Tripkovic · The American journal of clinical nutrition 2012 · systematic review and meta-analysis · n=?

Comparison of vitamin D2 and vitamin D3 supplementation in raising serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D status: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Cited 778 times in the scientific literature.

Level 1 - systematic review of randomized trials

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PubMed 22552031 · doi:10.3945/ajcn.111.031070 · record verified 2026-08-26

What was done

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials directly comparing the effects of vitamin D2 and vitamin D3 supplementation on serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations in adults. Searches were conducted from January 1966 to July 2011 across ISI Web of Knowledge, the Cochrane Clinical Trials Registry, ISRCTN register, and clinicaltrials.gov for published and unpublished trials.

What was found

Vitamin D3 supplementation produced a significantly greater increase in serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations compared to vitamin D2 (P = 0.001). When evaluated by dosage frequency, vitamin D3 was significantly superior when given as a bolus dose (P = 0.0002), but the significant difference was lost with daily supplementation. Quantitative effect estimates, confidence intervals, and study counts were not reported in the abstract.

Why it matters

This review indicates that vitamin D3 is generally more efficacious than vitamin D2 at raising serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D, with the advantage driven by bolus administration rather than daily dosing.

Limits

The abstract does not state the number of included trials, total sample size, or numerical effect sizes with confidence intervals. The analysis was also unable to assess outcomes across age, sex, ethnicity, or administration routes such as oral versus intramuscular.

Cited by