Randomized trial evaluates high-dose vitamin D3 effect on glycaemic control in adult males with Type 2 diabetes, suggesting limited impact on insulin resistance.
Background Vitamin D deficiency is common among individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and has been linked to insulin resistance and poor glycaemic control. However, findings from randomised controlled trials remain inconsistent.Objective To evaluate the effect of high-dose vitamin D₃ supplementation on insulin resistance and glycaemic parameters in adult males with T2DM.Methods This double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial was conducted at Taibah University, Saudi Arabia. Sixty adult males with established T2DM were randomly assigned to receive oral vitamin D₃ (cholecalciferol) 50,000 IU once weekly (n = 30) or a matching placebo (n = 30) for 24 weeks. Fasting blood samples were collected at baseline and post-intervention. The primary outcome was insulin resistance assessed using the Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR). Secondary outcomes included fasting blood glucose, plasma insulin, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), body mass index, lipid profile, and serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations. Data were analysed using SPSS version 29 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).Results Vitamin D₃ supplementation significantly increased serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations in the intervention group, with no meaningful change in the placebo group. Despite correction of vitamin D deficiency, there were no statistically significant between-group differences at 24 weeks in insulin resistance, fasting blood glucose, plasma insulin, HbA1c, body mass index, or lipid profile. Within-group changes in metabolic parameters were modest and not statistically significant.Conclusion In adult males with established T2DM, weekly high-dose vitamin D₃ supplementation for 24 weeks effectively corrected vitamin D deficiency but did not improve insulin resistance or glycaemic control. Vitamin D supplementation should therefore be considered primarily for correcting deficiency rather than for glycaemic management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nasr et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: