Vitamin D Binding Protein Is Not Involved in Vitamin D Deficiency in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to evaluate vitamin D status with separate determination of 25-OH D2 and 25-OH D3 and its relationship to vitamin D binding protein (VDBP) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and long-term haemodialysis patients (HD). METHODS: 45 CKD patients, 103 HD patients, and 25 controls (C) were included. Plasma vitamin D concentrations were determined using chromatography and VDBP in serum and urine in CKD using enzyme immunoassay. RESULTS: Plasma vitamin D levels were lower in CKD (30.16 ± 16.74 ng/mL) and HD (18.85 ± 15.85 ng/mL) versus C (48.72 ± 18.35 ng/mL), P < 0.0001. 25-OH D3 was the dominant form of vitamin D. Serum VDBP was higher in CKD (273.2 ± 93.8 ug/mL) versus C (222 ± 87.6 ug/mL) and HD (213.8 ± 70.9 ug/mL), P = 0.0003. Vitamin D/VDBP ratio was the highest in C and the lowest in HD; however, there was no correlation between vitamin D and VDBP. Urinary concentration of VDBP in CKD (0.25 ± 0.13 ug/mL) correlated with proteinuria (r = 0.43, P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Plasma levels of vitamin D are decreased in CKD patients and especially in HD patients. 25-OH D3 was the major form of vitamin D. Despite urinary losses of VDBP, CKD patients had higher serum VDBP concentrations, indicating compensatory enhanced production. Vitamin D binding protein is not involved in vitamin D deficiency.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".