1988Journal of Bone and Mineral ResearchRequires access

Dose dependency of calcium absorption: A comparison of calcium carbonate and calcium citrate

Jean A. Harvey, Margaret M. Zobitz, Charles Y.C. Pak

Open publisher page 174 citations

Abstract

Abstract Calcium supplementation is recommended as a prophylaxis against bone loss. This study was performed to determine the dose dependency of calcium absorption in an attempt to derive an optimum dose schedule. Using the well-described oral calcium load technique, we measured the calcium absorption from three different calcium doses (0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 g) of both calcium carbonate and calcium citrate administered to 21 normal subjects (4 men and 17 women, 22–60 years). Nine subjects underwent two additional loads with 0.2 g of elemental calcium as calcium carbonate and as calcium citrate. The intestinal calcium absorption from calcium carbonate and calcium citrate was estimated from the rise in urinary calcium following oral ingestion of the respective calcium salt. The increment in urinary calcium post-load, reflective of intestinal calcium absorption, rose rapidly from 0 to 0.5 g calcium loads with only slight subsequent increases from the 0.5 g to 2.0 g calcium doses. Thus, results indicate that 0.5 g of calcium is the optimum dose of either calcium salt. Moreover, the increment in urinary calcium post-load was higher from calcium citrate than from calcium carbonate at all four dosage levels. The increment in urinary calcium (during the second 2 hr) following calcium citrate load (0.5 g calcium) was 0.104 ± 0.096 mg/dl glomerular filtrate (GF), which was higher than that of 0.091 ± 0.068 mg/dl GF obtained from 2.0 g calcium as calcium carbonate. These results confirm the superior calcium bioavailability from calcium citrate as compared with calcium carbonate. To confirm findings from the calcium load technique, 9 subjects underwent calcium absorption test from the fecal recovery of orally administered radiolabeled calcium salts (containing 100–200 mg of elemental calcium). Fractional calcium absorption from calcium citrate of 0.402 ± 0.067 was significantly higher than that of 0.314 ± 0.100 obtained from calcium carbonate. Moreover, calcium loading with either salt did not produce significant citraturic effect during 4 hr of study, ruling out “calcium trapping” by citrate in the renal tubule. In conclusion: (1) Both calcium carbonate and calcium citrate display dose dependency of calcium absorption; (2) calcium is more absorbable from calcium citrate than from calcium carbonate at all four doses employed (0.2, 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 g); and (3) calcium absorption from 0.5 g of calcium as calcium citrate is greater than that from 2.0 g of calcium as calcium carbonate.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Abstract Calcium supplementation is recommended as a prophylaxis against bone loss. This study was performed to determine the dose dependency of calcium absorption in an attempt to derive an optimum dose schedule. Using the well-described oral calcium load technique, we measured the calcium absorption from three different calcium doses (0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 g) of both calcium carbonate and calcium citrate administered to 21 normal subjects (4 men and 17 women, 22–60 years). Nine subjects underwent two additional loads with 0.2 g of elemental calcium as calcium carbonate and as calcium citrate. The intestinal calcium absorption from calcium carbonate and calcium citrate was estimated from the rise in urinary calcium following oral ingestion of the respective calcium salt. The increment in urinary calcium post-load, reflective of intestinal calcium absorption, rose rapidly from 0 to 0.5 g calcium loads with only slight subsequent increases from the 0.5 g to 2.0 g calcium doses. Thus, results indicate that 0.5 g of calcium is the optimum dose of either calcium salt. Moreover, the increment in urinary calcium post-load was higher from calcium citrate than from calcium carbonate at all four dosage levels. The increment in urinary calcium (during the second 2 hr) following calcium citrate load (0.5 g calcium) was 0.104 ± 0.096 mg/dl glomerular filtrate (GF), which was higher than that of 0.091 ± 0.068 mg/dl GF obtained from 2.0 g calcium as calcium carbonate. These results confirm the superior calcium bioavailability from calcium citrate as compared with calcium carbonate. To confirm findings from the calcium load technique, 9 subjects underwent calcium absorption test from the fecal recovery of orally administered radiolabeled calcium salts (containing 100–200 mg of elemental calcium). Fractional calcium absorption from calcium citrate of 0.402 ± 0.067 was significantly higher than that of 0.314 ± 0.100 obtained from calcium carbonate. Moreover, calcium loading with either salt did not produce significant citraturic effect during 4 hr of study, ruling out “calcium trapping” by citrate in the renal tubule. In conclusion: (1) Both calcium carbonate and calcium citrate display dose dependency of calcium absorption; (2) calcium is more absorbable from calcium citrate than from calcium carbonate at all four doses employed (0.2, 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 g); and (3) calcium absorption from 0.5 g of calcium as calcium citrate is greater than that from 2.0 g of calcium as calcium carbonate.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 174 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Abstract Calcium supplementation is recommended as a prophylaxis against bone loss. This study was performed to determine the dose dependency of calcium absorption in an attempt to derive an optimum dose schedule. Using the well-described oral calcium load technique, we measured the calcium absorption from three different calcium doses (0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 g) of both calcium carbonate and calcium citrate administered to 21 normal subjects (4 men and 17 women, 22–60 years). Nine subjects underwent two additional loads with 0.2 g of elemental calcium as calcium carbonate and as calcium citrate. The intestinal calcium absorption from calcium carbonate and calcium citrate was estimated from the rise in urinary calcium following oral ingestion of the respective calcium salt. The increment in urinary calcium post-load, reflective of intestinal calcium absorption, rose rapidly from 0 to 0.5 g calcium loads with only slight subsequent increases from the 0.5 g to 2.0 g calcium doses. Thus, results indicate that 0.5 g of calcium is the optimum dose of either calcium salt. Moreover, the increment in urinary calcium post-load was higher from calcium citrate than from calcium carbonate at all four dosage levels. The increment in urinary calcium (during the second 2 hr) following calcium citrate load (0.5 g calcium) was 0.104 ± 0.096 mg/dl glomerular filtrate (GF), which was higher than that of 0.091 ± 0.068 mg/dl GF obtained from 2.0 g calcium as calcium carbonate. These results confirm the superior calcium bioavailability from calcium citrate as compared with calcium carbonate. To confirm findings from the calcium load technique, 9 subjects underwent calcium absorption test from the fecal recovery of orally administered radiolabeled calcium salts (containing 100–200 mg of elemental calcium). Fractional calcium absorption from calcium citrate of 0.402 ± 0.067 was significantly higher than that of 0.314 ± 0.100 obtained from calcium carbonate. Moreover, calcium loading with either salt did not produce significant citraturic effect during 4 hr of study, ruling out “calcium trapping” by citrate in the renal tubule. In conclusion: (1) Both calcium carbonate and calcium citrate display dose dependency of calcium absorption; (2) calcium is more absorbable from calcium citrate than from calcium carbonate at all four doses employed (0.2, 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 g); and (3) calcium absorption from 0.5 g of calcium as calcium citrate is greater than that from 2.0 g of calcium as calcium carbonate.

Key concepts: Calcium, Calcium carbonate, Chemistry, Urinary calcium, Calcium metabolism, Organic chemistry

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Dose dependency of calcium absorption: A comparison of calcium carbonate and calcium citrate — Research Paper | ScholarLens