ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03447275VITAUpdated May 14, 2018

The Vitamin B Status in Type 2 Diabetes (VITA) Study

An observational study in Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Vitamin B 12 Deficiency and Vitamin B 6 Deficiency, sponsored by Rima Obeid. Completed. Open to participants aged 40 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2018-05-14.

Sponsored by Rima Obeid · Observational

Help build ClinicalTrials.gg — short surveys, remote interviews or testing, in your language. Take part →

Study type
Observational
Model
Case-control
Time perspective
Cross-sectional
Enrollment
174
Ages
40 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The objective of this study was to evaluate vitamin B deficiency (particularly vitamin B6 deficiency) in diabetic patients in Germany in relation to the presence or absence of proteinuria, and global vascular risk.

Read the detailed description

This observational study recruited either control subjects or patients with type 2 diabetes for over 5 years and collected information on cardiovascular risk factors. Fasting blood samples and urine were collected and biomarkers of B-vitamins were measured and were related to renal function or to global cardiovascular risk. Global cardiovascular risk was calculated from established models that include Routine clinical and laboratory markers such as plasma lipids, smoking, hypertension, and BMI.

we measured the following markers: Glucose (fasting plasma glucose); HbA1C; serum creatinine; Glomerular filtration rate (GFR), urinary Albumin, C-reactive Protein, Soluble vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 (sVCAM-1), cystatin C, vitamin B1, vitamin B12, holotranscobalamin, methylmalonic acid, homocysteine, and different vitamin B6 forms.

02

Conditions studied

  • Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2
  • Vitamin B 12 Deficiency
  • Vitamin B 6 Deficiency
03

In context

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2

10,378 studies on the registry are indexed under Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; 1,410 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 174 is below the median of 300 across 1,741 observational studies indexed under Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2.

Browse Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 studies →

Lead sponsor

This is the only study on the registry with Rima Obeid as lead sponsor.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
40 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes
Sampling method
Probability sample

Study population

122 patients with type 2 Diabetes and 52 control subjects were recruited (50% women in both groups).

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  1. Written before any study-related activities
  2. Ambulatory subject >18 years of age

    For patients with type 2 Diabetes:

  3. Duration of diabetes ≥ 5 years
  4. (HbA1C) \<10%
  5. (BMI) 19-40 kg/m2

    For healthy controls:

  6. No diabetes (normal fasting glucose levels measured by stick)

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. End stage renal disease ( \<10 mL/min)
  2. Severe excess alcohol consumption (>50 units/week)
  3. Severe co-morbidities
  4. Renal and/or pancreatic transplant
  5. Vitamin B1, B6 and/or B12 substitution (incl. multivitamin preparations)
  6. Participation in an interventional study within 30 previous days;
  7. Patient is female and pregnant or lactating
  8. Patient is female in a childbearing age without adequate precaution
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(5)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

HbA1c

A blood test of average blood sugar over the past two to three months, given as a percentage or in mmol/mol. 6.5% (48 mmol/mol) or more is the usual threshold for diabetes, normally confirmed by a second test.

BMI (body mass index)

Weight in kilograms divided by height in metres squared. Example: 70 kg and 1.75 m gives 70 ÷ (1.75 × 1.75) ≈ 22.9.

What counts as overweight or obesity differs between countries (some use lower cut-offs), so go by the range the study states.

Creatinine clearance (CrCl)

How quickly the kidneys clear creatinine, a waste product, from the blood. A study may estimate it from a blood test with age, weight and sex (often by the Cockcroft–Gault formula), or measure it using blood and urine collected over a set time. Given in mL/min; higher is better.

Contraception

Ways of preventing pregnancy. “Highly effective” methods fail less than 1% of the time a year when used correctly — for example an IUD or an implant.

Criteria usually say which methods count and how long to keep using them after the last dose, sometimes for male participants too. Some studies accept a partner’s vasectomy if it was confirmed successful and that person is the participant’s only sexual partner.

05

Study design

Observational model
Case-control
Time perspective
Cross-sectional
Enrollment
174 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Controls

    Apparently healthy subjects without type 2 diabetes

    Other: Type 2 diabetes

  • Patients with type 2 diabetes

    type 2 Diabetes since 5 years or longer

    Other: Type 2 diabetes

Interventions

  • OtherType 2 diabetes

    Test if patients with diabetes have different blood concentrations of vitamin biomarkers compared with control subjects and if vitamin levels in the patients will differ according to renal damage.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. The difference in serum vitamin B12 levels between cases and controls

    Compare mean levels of the controls with those in the patients

    Time frame: Baseline

  2. The difference in serum vitamin B1 between cases and controls

    Compare mean levels of the controls with those in the patients

    Time frame: Baseline

  3. The difference in serum vitamin B6 concentrations between cases and controls

    Compare mean levels of the controls with those in the patients

    Time frame: Baseline

Secondary outcomes

  1. The difference in serum vitamin B12 between patients with and those without albuminuria

    Compare mean levels of diabetes patients with microalbuminuria and those without microalbuminuria

    Time frame: Baseline

  2. The difference in serum and urine vitamin B1 between patients with and those without albuminuria

    Compare mean levels of diabetes patients with microalbuminuria and those without microalbuminuria

    Time frame: Baseline

  3. The difference in serum and urine vitamin B6 vitamers between patients with and those without albuminuria

    Compare mean levels of diabetes patients with microalbuminuria and those without microalbuminuria

    Time frame: Baseline

  4. The difference in serum and urine vitamin B6 vitamers between patients with advanced global vascular risk versus those with a low vascular risk

    Compare mean levels of diabetes patients with microalbuminuria and those without microalbuminuria

    Time frame: Baseline

07

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

08

References and documents

Publications

  • Nix WA, Zirwes R, Bangert V, Kaiser RP, Schilling M, Hostalek U, Obeid R. Vitamin B status in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus with and without incipient nephropathy. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2015 Jan;107(1):157-65. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2014.09.058. Epub 2014 Oct 8. PubMed 25458341 ↗

Related links

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No — data will not be shared

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reached

Ran from Jan 2011 to primary completion in Sep 2011, 8 months.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Feb 19, 2018
First posted
Feb 27, 2018
StartActual
Jan 2011
Primary completionActual
Sep 2011
CompletionActual
Sep 2011
Last update
May 14, 2018
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on May 14, 2018, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03447275
Lead sponsor
Rima Obeid
Collaborators
Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany, Syneed Medidata GmbH
Responsible party
Rima Obeid (Prof. Dr., Universität des Saarlandes) — Sponsor-investigator
First posted
Feb 27, 2018
Start date
Jan 2011
Primary completion
Sep 2011
Completion
Sep 2011
Last update
May 14, 2018

Study contacts

Wilfred A Nix, PhD
principal investigator · Department of Neurology, Medical University of Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in May 2018. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion