ReviewFrontiers in medicine2025
Vitamin D deficiency, supplementation, and colorectal cancer outcomes: interactions with obesity and risk profiles.
Review in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Vitamin D deficiency, colorectal cancer, and tumor progression are increasingly linked in recent research. Beyond its well-established roles in bone metabolism and immune regulation, vitamin D has emerged as a potential modulator of cancer prevention and prognosis, particularly in colorectal cancer, where deficiency may worsen outcomes. Purpose: Vitamin D is critical in the prevention and prognosis of colorectal cancer, such as colorectal adenocarcinoma. This review aims to explore the impact of Vitamin D deficiency on colorectal cancer progression and assess the role of vitamin D supplementation in improving outcomes. Methods: A narrative review was conducted, utilizing five databases: PubMed, Medline Plus, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Google Scholar, focusing on human studies published in the last 15 years (from 2012 to 2025). Priority was given to primary studies like randomized controlled trials and cohort studies, while systematic reviews were included for broader context. Exclusion criteria included animal studies, non-English papers, and non-peer-reviewed content. Results: The review synthesizes evidence from 33 primary studies and 16 high-quality reviews. Findings indicate that vitamin D supplementation may enhance prognosis by influencing serum levels, immune modulation, and gut microbiota. However, clinical trials results are mixed, particularly concerning optimal dosing, genetic variability, and factors like obesity. Discussion: Vitamin D supplementation shows promise in improving colorectal cancer prognosis, but further research is necessary to refine dosing strategies and develop personalized therapies tailored to individual patient needs.
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.