The spectrum of activity of vitamin D goes beyond calcium and bone homeostasis, and growing evidence suggests that vitamin D contributes to maintain musculoskeletal health in healthy subjects as well as in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), who display the combination of bone metabolism disorder, muscle wasting, and weakness. Here, we review how vitamin D represents a pathway in which bone and muscle may interact. In vitro studies have confirmed that the vitamin D receptor is present on muscle, describing the mechanisms whereby vitamin D directly affects skeletal muscle. These include genomic and non‐genomic (rapid) effects, regulating cellular differentiation and proliferation. Observational studies have shown that circulating 25‐hydroxyvitamin D levels correlate with the clinical symptoms and muscle morphological changes observed in CKD patients. Vitamin D deficiency has been linked to low bone formation rate and bone mineral density, with an increased risk of skeletal fractures. The impact of low vitamin D status on skeletal muscle may also affect muscle metabolic pathways, including its sensitivity to insulin. Although some interventional studies have shown that vitamin D may improve physical performance and protect against the development of histological and radiological signs of hyperparathyroidism, evidence is still insufficient to draw definitive conclusions.

Due to the unique role of the kidney in the metabolism of nutrients, patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) lose the ability to excrete solutes and maintain homeostasis. Nutrient intake modifications and monitoring of nutritional status in this population becomes critical, since it can affect important health outcomes, including progression to kidney failure, quality of life, morbidity, and mortality. Although there are multiple hemodynamic and metabolic factors involved in the progression and prognosis of CKD, nutritional interventions are a central component of the care of patients with non-dialysis CKD (ND-CKD) and of the prevention of overweight and possible protein energy-wasting. Here, we review the reno-protective effects of diet in adults with ND-CKD stages 3–5, including transplant patients.

Growing evidence indicates that vitamin D receptor activation may have antiproteinuric effects. We aimed to evaluate whether vitamin D supplementation with daily cholecalciferol could reduce albuminuria in proteinuric chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. This 6-month prospective, controlled, intervention study enrolled 101 non-dialysis CKD patients with albuminuria. Patients with low 25(OH) vitamin D [25(OH)D] and high parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels (n = 50; 49%) received oral cholecalciferol (666 IU/day), whereas those without hyperparathyroidism (n = 51; 51%), independent of their vitamin D status, did not receive any cholecalciferol, and were considered as the control group. Cholecalciferol administration led to a rise in mean 25(OH)D levels by 53.0 ± 41.6% (P < 0.001). Urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (uACR) decreased from (geometric mean with 95% confidence interval) 284 (189–425) to 167 mg/g (105–266) at 6 months (P < 0.001) in the cholecalciferol group, and there was no change in the control group. Reduction in a uACR was observed in the absence of significant changes in other factors, which could affect proteinuria, like weight, blood pressure (BP) levels or antihypertensive treatment. Six-month changes in 25(OH)D levels were significantly and inversely associated with that in the uACR (Pearson's R = −0.519; P = 0.036), after adjustment by age, sex, body mass index, BP, glomerular filtration rate and antiproteinuric treatment. The mean PTH decreased by −13.8 ± 20.3% (P = 0.039) only in treated patients, with a mild rise in phosphate and calcium–phosphate product [7.0 ± 14.7% (P = 0.002) and 7.2 ± 15.2% (P = 0.003), respectively]. In addition to improving hyperparathyroidism, vitamin D supplementation with daily cholecalciferol had a beneficial effect in decreasing albuminuria with potential effects on delaying the progression of CKD.

Current therapy directed at delaying the progression of diabetic nephropathy includes intensive glycemic and optimal blood pressure control, renin angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade and multifactorial intervention. However, the renal protection provided by these therapeutic modalities is incomplete. There is a scarcity of studies analysing the nephroprotective effect of antihyperglycaemic drugs beyond their glucose lowering effect and improved glycaemic control on the prevention and progression of diabetic nephropathy. This article analyzes the exisiting data about older and newer drugs as well as the mechanisms associated with hypoglycemic drugs, apart from their well known blood glucose lowering effect, in the prevention and progression of diabetic nephropathy. Most of them have been tested in humans, but with varying degrees of success. Although experimental data about most of antihyperglycemic drugs has shown a beneficial effect in kidney parameters, there is a lack of clinical trials that clearly prove these beneficial effects. The key question, however, is whether antihyperglycemic drugs are able to improve renal end-points beyond their antihyperglycemic effect. Existing experimental data are post hoc studies from clinical trials, and supportive of the potential renal-protective role of some of them, especially in the cases of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors. Dedicated and adequately powered renal trials with renal outcomes are neccessary to assess the nephrotection of antihyperglycaemic drugs beyond the control of hyperglycaemia.

Hemodialysis is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates as well as low quality of life. Altered nutritional status and protein-energy wasting are important indicators of these risks. Maintaining optimal nutritional status in patients with hemodialysis is a critical but sometimes overlooked aspect of care. Nutritional support strategies usually begin with dietary counseling and oral nutritional supplements. Patients may not comply with this advice or oral nutritional supplements, however , or compliance may be affected by other complications of progressive chronic kidney disease. Intradialytic parenteral nutrition (IDPN) may be a possibility in these cases, but lack of knowledge on practical aspects of IDPN delivery are seldom discussed and may represent a barrier. In this review, we, as a consensus panel of clinicians experienced with IDPN, survey existing literature and summarize our views on when to use IDPN, which patients may be best suited for IDPN, and how to effectively deliver and monitor this strategy for nutritional support.