Trial reportNutrients2024
Efficacy and Safety of Weekly Calcifediol Formulations (75 and 100 µg) in Subjects with Vitamin D Deficiency: A Phase II/III Randomised Trial.
Trial report in Nutrients, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04735926 (Randomised, Double-blind, Double-dummy, Multicentre Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Three Different Weekly Dosages of Calcifediol Versus Placebo in Subjects With Either Vitamin D Deficiency or Insufficiency.), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
Randomised, Double-blind, Double-dummy, Multicentre Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Three Different Weekly Dosages of Calcifediol Versus Placebo in Subjects With Either Vitamin D Deficiency or Insufficiency.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Weekly Calcifediol 100 µg in Vitamin D Deficient Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectiveOptimal vitamin D levels are required for bone health and proper functionality of the nervous, musculoskeletal and immune systems. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety profiles of new weekly calcifediol formulations with the potential to improve adherence and outcome.
methodsA Phase II-III, double-blind, randomized, multicentre trial (EudraCT 2020-001099-14 and NCT04735926). Subjects were randomized 2:2:1 to calcifediol 75 µg, 100 µg and placebo. 25(OH)D levels were measured at 4, 16, 24, 32 and 52 weeks. The main outcome was the percentage of subjects who achieved a response defined as 25(OH)D levels ≥20 ng/mL and/or ≥30 ng/mL at week 16.
results398 subjects (51.1 ± 15.96 years, 74.2% females, 98.7% Caucasian) with plasma 25(OH)D levels between 10 and 20 ng/mL were randomized. A total of 376 subjects completed 16 weeks of treatment, and 355 subjects completed the study. Six patients withdrew due to an adverse event, all unrelated to treatment. At week 16, 93.6% and 74.4% of subjects receiving calcifediol 75 µg achieved response levels of ≥20 ng/mL and ≥30 ng/mL, respectively. The calcifediol 100 µg group showed 98.7% and 89.9% of responders for ≥20 ng/mL and ≥30 ng/mL, respectively. Both calcifediol groups showed superiority over placebo at each response level at all time points analyzed (
conclusionsNew weekly calcifediol 75 and 100 µg formulations showed an effective and sustained response with a good long-term safety profile.
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.