Evidence Hub

Vitamin D insufficiency in infants with increased risk of developing type 1 diabetes: a secondary analysis of the POInT Study

An Jacobs, Maarten Warnants, Veronika Vollmuth, C. Winkler, Andreas Weiss, Anette-Gabriele Ziegler, M. Lundgren, Helena Elding Larsson et al.

BMJ Paediatrics Open, 2024

1,050 participants · 3 citations

Abstract

Background Vitamin D insufficiency (VDI) may be a factor in the development of type 1 diabetes (T1D). The aim of this study is to investigate the presence and persistence of VDI in a large cohort of infants with increased risk of developing T1D, in light of the differences in local supplementation guidelines. Methods In the POInT Study, a multicentre primary prevention study between February 2018 and March 2021 in Germany, Poland, Belgium, England and Sweden, including infants aged 4–7 months at high genetic risk of developing β-cell autoantibodies, vitamin D levels were analysed at each study visit from inclusion (4–7 months) until 3 years, with an interval of 2 months (first three visits) or 4–6 months (visits 4–8). The protocol actively promotes vitamin D sufficiency to optimise immune tolerance. VDI was defined as a concentration below 30 ng/mL and was treated according to local guidelines of participating centres. Recovery from VDI was defined as a concentration above or equal to 30 ng/mL on the subsequent visit after VDI. Results 1050 infants were included, of which 5937 vitamin D levels were available for analyses. VDI was observed in 1464 (24.7%) visits and 507 (46.1%) of these were not resolved at the next visit. The risk of having VDI was independently associated with season (higher in winter), weight (higher with increased weight), age (higher with increased age) and country (higher in England). The risk of not recovering from VDI was independently associated with…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,050 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free