Vitamin D and COVID-19 infection and mortality in UK Biobank

  1. Claire E. Hastie
  2. Jill P. Pell
  3. Naveed Sattar

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Purpose

Low blood 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration has been proposed as a potential causal factor in COVID-19 risk. We aimed to establish whether baseline serum 25(OH)D concentration was associated with COVID-19 mortality, and inpatient confirmed COVID-19 infection, in UK Biobank participants.

Methods

UK Biobank recruited 502,624 participants aged 37–73 years between 2006 and 2010. Baseline exposure data, including serum 25(OH)D concentration, were linked to COVID-19 mortality. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed for the association between 25(OH)D and COVID-19 death, and Poisson regression analyses for the association between 25(OH)D and severe COVID-19 infection.

Results

Complete data were available for 341,484 UK Biobank participants, of which 656 had inpatient confirmed COVID-19 infection and 203 died of COVID-19 infection. 25(OH)D concentration was associated with severe COVID-19 infection and mortality univariably (mortality per 10 nmol/L 25(OH)D HR  0.92; 95% CI 0.86–0.98; p  = 0.016), but not after adjustment for confounders (mortality per 10 nmol/L 25(OH)D HR 0.98; 95% CI = 0.91–1.06; p  = 0.696). Vitamin D insufficiency or deficiency was also not independently associated with either COVID-19 infection or linked mortality.

Conclusions

Our findings do not support a potential link between 25(OH)D concentrations and risk of severe COVID-19 infection and mortality. Randomised trials are needed to prove a beneficial role for vitamin D in the prevention of severe COVID-19 reactions or death.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1007/s00394-020-02372-4
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.26.20140921: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.06.26.20140921v1 on medRxiv