is to review the evidence in relation to the existing difficulties in measuring vitamin D status and its therapeutic value.
Method: A search of recent literature from April 13th until June 30th 2020 was performed. Databases consulted were Medline (PubMed) and Scopus.
Results: Nowadays 25 (OH) D is the most widely used biomarker to estimate vitamin D status, however, this is not a direct measure of its therapeutic activity. There are a variety of factors related to interindividual characteristics, clinical
situations, instrumental employed or the analyte itself that hinder this objective and lead to non-optimal dosages and limitations in clinical trials that evaluated new vitamin D-based therapies. Establishing an adequate vitamin D status is subject of considerable debate in the scientific community.
Conclusions: It is necessary to standardize optimal levels of biomarkers according to the different clinical situations and interindividual aspects and to reach a consensus on the appropriate threshold to define vitamin D deficiency in order
to get more personalized prescribing recommendations.
BIOMARKERS – 25-HYDROXYVITAMIN D – REFERENCE VALUES – VITAMIN D DEFICIENCY