ArticleJournal of medical case reports2025
A mixed immediate and delayed allergy to oral vitamin D supplementation: a case report.
Article in Journal of medical case reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVitamin D deficiency is common worldwide and of particular concern for populations at higher latitudes, including those in developed areas such as Australia. The role of vitamin D in modulating bone health and the immune system is well recognized. Patients frequently have vitamin D deficiency identified and managed in the primary healthcare setting. Despite the high prevalence of use in Australia, allergies to supplemental vitamin D are uncommon. CASE PRESENTATION: The case presented here is a 53-year-old Caucasian female of Northern European ancestry, with a history of asthma and irritable bowel syndrome who was prescribed supplemental vitamin D. She experienced dyspepsia and stomach cramps within minutes of ingesting a vitamin D supplement. An alternative formulation of vitamin D produced similar gastrointestinal effects, worsening asthma and a rash. The results of the investigations were unremarkable except for mildly elevated total immunoglobulin levels. The patient was referred to an allergy clinic where a diagnosis of vitamin D hypersensitivity, with features of both immunoglobulin-E-mediated (type 1) and T-cell (type 4)-mediated pathways, was made. A desensitization program was commenced using a modified Australian protocol. During the 18-week course, the patient was exposed to increasing doses of vitamin D, and after 6 months, a daily dose of 1000 IU was tolerated. She continues to use daily antihistamines and avoids foods rich in vitamin D.
conclusionThis case report highlights a rare likely allergic reaction to supplemental vitamin D. The patient was never known to have supratherapeutic levels of vitamin D, but her history of atopy may increase the likelihood of an immune-mediated response to the supplement. While skin sensitivity testing was negative, a provocation test and the Naranjo scoring system indicated that a "probable" allergy occurred. Vitamin D deficiency is easily detected in primary healthcare, and oral supplementation is usually a safe and effective means to restore blood levels. While reactions to vitamin D supplementation in normal doses are rare, an allergic cause should be considered when there are no other likely precipitants. Personalized, carefully supervised, desensitization to vitamin D may enable the resumption of supplementation and help prevent unnecessary morbidity and mortality from vitamin D deficiency.
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.