Trial reportOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2014
The Auckland calcium study: 5-year post-trial follow-up.
Trial report in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- The feasibility and effect of deprescribing in older adults on mortality and health: a systematic review and meta-analysis.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2016Pooled it
- Bone density in healthy men after cessation of calcium supplements: 20-month follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2015Trial
- Fragility of Evidence for the Efficacy of Anti-Fracture Medications.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2025Article
- Expert consensus on vitamin D in osteoporosis.Annals of joint · 2025Review
- Nutraceuticals in osteoporosis prevention.Frontiers in nutrition · 2024Review
- UPDATE - Canadian Urological Association guideline: Evaluation and medical management of kidney stones.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2022Article
- The association of calcium intake with osteoporotic vertebral fractures in a large Chinese cohort.Aging · 2020Article
- The good, the bad, and the ugly of calcium supplementation: a review of calcium intake on human health.Clinical interventions in aging · 2018Review
- Vitamin D, Calcium, and Cardiovascular Disease: A"D"vantageous or "D"etrimental? An Era of Uncertainty.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2017Review
- The risks and benefits of calcium supplementation.Endocrinology and metabolism (Seoul, Korea) · 2015Review
- Therapies for musculoskeletal disease: can we treat two birds with one stone?Current osteoporosis reports · 2014Review
- Calcium revisited: part II calcium supplements and their effects.BoneKEy reports · 2014Review
- CUA guideline on the evaluation and medical management of the kidney stone patient - 2016 update.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du CanadaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
unlabelledFive years after completion of a randomised placebo-controlled trial of calcium supplements, there was no effect of calcium on total fracture incidence, a significant reduction in vertebral and forearm fractures and, in a subset, no effect on bone density. There was no increased risk of cardiovascular events after discontinuation of calcium.
introductionThe Auckland calcium study was a 5-year randomised controlled trial of 1 g/day calcium citrate in 1,471 postmenopausal women. Calcium did not reduce total, vertebral or forearm fracture incidence, increased hip fracture incidence and had beneficial effects on bone mineral density (BMD). A secondary analysis raised concerns about the cardiovascular safety of calcium. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the effects of calcium on fracture incidence, BMD and cardiovascular endpoints persisted after supplement discontinuation.
methodsApproximately 5-years post-trial, we collected information on the 1,408 participants alive at trial completion from the national databases of hospital admissions and deaths. We contacted 1,174 women by phone, and from these we obtained information on medical events and post-trial calcium use. We undertook BMD measurements at 10 years in a selected subset of 194 women who took study medication for 5 years in the original trial, and did not take bone-active medications post-trial.
resultsOver the 10-year period, there was no effect on total fracture (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.75-1.07) or hip fracture incidence (1.40, 0.89-2.21), but significant reductions in forearm (0.62, 0.43-0.89) and vertebral fractures (0.52, 0.32-0.85) in those assigned to calcium. There were no between-group differences in BMD at 10 years at any site. The adverse cardiovascular outcomes observed in the 5-year trial did not persist post-trial.
conclusionCalcium supplementation for 5 years had no effect on total fracture incidence at 10 years. The positive benefits on BMD and the adverse cardiovascular effects did not persist once supplements were stopped.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.