Erratum: why vitamin D for cancer patients?

Abstract Background We reported previously that rectal cancer patients given curative-intent chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery for non-metastatic disease had enhanced risk of metastatic progression and death if circulating levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH) D] were low. Here we investigated whether the association between the vitamin D status and prognosis pertains to the general, unselected population of rectal cancer patients. Methods Serum 25(OH) D at the time of diagnosis was assessed in 129 patients, enrolled 2013–2017 and representing the entire range of rectal cancer stages, and analyzed with respect to season, sex, systemic inflammation, and survival. Results In the population-based cohort residing at latitude 60°N, 25(OH) D varied according to season in men only, who were overrepresented among the vitamin D-deficient (< 50 nmol/L) patients. Consistent with our previous findings, the individuals presenting with T4 disease had significantly reduced 25(OH) D levels. Low vitamin D was associated with systemic inflammation, albeit with distinct modes of presentation. While men with low vitamin D showed circulating markers typical for the systemic inflammatory response (e.g., elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate), the corresponding female patients had elevated serum levels of interleukin-6 and the chemokine (C-X-C motif) ligand 7. Despite disparities in vitamin D status and the potential effects on disease attributes, significantly shortened cancer-specific survival was observed in vitamin D-deficient patients irrespective of sex. Conclusion This unselected rectal cancer cohort confirmed the interconnection of low vitamin D, more advanced disease presentation, and poor survival, and further suggested it may be conditional on disparate modes of adverse systemic inflammation in men and women. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.govNCT01816607; registration date: 22 March 2013.

Download Full-text

Prevention of Advanced Cancer by Vitamin D3 Supplementation: Interaction by Body Mass Index Revisited

Nutrients ◽

10.3390/nu13051408 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 13 (5) ◽

pp. 1408

Author(s):

Hermann Brenner ◽

Sabine Kuznia ◽

Clarissa Laetsch ◽

Tobias Niedermaier ◽

Ben Schöttker

Keyword(s):

Body Mass Index ◽

Vitamin D ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Body Mass ◽

Advanced Cancer ◽

Vitamin D3 ◽

Normal Weight ◽

The Body ◽

Published Data ◽

Vitamin D3 Supplementation

Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated a protective effect of vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) supplementation against cancer mortality. In the VITAL study, a RCT including 25,871 men ≥ 50 years and women ≥ 55 years, protective effects of vitamin D3 supplementation (2000 IU/day over a median of 5.3 years) with respect to incidence of any cancer and of advanced cancer (metastatic cancer or cancer death) were seen for normal-weight participants but not for overweight or obese participants. We aimed to explore potential reasons for this apparent variation of vitamin D effects by body mass index. We conducted complementary analyses of published data from the VITAL study on the association of body weight with cancer outcomes, stratified by vitamin D3 supplementation. Significantly increased risks of any cancer and of advanced cancer were seen among normal-weight participants compared to obese participants in the control group (relative risk (RR), 1.27; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.07–1.52, and RR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.04–1.97, respectively). No such patterns were seen in the intervention group. Among those with incident cancer, vitamin D3 supplementation was associated with a significantly reduced risk of advanced cancer (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.74–0.99). The observed patterns point to pre-diagnostic weight loss of cancer patients and preventive effects of vitamin D3 supplementation from cancer progression as plausible explanations for the body mass index (BMI)—intervention interactions. Further research, including RCTs more comprehensively exploring the potential of adjuvant vitamin D therapy for cancer patients, should be pursued with priority.

Download Full-text

The Vitamin D Receptor (VDR) Gene Polymorphisms in Turkish Brain Cancer Patients

BioMed Research International ◽

10.1155/2013/295791 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 2013 ◽

pp. 1-6 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Bahar Toptaş ◽

Ali Metin Kafadar ◽

Canan Cacina ◽

Saime Turan ◽

Leman Melis Yurdum ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Vitamin D ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Vitamin D Receptor ◽

Brain Cancer ◽

Gene Polymorphisms ◽

Vdr Gene ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Vdr Gene Polymorphisms ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Healthy Control

Objective. It has been stated that brain cancers are an increasingly serious issue in many parts of the world. The aim of our study was to determine a possible relationship between Vitamin D receptor (VDR) gene polymorphisms and the risk of glioma and meningioma.Methods. We investigated the VDR Taq-I and VDR Fok-I gene polymorphisms in 100 brain cancer patients (including 44 meningioma cases and 56 glioma cases) and 122 age-matched healthy control subjects. This study was performed by polymerase chain reaction-based restriction fragment length polymorphism (RF LP).Results. VDR Fok-I ff genotype was significantly increased in meningioma patients (15.9%) compared with controls (2.5%), and carriers of Fok-I ff genotype had a 6.47-fold increased risk for meningioma cases. There was no significant difference between patients and controls for VDR Taq-I genotypes and alleles.Conclusions. We suggest that VDR Fok-I genotypes might affect the development of meningioma.

Download Full-text

Expression of Vitamin D Receptor (VDR) Positively Correlates with Survival of Urothelial Bladder Cancer Patients

International Journal of Molecular Sciences ◽

10.3390/ijms161024369 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 16 (10) ◽

pp. 24369-24386 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

Wojciech Jóźwicki ◽

Anna Brożyna ◽

Jerzy Siekiera ◽

Andrzej Slominski

Keyword(s):

Vitamin D ◽

Bladder Cancer ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Vitamin D Receptor ◽

Urothelial Bladder Cancer ◽

Urothelial Bladder

Download Full-text

Assessment of vitamin D deficiency and COVID-19 diagnosis in patients with breast or prostate cancer using electronic medical records.

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2021.39.15_suppl.6589 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽

pp. 6589-6589

Author(s):

Aaron Galaznik ◽

Emelly Rusli ◽

Vicki Wing ◽

Rahul Jain ◽

Sheila Diamond ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Prostate Cancer ◽

Vitamin D ◽

Vitamin D Deficiency ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Electronic Medical Records ◽

Medical Records ◽

Research Database ◽

Breast Cancer Cohort ◽

Icd 10

6589 Background: While patients with cancer are known to be at increased risk of infection in part due to the immunocompromising nature of cancer treatments, recent data indicate a particularly high risk for COVID-19 infection and poor outcomes (Wang et al., 2020). A recent study (Meltzer et al., 2020) demonstrated Vitamin D deficiency may increase risk of COVID-19 infection, and a small randomized controlled trial in Spain reported significant improvement in mortality among hospitalized patients treated with calcifediol. Vitamin D deficiency has been reported in two leading causes of cancer deaths: breast and prostate. In this study, we performed a retrospective cohort analysis on nationally representative electronic medical records (EMR) to assess whether Vitamin D deficiency affects risk of COVID-19 among these patients. Methods: Patients with breast (female) or prostate (male) cancer were identified between 3/1/2018 and 3/1/2020 from EMR data provided pro-bono by the COVID-19 Research Database ( covid19researchdatabase.org ). Patients with an ICD-10 code for Vitamin D deficiency or < 20ng/mL 20(OH)D laboratory result within 12 months prior to 3/1/2020 were classified as Vitamin D deficient. COVID-19 diagnosis was defined using ICD-10 codes and laboratory results for COVID-19 at any time after 3/1/2020. Logistic regressions, adjusting for baseline demographic and clinical characteristics, were conducted to estimate the effect of Vitamin D deficiency on COVID-19 incidence in each cancer cohort. Results: A total of 16,287 breast cancer and 14,919 prostate cancer patients were included in the study. The average age was 68.9 years in the breast cancer cohort and 73.6 years in the prostate cancer cohort. The breast cancer cohort consisted of 85% Whites, 13% Black or African Americans, and less than 5% of other races. A similar race distribution was observed in the prostate cancer cohort. Unadjusted analysis showed the risk of COVID-19 was higher among Vitamin D deficient patients compared to non-deficient patients in both cohorts (breast: OR = 1.60 [95% C.I.: 1.15, 2.20]; prostate: OR = 1.59 [95% C.I.: 1.08, 2.33]). Similar findings were observed when assessed in subgroups of patients with newly diagnosed cancer in the dataset, as well as after adjusting for baseline characteristics. Conclusions: Our study suggests breast and prostate cancer patients may have an elevated risk of COVID-19 infection if Vitamin D deficient. These results support findings by Meltzer et al., 2020 demonstrating a relationship between Vitamin D deficiency and COVID-19 infection. While a randomized clinical trial is warranted to confirm the role for Vitamin D supplementation in preventing COVID-19, our study underscores the importance of monitoring Vitamin D levels across and within cancer populations, particularly in the midst of the global COVID-19 pandemic.

Download Full-text