Treatment response variations to a single large bolus of enteral cholecalciferol in vitamin D deficient critically Ill children: Metabolomic insights for precision nutrition

Le résumé fourni par la source

Vitamin D deficiency (VDD) is prevalent globally and in pediatric intensive care units, where it represents a modifiable risk factor that may impact patient recovery during hospitalization. Herein, we performed a retrospective analysis of serum samples from a phase-II randomized placebo-controlled trial involving a single large bolus of 10,000 IU/kg vitamin D3 ingested by critically ill children with VDD (25-OH-D < 50 nmol/L). Targeted and untargeted methods were used to comprehensively measure 6 vitamin D metabolites, 239 lipids, 68 polar metabolites, and 4 electrolytes using a multi-step data workflow for compound authentication. Complementary statistical methods classified circulating metabolites/lipids associated with vitamin D repletion following high-dose vitamin D3 intake (n = 20) versus placebo (n = 11) comprising an optional standard of care maintenance dose (< 1000 IU/day). There was a striking increase in median serum concentrations of 25-OH-D3 (4.7-fold), 3-epi-25-OH-D3 (24-fold) and their C3-epimer ratio (6.7-fold) in treated patients on day 3, whereas serum vitamin D3 peaked on day 1 (128-fold) unlike placebo. Treatment response differences were attributed to D3 bioavailability and C3-epimerase activity without evidence of hypercalcemia. For the first time, we report the detection of circulating 3-epi-D3 that was strongly correlated with vitamin D3 uptake (r = 0.898). Metabolomic studies revealed that vitamin D sufficiency (serum 25-OH-D >75 nmol/L) coincided with lower circulating levels of 3-methylhistidine, cystine, S-methylcysteine, uric acid, and two lysophosphatidylcholines 7 days after treatment. Rapid correction of VDD was associated with indicators of lower oxidative stress, inflammation, and muscle protein turn-over that may contribute clinical benefits in high-risk critically ill children.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.