2023
DOI: 10.1515/cclm-2022-1128
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dynamics of the vitamin D C3-epimer levels in preterm infants

Abstract: Objectives The primary objective was to determine levels of C3-epi-25(OH)D in very low birth weight infants. The secondary objective was to evaluate the possible influence of preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR), and season of birth on the production of C3-epimers. Methods A total of 127 infants with birth weight less than 1,500 g met the inclusion criteria of the study. We examined 25-hydroxyvitamin-D [25(OH… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 43 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The next factor that could explain the discrepancy between the results observed in the animal model reported by Chen et al [14] and the present study is that in this animal study the active form of vitamin D, namely 1,25(OH) 2 D, was used, whereas native vitamin D was used herein, according to clinical practice. Using 1,25(OH) 2 D, the physiological regulation of the production of 1,25(OH) 2 D is circumvented, even though the limiting factor of this synthesis as classically described is the availability of 25(OH)D in preterm infants [40], but the regulation in extremely and very preterm infants and in particular the function of the C3 epimers are still not fully elucidated [41,42]. The results of the studies reported by Wang et al and Mandell et al in rodent pups exposed to hyperoxia receiving native vitamin D demonstrated improved lung histology but 25(OH)D was measured at low and normal levels, not allowing conclusions on supraphysiological doses [3,43].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The next factor that could explain the discrepancy between the results observed in the animal model reported by Chen et al [14] and the present study is that in this animal study the active form of vitamin D, namely 1,25(OH) 2 D, was used, whereas native vitamin D was used herein, according to clinical practice. Using 1,25(OH) 2 D, the physiological regulation of the production of 1,25(OH) 2 D is circumvented, even though the limiting factor of this synthesis as classically described is the availability of 25(OH)D in preterm infants [40], but the regulation in extremely and very preterm infants and in particular the function of the C3 epimers are still not fully elucidated [41,42]. The results of the studies reported by Wang et al and Mandell et al in rodent pups exposed to hyperoxia receiving native vitamin D demonstrated improved lung histology but 25(OH)D was measured at low and normal levels, not allowing conclusions on supraphysiological doses [3,43].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%