Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle logoLink to Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle
. 2022 Mar 8;13(3):1642–1652. doi: 10.1002/jcsm.12976

Effect of vitamin D monotherapy on indices of sarcopenia in community‐dwelling older adults: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Konstantinos Prokopidis 1,2,✉, Panagiotis Giannos 2,3, Konstantinos Katsikas Triantafyllidis 2,4, Konstantinos S Kechagias 2,5, Jakub Mesinovic 6,7, Oliver C Witard 8, David Scott 6,7
PMCID: PMC9178168  PMID: 35261183

Abstract

Background

Vitamin D supplementation is proposed as a potentially effective nutritional intervention to mitigate the risk of sarcopenia. The aim of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to investigate the impact of vitamin D supplementation monotherapy on indices of sarcopenia in community‐dwelling older adults.

Methods

A comprehensive search of the literature was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compared the effect of vitamin D supplementation (as monotherapy) with placebo on indices of sarcopenia in older (>50 years) adults. Using the random effects inverse‐variance model, we calculated the mean difference (MD) in handgrip strength (HGS), short physical performance battery (SPPB), timed up and go (TUG), and appendicular lean mass (ALM) between groups. We also calculated the standardized mean difference (SMD) in general muscle strength and general physical performance (composite plot of all muscle strength and physical performance outcomes, respectively) between groups.

Results

Ten RCTs were included in the meta‐analysis. A significant decrease in SPPB scores was observed with vitamin D supplementation compared with placebo (MD: −0.23; 95% CI −0.40 to −0.06; I 2  = 0%; P = 0.007). Vitamin D supplementation conferred no effect on HGS (MD: −0.07 kg; 95% CI −0.70 to 0.55; I 2  = 51%, P = 0.82), TUG (MD: 0.07 s; 95% CI −0.08 to 0.22; I 2  = 0%, P = 0.35), ALM (MD: 0.06 kg/m2; 95% CI: −0.32 to 0.44; I 2  = 73%, P = 0.77), general muscle strength (SMD: −0.01; 95% CI −0.17 to 0.15; I 2  = 42%, P = 0.90), or general physical performance (SMD: −0.02; 95% CI −0.23 to 0.18; I 2  = 71%, P = 0.83).

Conclusions

Vitamin D supplementation did not improve any sarcopenia indices in community‐dwelling older adults and may compromise some aspects of physical performance. Future studies are warranted to investigate the impact of vitamin D supplementation on individual indices of SPPB, including mobility and balance, in older adults.

Keywords: Vitamin D, Frailty, Sarcopenia, Handgrip strength, Physical performance, Older adults

Introduction

Optimal body composition and skeletal muscle function are key contributors to healthy ageing. Ageing is associated with the gradual loss of muscle mass and strength called sarcopenia, 1 which leads to increased risk of falls and fractures, hospitalization, immobilization, and mortality rates. 2 Numerous non‐pharmacological interventions including resistance exercise and protein, creatine, n‐3 polyunsaturated fatty acid, and vitamin D supplementation have been studied with the aim to reduce the prevalence of sarcopenia. 3 , 4 , 5 Preliminary evidence suggests that vitamin D supplementation improves muscle mass and strength in older adults; however, most studies that have investigated the impact of vitamin D supplementation on musculoskeletal outcomes have been conducted in combination with structured exercise, whey protein, and/or calcium supplementation with no consideration of co‐morbidity status. 6 , 7 Hence, the effect of vitamin D supplementation as a monotherapy on musculoskeletal health outcomes in community‐dwelling older adults remains unclear.

Vitamin D is a fat‐soluble secosteroid that is primarily synthesized following solar ultraviolet light exposure and is most commonly implicated in regulating bone health by increasing intestinal absorption of calcium and phosphate. 8 Recently, vitamin D has been proposed as a modulator of skeletal muscle function, up‐regulating mitochondrial ATP production, and mitigating oxidative stress via overexpression of vitamin D receptors (VDR) in skeletal muscle stem cells. 9 , 10 Moreover, in vivo studies have linked VDR overexpression with skeletal muscle hypertrophy. 11 , 12 However, findings from comparable studies in older adult populations remain unequivocal. 13 Mixed findings have been reported for associations between vitamin D status or supplementation and appendicular lean mass (ALM), timed up and go (TUG), short physical performance battery (SPPB) scores, and knee extension and handgrip strength (HGS), with some studies showing improvements, 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 but others showing negative 18 , 19 , 20 or no effect. 21 Evidence also shows that intermittent high‐dose vitamin D supplementation in individuals with adequate serum vitamin D status increases risk of falls. 22 , 23 Meta‐analyses have reported a small positive effect of combined vitamin D and calcium supplementation on HGS 24 , 25 and balance, 26 whereas others have reported no apparent improvements in HGS and a small reduction in mobility 27 or physical performance. 28 Considerable heterogeneity between older adult populations (i.e. community‐dwelling vs. institutionalized) and co‐supplementation (e.g. combined vitamin D and calcium supplementation) may account for the discrepant findings between studies.

The independent effect of vitamin D supplementation on indices of sarcopenia has not been comprehensively established in community‐dwelling older adults, and so the aim of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to investigate the effect of vitamin D supplementation as a monotherapy on muscle mass, strength, and physical performance in this population.

Methods

This systematic review and meta‐analysis was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. 29 The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD: 42021240037).

Search strategy

Two independent reviewers (K. P. and K. K. T.) searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane library from inception until March 2021. The full search strategy and the search terms used are described in the Supporting Information, Table S1. Only RCTs were selected, while no restrictions in terms of geographic region were applied. A manual search of references cited in the selected articles, and published reviews also were performed. Discrepancies in the literature search process were resolved by a third investigator (P. G.).

Studies were included based on the following criteria: (i) RCTs; (ii) healthy and/or community‐dwelling adults; (iii) intervention group received vitamin D supplementation as monotherapy; (iv) control group received placebo; (v) participants aged ≥50 years (there is general consensus that onset of sarcopenia begins between 50 and 60 years of age 30 ). Measurements included in the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP2), 31 Sarcopenia Definitions and Outcomes Consortium (SDOC), 32 and Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia (AWGS) 33 definitions of sarcopenia were deemed eligible for inclusion. Published articles were excluded if they (i) were reviews, letters, animal experiments, or commentaries; (ii) were not published as a full text; (iii) included participants aged <50 years; (iv) included participants with a major co‐morbidity (i.e. diabetes, cardiovascular disease, renal dysfunction, cancer, frailty, and osteoporosis) or conditions known to influence vitamin D metabolism (i.e. hyperthyroidism); (v) included institutionalized individuals; (vi) administered vitamin D supplements in the form of fortified foods; (vii) included a control group that received any form of vitamin D supplementation; (viii) used a vitamin D analogue.

Data extraction and risk of bias

Two authors (K. P. and K. K. T.) extracted data independently which included name of first author, date of publication, country of origin, number of participants, outcome measurements, and treatment type, dose, and duration. Disagreements between authors were resolved by two independent reviewers (P. G. and K. S. K.). The quality of included studies was evaluated using the risk‐of‐bias 2 (RoB2) tool 34 and performed by two independent reviewers (K. P. and K. K. T.). RoB2 is a comprehensive tool used to assess bias in RCTs based on the following domains: (i) randomization process; (ii) deviations from intended interventions; (iii) missing outcome data; (iv) measurement of the outcome; (v) selection of the reported result. 35 According to the scoring system, study bias was defined as ‘high’, ‘some concerns’, or ‘low’.

Statistical analysis

Our meta‐analysis compared changes in HGS, SPPB, TUG, ALM, and general muscle strength and physical performance in participants randomized to vitamin D supplementation or placebo.

Quantitative data were treated as continuous measurements, and changes in outcomes from baseline to follow‐up were compared between groups to calculate mean differences. When units of measurements were inconsistent and could not be converted to units required for be included in the analysis and/or outcomes measured the same aspects of muscle health, standardized mean differences were used. When numerical data were not reported, graphical values were estimated using DigitizIt 2.5 Software. Statistical significance was assessed using the random effects model and inverse‐variance method. Any missing standard deviations for changes between baseline and follow‐up among outcome measurements were estimated depending on availability of either confidence intervals, standard errors, t and P values or by calculating a correlation coefficient from a known change from baseline standard deviation derived from a similar study.

Statistical heterogeneity of outcome measurements between different studies was assessed using the overlap of their confidence interval (95% CI) and expressed as measurements of Cochran's Q (χ 2 test) and I 2. The classification of data as moderately heterogeneous was based on I 2 from 30 to 49% and highly heterogeneous from 50% and above. 36 Furthermore, sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of reported statistical results by discounting the effect of lifestyle advice (i.e. mineral consumption and physical activity) on outcome measurements and according to risk of bias of the included studies. Subgroup analyses based on sex, treatment duration and dose of vitamin D supplementation, and geographic origin of study were also performed. The meta‐analysis was synthesized using Review Manager (RevMan 5.4.1) software.

Results

The initial literature search yielded 6255 publications. After duplicates and abstracts were excluded, 25 full‐texts were identified, and 10 studies were deemed eligible for the systematic review and meta‐analysis 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 (Figure 1). Baseline participant characteristics of the included studies are outlined in Table 1. Six studies were conducted in the USA, 37 , 38 , 41 , 43 , 45 , 46 one in Europe, 42 and two in Australia. 40 , 44 Four were conducted in cohorts of both older men and women, 37 , 38 , 43 , 44 four in postmenopausal women, 39 , 40 , 41 , 45 and one in older men. 46 In one study, the number of men and women was not reported. 42 Vitamin D supplementation was administered as calciferol in all studies, except in that of Grady et al. where calcitriol was administered. 38 Serum 25(OH)D levels were measured in all studies at follow‐up, except for Grady et al. 38 where 1,25‐dihydroxyvtamin D [1,25[OH]2D] was measured. According to the cut off values established by the Endocrine Society, 47 one study included participants with sufficient levels of baseline serum 25(ΟΗ)D (≥30 ng/mL), 38 four included participants with insufficient levels (>20 and <30 ng/mL), 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 and five included participants with deficient levels (<20 ng/mL). 37 , 39 , 42 , 44 , 45 Studies administered vitamin D supplementation daily, 37 , 39 , 44 , 45 , 46 twice daily, 38 weekly, 42 twice monthly, 43 and once every 3 months. 40 In the remaining study, vitamin D supplementation was also administered once every 3 months, but thereafter serum 25(OH)D concentration levels were maintained between 30 and 69 ng/mL. 41 The duration of supplementation exceeded 12 months in four studies, 37 , 39 , 41 , 43 and in the remaining six studies, the intervention was <12 months. 38 , 40 , 42 , 44 , 45 , 46 One study advised participants to aim to achieve daily dietary calcium consumption of 1300 mg and 30 min of physical activity. 40

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Flowchart of the search strategy employed in the literature search.

Table 1.

Study and participant characteristics of the included studies in the meta‐analysis

Study, year Country Study design Vitamin D a Placebo Treatmentdose Treatment duration Sarcopenia outcomes
n (M/F) Age Baseline 25(OH)D b n (M/F) Age Baseline 25(OH)D b
Shea, 2019 USA Double‐blind RCT 49 (32/17) 70.1 (±7.4) 19.6 (6.6) 51 (32/19) 69.2 (±6.2) 20.8 (6.9) 853 IU/day 12 months HGS SPPB SCT
Aloia, 2019 USA Double‐blind RCT 130 (0/130) 67.8 (65.1–71.5) 21.5 (6.5) 130 (0/130) 69 (65.4–73.4) 22.2 (6.9) 3490 IU/day c 36 months HGS SPPB
Levis, 2016 USA Double‐blind crossover RCT 66 (66/0) 71.8 (±6.3) 23.1 (5.0) 64 (64/0) 73.0 (±7.3) 22.6 (5.3) 4000 IU/day 9 months HGS SPPB GST CST
Hansen, 2015 USA Double‐blind RCT 79 (0/79) 60.0 (±5.0) 21.0 (3.0) 76 (0/76) 61.0 (±6.0) 21.0 (3.0) 50 000 IU/month 12 months TUG ALM CST
Cangussu, 2015 Brazil Double‐blind RCT 80 (0/80) 58.8 (±6.6) 15.0 (7.5) 80 (0/80) 59.3 (±6.7) 16.9 (6.7) 1000 IU/day 9 months HGS CST ALM
Pirotta, 2015 Australia Double‐blind RCT 13 (5/8) 66.1 (±4.0) 18.6 (4.6) 13 (8/5) 71.5 (±5.7) 19.4 (4.5) 2000 IU/day 10 weeks KET TUG
Ceglia, 2013 USA Double‐blind RCT 9 (0/9) 76.0 (± 4.0) 43.6 (10.3) 12 (0/12) 80.0 (±5.0) 48.3 (8.8) 4000 IU/day 4 months SPPB
Glendenning, 2012 Australia Double‐blind RCT 353 (0/353) 76.9 (± 4.0) 26.0 (7.1) 333 (0/333) 76.5 (±4.0) 26.6 (10.9) 150 000 IU/3 months 9 months HGS TUG
Lips, 2010 Europe and North America Double‐blind RCT 114 (NA) 78.5 (±6.2) 13.7 (4.4) 112 (NA) 77.6 (±6.6) 14.1 (5.5) 8400 IU/week 16 weeks SPPB GST
Grady, 1991 USA Double‐blind RCT 50 (27/23) 79.4 (±5.4) 24.2 (14.1) 48 (22/26) 78.9 (±5.4) 26.3 (20.6) 0.5 μg/day 6 months HGS
Open in a new tab

Values are presented as mean (±standard deviation), unless otherwise stated.

25‐hydroxyvitamin D, [(25(OH)D]; ALM, appendicular lean mass; CST, chair stand test; F, female; GST, gait speed test; HGS, handgrip strength; IU, international units; KET, knee extension test at 180°; M, male; RCT, randomized controlled trial; SCT, stair climbing test; SPPB, short physical performance battery; TUG, timed up and go.

a

Vitamin D supplementation was administered as calciferol in all studies, except in that of Grady et al. 38 where calcitriol was used instead.

b

Baseline serum 25‐hydroxyvitamin D 25(OH)D concentrations were expressed as ng/mL.

c

Doses were adjusted in 3‐month intervals to maintain serum 25(OH)D concentrations between 30 and 69 ng/mL.

Assessed indices of sarcopenia

Handgrip strength was expressed in kilograms (kg) or pounds/square inch (lb/in2) and assessed with the use of hydraulic or pneumatic hand dynamometers. 31 ALM was estimated by dual‐energy X‐ray absorptiometry (DXA), was defined as the sum of lean tissue in both upper and lower limbs, and was expressed in kilograms/squared meters (kg/m2). 48 SPPB score was calculated based on individual scores for balance, gait speed, and a chair stand test. The balance test was measured with the participant being asked to hold several standing positions, including a side‐by‐side, a semi‐tandem, and a tandem position for 10 s. 49 Gait speed was assessed through a 4 m walking speed test, measured either with a stopwatch or an electronic device. 50 Finally, the chair stand test was evaluated by the duration needed for a participant to rise five times from a seated position without using their arms. 51 Each test was scored on a 0–4 scale for a total SPPB score of 0–12. 52 TUG was defined by the time taken to rise from a chair, walk 3 m, turn around 180°, and walk back to sit on the chair. 53 TUG was expressed in seconds. Chair stand test (CST) was evaluated by the number of repetitions a patient could rise from and sit in a chair within 30 s. 54 Leg strength was assessed via a knee extension exercise in which participants were asked to extend their knees at a 120‐degree angle. 55 The stair climbing test (SCT) involved timing the duration of climbing a flight of 10 stairs using a stopwatch. 56 General muscle strength was expressed as a composite plot of any muscle strength measures (HGS and knee extension at 180°), and general physical performance was a composite plot that included any measure of physical performance (SPPB, TUG, or CST). Serum 25‐hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] concentration was expressed in nanograms/millilitre (ng/mL) and serum 1,25(OH)2D was expressed in pmol/litre (pmol/L). When expressed in nmol/L, serum 25(OH)D concentration was converted to ng/mL using a factor of 2.5. 57 When a study administered multiple treatment arms with different vitamin D supplementation doses, only the arm with the highest dose was considered.

Risk of bias of included studies

Two studies had some concerns in terms of the randomization process as they did not report relevant information on this process (Figure S1). 41 , 46 One study had high risk of bias regarding the randomization process because there was no information about concealment of treatment allocation. 38 One study had high risk of bias arising from missing outcome data. 38 One study had some concerns in the measurement of outcomes due to lack of relevant information on the assessment process. 46 One study had some concerns of bias in the selection of the reported results arising from absence of the data analysis procedure employed. 38

Vitamin D supplementation and indices of sarcopenia

Serum vitamin D [25(OH)D and 1,25(OH)2D] concentrations increased following vitamin D treatment compared to placebo (SMD: 1.97; 95% CI: 1.30–2.64; I 2  = 95%, P < 0.00001) (Figure S2). Our analysis revealed that vitamin D supplementation decreased SPPB scores compared with placebo (MD: −0.23; 95% CI −0.40 to −0.06; I 2  = 0%; P = 0.007) (Figure 2A). Vitamin D supplementation had no effect on HGS compared with placebo (MD: −0.07 kg; 95% CI −0.70 to 0.55; I 2  = 51%, P = 0.82) (Figure 2B). Changes in other outcome measurements of sarcopenia were also similar between groups, specifically ALM (MD: 0.06 kg/m2; 95% CI: −0.32 to 0.44; I 2  = 73%, P = 0.77) (Figure 2C), TUG (MD: 0.07 s; 95% CI −0.08 to 0.22; I 2  = 0%, P = 0.35) (Figure 2D), general muscle strength (SMD: −0.01; 95% CI −0.17 to 0.15; I 2  = 42%, P = 0.90) (Figure 3A), and general physical performance (SMD: −0.02; 95% CI −0.23 to 0.18; I 2  = 71%, P = 0.83) (Figure 3B).

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Effect of vitamin D supplementation on changes in (A) short physical performance battery, (B) handgrip strength, (C) appendicular lean mass, and (D) timed up and go, compared with placebo.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

Effect of vitamin D supplementation on changes in (A) general muscle strength [handgrip strength (HGS) and knee extension test at 180° (KET)] and (B) general physical performance [(short physical performance battery (SPPB), timed up and go (TUG) and chair stand test (CST)], compared with placebo.

A series of subgroup analyses based on sex (women and men; women only), treatment duration (<6 months; >6 months), and dose of vitamin D supplementation (moderate: 853–1667 IU/day), and geographic origin of study (USA; rest of the world) was performed for HGS, and the effect remained unchanged (Figure S3A–D). No effect of vitamin D supplementation on HGS was observed for women and men (MD: 0.04 kg; 95% CI: −1.10 to 1.19; I 2  = 65%, P = 0.94) or women alone (MD: 0.00 kg; 95% CI: −1.18 to 1.18, I 2  = 57%, P = 0.99), or in studies performed in the USA (MD: 0.04 kg, 95% CI: −1.10 to 1.19, I 2  = 65%, P = 0.94) or the rest of the world (MD: 0.00 kg, 95% CI: −1.18 to 1.18, I 2  = 57%, P = 0.99). Studies administering moderate doses of vitamin D supplementation also had no effect on HGS (MD: −0.03 kg, 95% CI: −0.74 to 0.68, I 2  = 39%, P = 0.93). No effect of vitamin D supplementation on HGS was observed for studies with treatment duration of more than 6 months (MD: 0.67 kg, 95% CI: −0.14 to 1.49, I 2  = 0%, P = 0.11), but treatment duration of <6 months had a significant negative effect on HGS (MD: −0.48 kg, 95% CI: −0.85 to −0.12, I 2  = 0%, P = 0.009),

Lifestyle factors also had no effect on our findings (Figure S4A,B); after omission of studies that provided advice on calcium consumption and physical activity, changes in HGS (MD: 0.20 kg, 95% CI: −0.78 to 1.19, I 2  = 59%, P = 0.68) and serum vitamin D [25(OH)D and 1,25(OH)2D] concentrations (SMD: 2.13, 95% CI: 1.42–2.84, I 2  = 95%, P < 0.00001) were similar to those observed in primary analyses. Type of vitamin D supplementation and study risk of bias also had no effect on our findings (Figure S5A–C); results were similar after omission of studies that administered calcitriol as a treatment or that were of high risk of bias for changes in HGS (MD: 0.22 kg, 95% CI: −0.56 to 0.99, I 2  = 51%, P = 0.59), global muscle strength (SMD: 0.02, 95% CI: −0.12 to 0.17, I 2  = 30%, P = 0.76), and serum vitamin D [25(OH)D and 1,25(OH)2D] concentrations (SMD: 2.17, 95% CI: 1.54–2.81, I 2 = 94%, P < 0.00001).

Discussion

This systematic review and meta‐analysis examined the effects of vitamin D supplementation as a monotherapy, compared to placebo, on muscle mass, strength and physical performance in community‐dwelling older adults. Vitamin D supplementation decreased SPPB scores (indicating negative effects on physical performance) but had no effect on muscle mass, strength, or any other physical performance parameters. These observations were based on findings from 10 studies with a low overall risk of bias.

Vitamin D supplementation led to a significant reduction in SPPB scores among community‐dwelling older adults compared to placebo. Perera et al. have proposed meaningful decline estimates of 0.27–0.55 for SPPB score, which suggests that the between‐group difference in change in SPPB score of −0.23 from baseline to follow‐up we observed for vitamin D compared with placebo could be clinically relevant. 58 However, further research is required to confirm the meaningfulness of a difference in SPPB change of this magnitude, and it was not possible to explore how individual indices of SPPB (such as balance) changed in response to vitamin D supplementation. 58 Furthermore, in two studies, 37 , 41 participants had perfect SPPB scores at baseline, resulting in a ceiling constraint on the effect of vitamin D supplementation. Nevertheless, previous studies have reported that high‐dose vitamin D supplementation increases risk of falls, 22 , 59 which may occur via supplement‐related decreases in physical performance. To explore this potential mechanism, we compared changes in general physical performance, which included any measure of physical performance to increase statistical power, but we found no differences between groups. This could be due to our inability to include only studies that prescribed high‐dose vitamin D supplementation in these analyses (insufficient number of studies), and so further research is required to explore how high‐dose vitamin D supplementation influences physical performance in older populations. However, based on current evidence suggesting increased risk of falls, mechanistic studies may be preferable to investigate this relationship and any randomized controlled trials of high‐dose vitamin D supplementation should potentially be restricted to those at low risk of falling.

The age‐related decline in muscle mass and strength may place older adults at an increased risk of falls and fractures. 60 Therefore, sustaining mobility during ageing is critical to reduce the risk of falls and fractures, as well as subsequent immobilization following a fall/fracture that may accelerate the incidence of sarcopenia. In this meta‐analysis, TUG, an indicator of mobility levels in older adults, demonstrated no changes in response to vitamin D supplementation. Consistent with this observation, other meta‐analyses have reported no differences in mobility levels after daily vitamin D administration with 1000 IU, 25 , 61 while two other meta‐analyses found a minor increase in TUG times (indicating worsening mobility) following vitamin D supplementation. 27 , 28

Vitamin D supplementation had no effect on HGS compared to placebo, although negative effects of treatment durations <6 months were observed. HGS has been proposed as a valuable and reliable assessment of muscle strength due to its low cost and practicability in clinical and community healthcare settings. 62 A previous meta‐analysis reported minor improvements in HGS following 1000 IU/day of vitamin D supplementation, and greater benefits were observed in older adults aged ≥65 years. 24 Another meta‐analysis reported improvements in several independent measurements of muscle strength (handgrip, quadriceps, and knee extension strength) following combined vitamin D and calcium supplementation, 26 while Beaudart et al. revealed a small but significant effect of vitamin D supplementation on general muscle strength, when combining multiple measures of muscle strength. 24 Conversely, a recent meta‐analysis reported no effect of vitamin D supplementation on HGS or SPPB in older adults compared with placebo. 28 Other meta‐analyses have also reported that vitamin D supplementation has no effect on HGS in community‐dwelling or pre‐frail older adults. 15 , 27 However, these meta‐analyses included studies that combined vitamin D and calcium supplementation, 15 , 27 as well as studies that recruited individuals with co‐morbidities (i.e. type 2 diabetes, hyperparathyroidism, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) that known to affect vitamin D absorption kinetics. 63 , 64 , 65 To the best of our knowledge, ours is the first meta‐analysis to demonstrate a negative effect of vitamin D monotherapy on hand grip strength when administered for <6 months. While it should be noted that this observation was obtained from a sub‐group analysis of only two studies, Sanders et al. previously reported that the risk of falls and fracture in older women receiving intermittent annual high‐dose (500 000 IU) vitamin D monotherapy increased in the first 3 months following vitamin D supplementation. 22 The authors proposed that this effect on falls could be explained by the intermittent, high‐dosing regimen; however, the results of our meta‐analysis suggest that further research is warranted to explore short‐term effects of different vitamin D supplementation regimens on muscle function.

According to the EWGSOP and AWGS definitions, the evaluation of ALM as a surrogate measurement of muscle mass constitutes a valuable parameter for the diagnosis of sarcopenia. 31 , 33 In our meta‐analysis, no effect of vitamin D supplementation on ALM was observed, although the analysis included only two studies. 39 , 43 Prior meta‐analyses in older adults reported a modest increase in ALM following vitamin D supplementation. 24 , 66 However, one meta‐analysis investigated the combined use of vitamin D with protein supplementation in healthy older adults, 66 whereas another meta‐analysis used total lean body mass, rather than ALM, for the assessment of muscle mass using DXA. 24 Protein supplementation alone is an effective nutritional strategy to increase muscle mass in older adults, 67 and total lean body mass may be more influenced by inclusion of non‐muscle tissues than ALM. 68 Consistent with our findings, a more recent meta‐analysis reported no beneficial effect of vitamin D supplementation on ALM in older adults. 28 Hence, findings from past and present studies appear to be inconsistent regarding the effects of vitamin D supplementation on muscle mass in older populations. Thus, future trials are warranted to explore the effect of vitamin D supplementation on muscle mass in community‐dwelling older adults.

Strengths and limitations

This is the first study to examine the effect of vitamin D supplementation as a monotherapy on indices of sarcopenia (measures of muscle mass, strength, and physical performance) in community‐dwelling older adults, compared with placebo. Previous studies have only investigated vitamin D effects without controlling for confounders such as calcium co‐supplementation and co‐morbidity status. Increased calcium intake has been associated with lower odds of sarcopenia, 69 , 70 elevated ALM, 69 , 70 and greater gait speed. 71 Equally, an association with attenuated physical function and lower muscle quality have all been observed in individuals with obesity and related co‐morbidities. 72 , 73 , 74 This suggests that mineral co‐supplementation and co‐morbidity status may potentially influence effects of vitamin D supplementation on muscle health. Moreover, to achieve the aim of our study, we utilized clinically reliable measurements of physical performance and muscle strength that have little bias in their determination among older populations. However, our study is limited by the scarcity of similar studies in terms of sex ratios, vitamin D treatment regimes, serum 25(OH)D baseline values, and assessments of sarcopenia indices. Additionally, effects of lower (i.e. <400 IU/day) and higher (i.e. >4000 IU/day) dose vitamin D supplementation could not be explored. Further, daily physical activity in the included studies was not accounted for in a way that ensured comparability of post‐intervention sarcopenia indices between the two groups. Finally, in two studies with substantial population weights in our analysis, 38 , 46 signs of high risk or some concerns in terms of bias were observed. Taken together, our findings should be interpreted with caution, and their clinical meaningfulness warrants further investigation.

Conclusions

This systematic review and meta‐analysis revealed no effect of vitamin D supplementation on muscle mass or strength, but resulted in a significant decrease in SPPB score, indicating potential deleterious effects on lower‐limb physical function, when administered as a monotherapy in community‐dwelling older adults. A sub‐group analysis also revealed decreases in HGS following vitamin D supplementation regimens of <6 months. Future studies that supplement vitamin D in populations with low vitamin D status and/or low baseline physical performance are warranted to provide insight on its effects on sarcopenia indices in these groups, particularly for balance and mobility measures which comprise the SPPB. Further research is also necessary to confirm effects of short‐term vitamin D supplementation on muscle function in older adults. The lack of homogeneity in sarcopenia indices highlights the need for a global consensus regarding clinically relevant measurement tools for assessing muscle mass, strength, and physical performance in older populations. However, based on current evidence, the impact of vitamin D supplementation in mitigating risk of sarcopenia may be considered negligible, at least in community‐dwelling older adults.

Conflict of interest

There are no conflict of interest.

Supporting information

Table S1. Search terms employed to screen different electronic databases for the literature search.

Click here for additional data file. (10.7MB, pdf)

Figure S1. Quality assessment of the included studies according to the Cochrane risk‐of‐bias 2 tool.

Figure S2. Effect of vitamin D supplementation on changes in serum vitamin D (25‐hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] and 1,25‐dihydroxyvitamin D [1,25(OH)2D]) levels compared to placebo.

Figure S3. Subgroup analysis of handgrip strength changes in response to vitamin D supplementation based on (A) sex, vitamin D treatment (B) duration and (C) dose and (D) geographic origin of study, compared to placebo.

Figure S4. Sensitivity analysis based on the effect of lifestyle factors on changes in (A) handgrip strength (B) serum vitamin D (25‐hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] and 1,25‐dihydroxyvitamin D [1,25(OH)2D]), in response to vitamin D supplementation compared to placebo.

Figure S5. Sensitivity analysis based on the effect of type of vitamin D supplementation or risk of bias on changes in (A) handgrip strength (HGS), (B) general muscle strength (HGS and knee extension test at 180 degrees (KET)) and (C) serum vitamin D (25‐hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] and 1,25‐dihydroxyvitamin D [1,25(OH)2D]) levels, in response to vitamin D supplementation compared to placebo.

Click here for additional data file. (83.4KB, pdf)

Acknowledgement

The authors of this manuscript certify that they comply with the ethical guidelines for authorship and publishing in the Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle. 75

Prokopidis K., Giannos P., Katsikas Triantafyllidis K., Kechagias K. S., Mesinovic J., Witard O. C., and Scott D. (2022) Effect of vitamin D monotherapy on indices of sarcopenia in community‐dwelling older adults: a systematic review and meta‐analysis, Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle, 13, 1642–1652, 10.1002/jcsm.12976

References

  • 1. Cruz‐Jentoft AJ, Baeyens JP, Bauer JM, Boirie Y, Cederholm T, Landi F, et al. Sarcopenia: European consensus on definition and diagnosis. Report of the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People. Age Ageing 2010;39:412–423. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Sobestiansky S, Michaelsson K, Cederholm T. Sarcopenia prevalence and associations with mortality and hospitalisation by various sarcopenia definitions in 85–89 year old community‐dwelling men: a report from the ULSAM study. BMC Geriatr 2019;19:1–13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Candow DG, Vogt E, Johannsmeyer S, Forbes SC, Farthing JP. Strategic creatine supplementation and resistance training in healthy older adults. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 2015;40:689–694. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. West DW, Abou Sawan S, Mazzulla M, Williamson E, Moore DR. Whey protein supplementation enhances whole body protein metabolism and performance recovery after resistance exercise: a double‐blind crossover study. Nutrients 2017;9:735. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Nilsson MI, Mikhail A, Lan L, Di Carlo A, Hamilton B, Barnard K, et al. A five‐ingredient nutritional supplement and home‐based resistance exercise improve lean mass and strength in free‐living elderly. Nutrients 2020;12:2391. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Mølmen KS, Hammarström D, Pedersen K, Lian Lie AC, Steile RB, Nygaard H, et al. Vitamin D3 supplementation does not enhance the effects of resistance training in older adults. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 2021;12:599–628. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Miller EG, Nowson CA, Dunstan DW, Kerr DA, Menzies D, Daly RM. Effects of whey protein plus vitamin D supplementation combined with progressive resistance training on glycaemic control, body composition, muscle function and cardiometabolic risk factors in middle‐aged and older overweight/obese adults with type 2 diabetes: a 24‐week randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Obes Metab 2021;23:938–949. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Rybchyn MS, Abboud M, Puglisi DA, Gordon‐Thomson C, Brennan‐Speranza TC, Mason RS, et al. Skeletal muscle and the maintenance of vitamin D status. Nutrients 2020;12:3270. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Dzik KP, Kaczor JJ. Mechanisms of vitamin D on skeletal muscle function: oxidative stress, energy metabolism and anabolic state. Eur J Appl Physiol 2019;119:825–839. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Latham CM, Brightwell CR, Keeble AR, Munson BD, Thomas NT, Zagzoog AM, et al. Vitamin D promotes skeletal muscle regeneration and mitochondrial health. Front Physiol 2021;12:463. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Bass JJ, Nakhuda A, Deane CS, Brook MS, Wilkinson DJ, Phillips BE, et al. Overexpression of the vitamin D receptor (VDR) induces skeletal muscle hypertrophy. Molecular Metabolism 2020;42:101059. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Bass JJ, Kazi AA, Deane CS, Nakhuda A, Ashcroft SP, Brook MS, et al. The mechanisms of skeletal muscle atrophy in response to transient knockdown of the vitamin D receptor in vivo. J Physiol 2021;599:963–979. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Van Vliet S, Fappi A, Reeds DN, Mittendorfer B. No independent or combined effects of vitamin D and conjugated linoleic acids on muscle protein synthesis in older adults: a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled clinical trial. Am J Clin Nutr 2020;112:1382–1389. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Davarzani S, Djafarian K, Clark CC, Babaei N, Ghorbaninejad P, Ebaditabar M, et al. The interaction of aging with serum 25 (OH) D and 1, 25 (OH) 2 D status on muscle strength. Int J Clin Pract 2021;75:e14510. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Dewansingh P, Melse‐Boonstra A, Krijnen WP, van der Schans CP, Jager‐Wittenaar H, van den Heuvel EG. Supplemental protein from dairy products increases body weight and vitamin D improves physical performance in older adults: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Nutr Res 2018;49:1–22. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. El Hajj C, Fares S, Chardigny JM, Boirie Y, Walrand S. Vitamin D supplementation and muscle strength in pre‐sarcopenic elderly Lebanese people: a randomized controlled trial. Archives of Osteoporosis 2019;14:1–11. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Scott D, Blizzard L, Fell J, Ding C, Winzenberg T, Jones G. A prospective study of the associations between 25‐hydroxy‐vitamin D, sarcopenia progression and physical activity in older adults. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 2010;73:581–587. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Aspell N, Laird E, Healy M, Lawlor B, O'Sullivan M. Vitamin D deficiency is associated with impaired muscle strength and physical performance in community‐dwelling older adults: findings from the english longitudinal study of ageing. Clin Interv Aging 2019;14:1751–1761. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Mendoza‐Garcés L, Velázquez‐Alva MC, Cabrer‐Rosales MF, Arrieta‐Cruz I, Gutiérrez‐Juárez R, Irigoyen‐Camacho ME. Vitamin D deficiency is associated with handgrip strength, nutritional status and T2DM in community‐dwelling older mexican women: a cross‐sectional study. Nutrients 2021;13:736. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Tieland M, Brouwer‐Brolsma EM, Cv N‐R, van Loon LJ, De Groot L. Low vitamin D status is associated with reduced muscle mass and impaired physical performance in frail elderly people. Eur J Clin Nutr 2013;67:1050–1055. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Vaes AM, Tieland M, Toussaint N, Nilwik R, Verdijk LB, van Loon LJ, et al. Cholecalciferol or 25‐hydroxycholecalciferol supplementation does not affect muscle strength and physical performance in prefrail and frail older adults. J Nutr 2018;148:712–720. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Sanders KM, Stuart AL, Williamson EJ, Simpson JA, Kotowicz MA, Young D, et al. Annual high‐dose oral vitamin D and falls and fractures in older women: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2010;303:1815–1822. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Waterhouse M, Sanguineti E, Baxter C, Duarte Romero B, McLeod DS, English DR , et al. Vitamin D supplementation and risk of falling: outcomes from the randomized, placebo‐controlled D‐Health Trial. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 2021;12:1428–1439. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Beaudart C, Buckinx F, Rabenda V, Gillain S, Cavalier E, Slomian J, et al. The effects of vitamin D on skeletal muscle strength, muscle mass, and muscle power: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Endocrinol Metabol 2014;99:4336–4345. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Abshirini M, Mozaffari H, Kord‐Varkaneh H, Omidian M, Kruger M. The effects of vitamin D supplementation on muscle strength and mobility in postmenopausal women: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials. J Hum Nutr Diet 2020;33:207–221. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Muir SW, Montero‐Odasso M. Effect of vitamin D supplementation on muscle strength, gait and balance in older adults: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. J Am Geriatr Soc 2011;59:2291–2300. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Rosendahl‐Riise H, Spielau U, Ranhoff AH, Gudbrandsen OA, Dierkes J. Vitamin D supplementation and its influence on muscle strength and mobility in community‐dwelling older persons: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. J Hum Nutr Diet 2017;30:3–15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Bislev LS, Grove‐Laugesen D, Rejnmark L. Vitamin D and muscle health: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized placebo‐controlled trials. J Bone Miner Res 2021;36:1651–1660. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. von Haehling S, Morley JE, Anker SD. An overview of sarcopenia: facts and numbers on prevalence and clinical impact. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 2010;1:129–133. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Cruz‐Jentoft AJ, Bahat G, Bauer J, Boirie Y, Bruyère O, Cederholm T, et al. Sarcopenia: revised European consensus on definition and diagnosis. Age Ageing 2019;48:16–31. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Bhasin S, Travison TG, Manini TM, Patel S, Pencina KM, Fielding RA, et al. Sarcopenia definition: the position statements of the sarcopenia definition and outcomes consortium. J Am Geriatr Soc 2020;68:1410–1418. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Chen L‐K, Woo J, Assantachai P, Auyeung T‐W, Chou M‐Y, Iijima K, et al. Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia: 2019 consensus update on sarcopenia diagnosis and treatment. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2020;21:300, e2–307. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Sterne JA, Savović J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Blencowe NS, Boutron I, et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2019;366:l4898. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Jüni P, Moher D, Oxman AD, et al. The Cochrane collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2011;343:d5928. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta‐analyses. BMJ 2003;327:557–560. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Shea MK, Fielding RA, Dawson‐Hughes B. The effect of vitamin D supplementation on lower‐extremity power and function in older adults: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Clin Nutr 2019;109:369–379. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Grady D, Halloran B, Cummings S, Leveille S, Wells L, Black D, et al. 1, 25‐Dihydroxyvitamin D3 and muscle strength in the elderly: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Endocrinol Metabol 1991;73:1111–1117. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Cangussu L, Nahas‐Neto J, Orsatti C, Bueloni‐Dias F, Nahas E. Effect of vitamin D supplementation alone on muscle function in postmenopausal women: a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled clinical trial. Osteoporos Int 2015;26:2413–2421. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Glendenning P, Zhu K, Inderjeeth C, Howat P, Lewis JR, Prince RL. Effects of three‐monthly oral 150,000 IU cholecalciferol supplementation on falls, mobility, and muscle strength in older postmenopausal women: a randomized controlled trial. J Bone Miner Res 2012;27:170–176. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Aloia JF, Mikhail M, Fazzari M, Islam S, Ragolia L, Guralnik J. Physical performance and vitamin D in elderly black women–the PODA randomized clinical trial. J Clin Endocrinol Metabol 2019;104:1441–1448. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Lips P, Binkley N, Pfeifer M, Recker R, Samanta S, Cohn DA, et al. Once‐weekly dose of 8400 IU vitamin D3 compared with placebo: effects on neuromuscular function and tolerability in older adults with vitamin D insufficiency. Am J Clin Nutr 2010;91:985–991. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Hansen KE, Johnson RE, Chambers KR, Johnson MG, Lemon CC, Vo TN, et al. Treatment of vitamin D insufficiency in postmenopausal women: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med 2015;175:1612–1621. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Pirotta S, Kidgell DJ, Daly RM. Effects of vitamin D supplementation on neuroplasticity in older adults: a double‐blinded, placebo‐controlled randomised trial. Osteoporos Int 2015;26:131–140. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Ceglia L, Niramitmahapanya S, da Silva Morais M, Rivas DA, Harris SS, Bischoff‐Ferrari H, et al. A randomized study on the effect of vitamin D3 supplementation on skeletal muscle morphology and vitamin D receptor concentration in older women. J Clin Endocrinol Metabol 2013;98:E1927–E1935. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Levis S, Gómez‐Marín O. Vitamin D and physical function in sedentary older men. J Am Geriatr Soc 2017;65:323–331. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Holick MF, Binkley NC, Bischoff‐Ferrari HA, Gordon CM, Hanley DA, Heaney RP, et al. Evaluation, treatment, and prevention of vitamin D deficiency: an Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metabol 2011;96:1911–1930. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Harvey NC, Kanis JA, Liu E, Johansson H, Lorentzon M, McCloskey E. Appendicular lean mass and fracture risk assessment: implications for FRAX® and sarcopenia, Vol. 30. Springer; 2019. p 537–539. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Beaudart C, Rolland Y, Cruz‐Jentoft AJ, Bauer JM, Sieber C, Cooper C, et al. Assessment of muscle function and physical performance in daily clinical practice. Calcif Tissue Int 2019;105:1–14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50. Maggio M, Ceda GP, Ticinesi A, De Vita F, Gelmini G, Costantino C, et al. Instrumental and non‐instrumental evaluation of 4‐meter walking speed in older individuals. PLoS One 2016;11:e0153583. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51. Cesari M, Kritchevsky SB, Newman AB, Simonsick EM, Harris TB, Penninx BW, et al. Added value of physical performance measures in predicting adverse health‐related events: results from the Health, Aging and Body Composition Study. J Am Geriatr Soc 2009;57:251–259. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Guralnik JM, Simonsick EM, Ferrucci L, Glynn RJ, Berkman LF, Blazer DG, et al. A short physical performance battery assessing lower extremity function: association with self‐reported disability and prediction of mortality and nursing home admission. J Gerontol 1994;49:M85–M94. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Barry E, Galvin R, Keogh C, Horgan F, Fahey T. Is the timed up and go test a useful predictor of risk of falls in community dwelling older adults: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. BMC Geriatr 2014;14:1–14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54. Jones CJ, Rikli RE, Beam WC. A 30‐s chair‐stand test as a measure of lower body strength in community‐residing older adults. Res Q Exerc Sport 1999;70:113–119. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55. Sekir U, Yildiz Y, Hazneci B, Ors F, Aydin T. Effect of isokinetic training on strength, functionality and proprioception in athletes with functional ankle instability. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2007;15:654–664. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56. Bean JF, Kiely DK, LaRose S, Alian J, Frontera WR. Is stair climb power a clinically relevant measure of leg power impairments in at‐risk older adults? Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007;88:604–609. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57. Sahota O. Understanding vitamin D deficiency. Age Ageing 2014;43:589–591. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58. Perera S, Mody SH, Woodman RC, Studenski SA. Meaningful change and responsiveness in common physical performance measures in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 2006;54:743–749. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59. Cummings SR, Kiel DP, Black DM. Vitamin D supplementation and increased risk of falling: a cautionary tale of vitamin supplements retold. JAMA Intern Med 2016;176:171–172. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60. Van Ancum JM, Pijnappels M, Jonkman NH, Scheerman K, Verlaan S, Meskers CG, et al. Muscle mass and muscle strength are associated with pre‐ and post‐hospitalization falls in older male inpatients: a longitudinal cohort study. BMC Geriatr 2018;18:1–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61. Tabrizi R, Hallajzadeh J, Mirhosseini N, Lankarani KB, Maharlouei N, Akbari M, et al. The effects of vitamin D supplementation on muscle function among postmenopausal women: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. EXCLI J 2019;18:591. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62. Beaudart C, McCloskey E, Bruyère O, Cesari M, Rolland Y, Rizzoli R, et al. Sarcopenia in daily practice: assessment and management. BMC Geriatr 2016;16:1–10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63. Nakashima A, Yokoyama K, Yokoo T, Urashima M. Role of vitamin D in diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease. World J Diabetes 2016;7:89. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64. Tebben PJ, Singh RJ, Kumar R. Vitamin D‐mediated hypercalcemia: mechanisms, diagnosis, and treatment. Endocr Rev 2016;37:521–547. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65. Zakharova I, Klimov L, Kuryaninova V, Nikitina I, Malyavskaya S, Dolbnya S, et al. Vitamin D insufficiency in overweight and obese children and adolescents. Front Endocrinol 2019;10:103. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66. Gkekas NK, Anagnostis P, Paraschou V, Stamiris D, Dellis S, Kenanidis E, et al. The effect of vitamin D plus protein supplementation on sarcopenia: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. Maturitas 2021;145:56–63. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67. Moore DR. Maximizing post‐exercise anabolism: the case for relative protein intakes. Front Nutr 2019;6:147. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68. Buckinx F, Landi F, Cesari M, Fielding RA, Visser M, Engelke K, et al. Pitfalls in the measurement of muscle mass: a need for a reference standard. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 2018;9:269–278. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69. Petermann‐Rocha F, Chen M, Gray SR, Ho FK, Pell JP, Celis‐Morales C. Factors associated with sarcopenia: a cross‐sectional analysis using UK Biobank. Maturitas 2020;133:60–67. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70. Seo MH, Kim MK, Park SE, Rhee EJ, Park CY, Lee W‐Y, et al. The association between daily calcium intake and sarcopenia in older, non‐obese Korean adults: the fourth Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES IV) 2009. Endocr J 2013;60:EJ12–EJ0395. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71. Waters DL, Wayne S, Andrieu S, Cesari M, Villareal D, Garry P, et al. Sexually dimorphic patterns of nutritional intake and eating behaviors in community‐dwelling older adults with normal and slow gait speed. J Nutr Health Aging 2014;18:228–233. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72. Khanal P, Williams AG, He L, Stebbings GK, Onambele‐Pearson GL, Thomis M, et al. Sarcopenia, obesity, and sarcopenic obesity: relationship with skeletal muscle phenotypes and single nucleotide polymorphisms. J Clin Med 2021;10:4933. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73. Rolland Y, Lauwers‐Cances V, Cristini C, van Kan GA, Janssen I, Morley JE, et al. Difficulties with physical function associated with obesity, sarcopenia, and sarcopenic‐obesity in community‐dwelling elderly women: the EPIDOS (EPIDemiologie de l'OSteoporose) Study. Am J Clin Nutr 2009;89:1895–1900. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74. Mesinovic J, McMillan LB, Shore‐Lorenti C, De Courten B, Ebeling PR, Scott D. Metabolic syndrome and its associations with components of sarcopenia in overweight and obese older adults. J Clin Med 2019;8:145. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75. von Haehling S, Morley JE, Coats AJ, Anker SD. Ethical guidelines for publishing in the Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle: update 2021. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 2021;12:2259–2261. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Table S1. Search terms employed to screen different electronic databases for the literature search.

Click here for additional data file. (10.7MB, pdf)

Figure S1. Quality assessment of the included studies according to the Cochrane risk‐of‐bias 2 tool.

Figure S2. Effect of vitamin D supplementation on changes in serum vitamin D (25‐hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] and 1,25‐dihydroxyvitamin D [1,25(OH)2D]) levels compared to placebo.

Figure S3. Subgroup analysis of handgrip strength changes in response to vitamin D supplementation based on (A) sex, vitamin D treatment (B) duration and (C) dose and (D) geographic origin of study, compared to placebo.

Figure S4. Sensitivity analysis based on the effect of lifestyle factors on changes in (A) handgrip strength (B) serum vitamin D (25‐hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] and 1,25‐dihydroxyvitamin D [1,25(OH)2D]), in response to vitamin D supplementation compared to placebo.

Figure S5. Sensitivity analysis based on the effect of type of vitamin D supplementation or risk of bias on changes in (A) handgrip strength (HGS), (B) general muscle strength (HGS and knee extension test at 180 degrees (KET)) and (C) serum vitamin D (25‐hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] and 1,25‐dihydroxyvitamin D [1,25(OH)2D]) levels, in response to vitamin D supplementation compared to placebo.

Click here for additional data file. (83.4KB, pdf)

Articles from Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES