4.5 Article

High serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations are associated with a favorable serum lipid profile

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION
卷 64, 期 12, 页码 1457-1464

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/ejcn.2010.176

关键词

lipids; vitamins; cholesterol; triacylglycerol; epidemiology

资金

  1. Northern Norway Regional Health Authority

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background/Objectives: Low serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH) D) concentrations are related to increased mortality. One possible explanation could be an association between serum 25(OH) D and serum lipids. Subjects/Methods: The study was performed at the University of Tromso, Northern Norway. In total, 8018 nonsmoking and 2087 smoking subjects were included in a cross-sectional study performed in 2008, and 1762 nonsmoking and 397 smoking subjects in a longitudinal study from 1994/1995 to 2008. Nonfasting serum 25(OH) D, total cholesterol (TC), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), LDL-C/HDL-C ratio and triacylglycerol (TAG) were measured. Results: After adjustment for gender, age, sample month and body mass index in the cross-sectional study, there was a significant increase in serum TC, HDL-C and LDL-C, and a significant decrease in serum LDL-C/HDL-C ratio and TAG across increasing serum 25(OH) D quartiles. For serum HDL-C and TAG in nonsmokers the differences between the means for the highest and lowest serum 25(OH) D quartiles were 6.0 and 18.5%, respectively. In the longitudinal study, an increase in serum 25(OH) D was associated with a significant decrease in serum TAG. Conclusions: There is a cross-sectional association between serum 25(OH) D and serum lipids, and a longitudinal association over 14 years between serum 25(OH) D and TAG, which may contribute to explain the relation between low serum 25(OH) D concentrations and mortality. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2010) 64, 1457-1464; doi: 10.1038/ejcn.2010.176; published online 8 September 2010

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据