Vitamin D as an adjunct to antibiotics for the treatment of acute childhood pneumonia

Background Children with acute pneumonia may be vitamin D deficient. Clinical trials have found that prophylactic vitamin D supplementation decreases children's risk of developing pneumonia. Data on the therapeutic effects of vitamin D in acute childhood pneumonia are limited. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2018. Objectives To evaluate the efficacy and safety of vitamin D supplementation as an adjunct to antibiotics for the treatment of acute childhood pneumonia. Search methods We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trial registries on 28 December 2021. We applied no language restrictions. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared vitamin D supplementation with placebo in children (aged one month to five years) hospitalised with acute community-acquired pneumonia, as defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) acute respiratory infection guidelines. For this update, we reappraised eligible trials according to research integrity criteria, excluding RCTs published from April 2018 that were not prospectively registered in a trials registry according to WHO or Clinical Trials Registry - India (CTRI) guidelines (it was not mandatory to register clinical trials in India before April 2018). Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and extracted data. For dichotomous data, we extracted the number of participants experiencing the outcome and the total number of participants in each treatment group. For continuous data, we used the arithmetic mean and standard deviation (SD) for each treatment group together with number of participants in each group. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Main results In this update, we included three new trials involving 468 children, bringing the total number of trials to seven, with 1601 children (631 with pneumonia and 970 with severe or very severe pneumonia). We categorised three previously included studies and three new studies as 'awaiting classification' based on the research integrity screen. Five trials used a single bolus dose of vitamin D (300,000 IU in one trial and 100,000 IU in four trials) at the onset of illness or within 24 hours of hospital admission; one used a daily dose of oral vitamin D (1000 IU for children aged up to one year and 2000 IU for children aged over one year) for five days; and one used variable doses (on day 1, 20,000 IU in children younger than six months, 50,000 IU in children aged six to 12 months, and 100,000 IU in children aged 13 to 59 months; followed by 10,000 IU/day for four days or until discharge). Three trials performed microbiological diagnosis of pneumonia, radiological diagnosis of pneumonia, or both. Vitamin D probably has little or no effect on the time to resolution of acute illness (mean difference (MD) -1.28 hours, 95% confidence interval (CI) -5.47 to 2.91; 5 trials, 1188 children; moderate-certainty evidence). We do not know if vitamin D has an effect on the duration of hospitalisation (MD 4.96 hours, 95% CI -8.28 to 18.21; 5 trials, 1023 children; very low-certainty evidence). We do not know if vitamin D has an eIect on mortality rate (risk ratio (RR) 0.69, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.07; 3 trials, 584 children; low-certainty evidence). The trials reported no major adverse events. According to GRADE criteria, the evidence was of very low-to-moderate certainty for all outcomes, owing to serious trial limitations, inconsistency, indirectness, and imprecision. Three trials received funding: one from the New Zealand Aid Corporation, one from an institutional grant, and one from multi-government organisations (Bangladesh, Sweden, and UK). The remaining four trials were unfunded. Authors' conclusions Based on the available evidence, we are uncertain whether vitamin D supplementation has important effects on outcomes of acute pneumonia when used as an adjunct to antibiotics. The trials reported no major adverse events. Uncertainty in the evidence is due to imprecision, risk of bias, inconsistency, and indirectness.