Vitamin D Insufficiency and Epistemic Humility: An Endocrine Society Guideline Communication.
Level 5 - mechanism / opinion, no new human data
Guideline communication and expert consensus panel report.
PubMed 38828961 · doi:10.1210/clinem/dgae322
What was done
An Endocrine Society guideline development panel assessed four clinical questions regarding the benefits and harms of vitamin D supplementation in generally healthy individuals with baseline circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) concentrations below various thresholds, reviewing randomized clinical trials published since 2011.
What was found
No quantitative outcome data or study counts are reported in the abstract. The panel concluded that existing clinical trial evidence cannot establish 25(OH)D thresholds that predict meaningful clinical benefit from supplementation, with the panel grading the overall certainty of the evidence as very low. As a result, the Endocrine Society no longer endorses its 2011 definitions of vitamin D insufficiency (20 to <30 ng/mL [50 to <75 nmol/L]) or sufficiency (≥30 ng/mL [75 nmol/L]).
Why it matters
This communication formalizes the withdrawal of widely used clinical thresholds for vitamin D sufficiency, emphasizing that observational cutoffs have not translated into proven benefit in randomized trials.
Limits
The abstract reports no numeric trial outcomes, number of included studies, or specific clinical endpoints evaluated. The underlying clinical trial evidence base itself was judged by the panel to have important limitations and very low certainty.
Cited by
- supports Vitamin D insufficiency is defined by the Endocrine Society as circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels below 30 ng/mL, and deficiency is defined as below 20 ng/mL.