Early pregnancy vitamin D status and risk of preeclampsia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Low vitamin D status in pregnancy was proposed as a risk factor of preeclampsia. METHODS: We assessed the effect of vitamin D supplementation (4,400 vs. 400 IU/day), initiated early in pregnancy (10-18 weeks), on the development of preeclampsia. The effects of serum vitamin D (25-hydroxyvitamin D [25OHD]) levels on preeclampsia incidence at trial entry and in the third trimester (32-38 weeks) were studied. We also conducted a nested case-control study of 157 women to investigate peripheral blood vitamin D-associated gene expression profiles at 10 to 18 weeks in 47 participants who developed preeclampsia. RESULTS: Of 881 women randomized, outcome data were available for 816, with 67 (8.2%) developing preeclampsia. There was no significant difference between treatment (N = 408) or control (N = 408) groups in the incidence of preeclampsia (8.08% vs. 8.33%, respectively; relative risk: 0.97; 95% CI, 0.61-1.53). However, in a cohort analysis and after adjustment for confounders, a significant effect of sufficient vitamin D status (25OHD ≥30 ng/ml) was observed in both early and late pregnancy compared with insufficient levels (25OHD <30 ng/ml) (adjusted odds ratio, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.10-0.96). Differential expression of 348 vitamin D-associated genes (158 upregulated) was found in peripheral blood of women who developed preeclampsia (FDR <0.05 in the Vitamin D Antenatal Asthma Reduction Trial [VDAART]; P < 0.05 in a replication cohort). Functional enrichment and network analyses of this vitamin D-associated gene set suggests several highly functional modules related to systematic inflammatory and immune responses, including some nodes with a high degree of connectivity. CONCLUSIONS: Vitamin D supplementation initiated in weeks 10-18 of pregnancy did not reduce preeclampsia incidence in the intention-to-treat paradigm. However, vitamin D levels of 30 ng/ml or higher at trial entry and in late pregnancy were associated with a lower risk of preeclampsia. Differentially expressed vitamin D-associated transcriptomes implicated the emergence of an early pregnancy, distinctive immune response in women who went on to develop preeclampsia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00920621. FUNDING: Quebec Breast Cancer Foundation and Genome Canada Innovation Network. This trial was funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. For details see Acknowledgments.
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 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".