Letter to the Editor - Calcium Intake and Cardiovascular Disease Risk

Ian R. Reid, Alison Avenell, Andrew Grey, Mark J. Bolland

Research output: Contribution to journalLetter

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In their review of calcium intake and cardiovascular disease, Chung and colleagues (1) did not perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) as their title suggests. They identified only 2 trials reporting the effects of calcium plus vitamin D on cardiovascular events and 3 trials of calcium alone, whereas we have reported data on myocardial infarction or stroke from 13 studies of calcium with or without vitamin D (4 trials of calcium plus vitamin D and 11 trials of calcium monotherapy, with 2 studies comparing both calcium and calcium plus vitamin D with placebo) (2). For 6 trials, we used individual patient data. As in Chung and colleagues' review, cardiovascular event rates did not significantly increase in individual trials in our review but did when data were meta-analyzed (relative risk for myocardial infarction or stroke from calcium with or without vitamin D in 9 trials, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.03 to 1.27]) (2). Another meta-analysis of calcium monotherapy (5 trials involving 6333 participants) reported a relative risk for myocardial infarction of 1.37 (CI, 0.98 to 1.92) (3). Chung and colleagues do not comment on why their findings differ from those published previously.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)684-685
Number of pages2
JournalAnnals of Internal Medicine
Volume166
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 May 2017

Fingerprint

Cardiovascular Diseases
Calcium
Vitamin D
Myocardial Infarction
Meta-Analysis
Stroke
Randomized Controlled Trials
Placebos

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine

Cite this

Letter to the Editor - Calcium Intake and Cardiovascular Disease Risk. / Reid, Ian R.; Avenell, Alison; Grey, Andrew; Bolland, Mark J.

In: Annals of Internal Medicine, Vol. 166, No. 9, 02.05.2017, p. 684-685.

Research output: Contribution to journalLetter

Reid, Ian R. ; Avenell, Alison ; Grey, Andrew ; Bolland, Mark J. / Letter to the Editor - Calcium Intake and Cardiovascular Disease Risk. In: Annals of Internal Medicine. 2017 ; Vol. 166, No. 9. pp. 684-685.
@article{ce63304b03fb4db98eae3976625358d9,
title = "Letter to the Editor - Calcium Intake and Cardiovascular Disease Risk",
abstract = "In their review of calcium intake and cardiovascular disease, Chung and colleagues (1) did not perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) as their title suggests. They identified only 2 trials reporting the effects of calcium plus vitamin D on cardiovascular events and 3 trials of calcium alone, whereas we have reported data on myocardial infarction or stroke from 13 studies of calcium with or without vitamin D (4 trials of calcium plus vitamin D and 11 trials of calcium monotherapy, with 2 studies comparing both calcium and calcium plus vitamin D with placebo) (2). For 6 trials, we used individual patient data. As in Chung and colleagues' review, cardiovascular event rates did not significantly increase in individual trials in our review but did when data were meta-analyzed (relative risk for myocardial infarction or stroke from calcium with or without vitamin D in 9 trials, 1.15 [95{\%} CI, 1.03 to 1.27]) (2). Another meta-analysis of calcium monotherapy (5 trials involving 6333 participants) reported a relative risk for myocardial infarction of 1.37 (CI, 0.98 to 1.92) (3). Chung and colleagues do not comment on why their findings differ from those published previously.",
author = "Reid, {Ian R.} and Alison Avenell and Andrew Grey and Bolland, {Mark J.}",
year = "2017",
month = "5",
day = "2",
doi = "10.7326/L17-0135",
language = "English",
volume = "166",
pages = "684--685",
journal = "Annals of Internal Medicine",
issn = "0003-4819",
publisher = "American College of Physicians",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Letter to the Editor - Calcium Intake and Cardiovascular Disease Risk

AU - Reid, Ian R.

AU - Avenell, Alison

AU - Grey, Andrew

AU - Bolland, Mark J.

PY - 2017/5/2

Y1 - 2017/5/2

N2 - In their review of calcium intake and cardiovascular disease, Chung and colleagues (1) did not perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) as their title suggests. They identified only 2 trials reporting the effects of calcium plus vitamin D on cardiovascular events and 3 trials of calcium alone, whereas we have reported data on myocardial infarction or stroke from 13 studies of calcium with or without vitamin D (4 trials of calcium plus vitamin D and 11 trials of calcium monotherapy, with 2 studies comparing both calcium and calcium plus vitamin D with placebo) (2). For 6 trials, we used individual patient data. As in Chung and colleagues' review, cardiovascular event rates did not significantly increase in individual trials in our review but did when data were meta-analyzed (relative risk for myocardial infarction or stroke from calcium with or without vitamin D in 9 trials, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.03 to 1.27]) (2). Another meta-analysis of calcium monotherapy (5 trials involving 6333 participants) reported a relative risk for myocardial infarction of 1.37 (CI, 0.98 to 1.92) (3). Chung and colleagues do not comment on why their findings differ from those published previously.

AB - In their review of calcium intake and cardiovascular disease, Chung and colleagues (1) did not perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) as their title suggests. They identified only 2 trials reporting the effects of calcium plus vitamin D on cardiovascular events and 3 trials of calcium alone, whereas we have reported data on myocardial infarction or stroke from 13 studies of calcium with or without vitamin D (4 trials of calcium plus vitamin D and 11 trials of calcium monotherapy, with 2 studies comparing both calcium and calcium plus vitamin D with placebo) (2). For 6 trials, we used individual patient data. As in Chung and colleagues' review, cardiovascular event rates did not significantly increase in individual trials in our review but did when data were meta-analyzed (relative risk for myocardial infarction or stroke from calcium with or without vitamin D in 9 trials, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.03 to 1.27]) (2). Another meta-analysis of calcium monotherapy (5 trials involving 6333 participants) reported a relative risk for myocardial infarction of 1.37 (CI, 0.98 to 1.92) (3). Chung and colleagues do not comment on why their findings differ from those published previously.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85020739673&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.7326/L17-0135

DO - 10.7326/L17-0135

M3 - Letter

VL - 166

SP - 684

EP - 685

JO - Annals of Internal Medicine

JF - Annals of Internal Medicine

SN - 0003-4819

IS - 9

ER -