Vitamin D to Prevent Severe Asthma Exacerbations
Phase: PHASE2
Conditions: Asthma
Sponsor: Juan Celedon, MD

Protocol (06/19/2018) 
SITE Protocol 
Principal Investigator/Pittsburgh PI: 
Juan Carlos Celedón, MD 
University of Pittsburgh 
Cleveland PI: 
Kristie Ross, MD, MS  
Rainbow Babies and Children’s Hospital - Cleveland 
Boston PI: 
Wanda Phipatanakul, MD, MS 
Boston Children’s Hospital/Harvard Medical School – Boston 
Saint Louis PI: 
Leonard Bacharier, MD 
Washington University at Saint Louis 
Cincinnati PI: 
Theresa Guilbert, MD, MS 
Cincinnati Children’s Hospital and Medical Center- Cincinnati 
Denver, PI: 
Ronina Covar, MD 
National Jewish Health - Denver 
Data Coordinating Center PI: 
Stephen Wisniewski, PhD 
Epidemiology Data Center 
Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh 
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02687815
Rev. 06/19/2018 
Vitamin D to Prevent Severe Asthma
Exacerbations (Vit-D-Kids Asthma)

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
1. 
About this Protocol ..................................................................................................................4 
2. 
Background and Significance ..................................................................................................4 
3. 
STudy Design ............................................................................................................................5 
3.1. 
Hypothesis and Specific Aims ........................................................................................................... 6 
3.2. 
Outcome Measures .......................................................................................................................... 6 
3.3. 
Questionnaires ................................................................................................................................. 6 
3.4. 
ANTHROPOMETRY ............................................................................................................................ 7 
4. 
Funding/Support......................................................................................................................7 
5. 
Study organization and leadership .........................................................................................7 
5.1. 
Study Principal Investigators ............................................................................................................ 7 
5.2. 
Clinical Coordinating Center ............................................................................................................. 7 
5.3. 
Data Coordinating Center ................................................................................................................. 7 
5.4. 
Site Principal Investigators and Responsibilities .............................................................................. 8 
5.5. 
Co-Investigators ................................................................................................................................ 9 
5.6. 
Consultants ..................................................................................................................................... 10 
6. 
Study Population ...................................................................................................................10 
6.1. 
Inclusion Criteria ............................................................................................................................. 10 
6.2. 
Exclusion Criteria ............................................................................................................................ 11 
6.3. 
Reconsideration for Inclusion after Run-In Period ......................................................................... 12 
6.4. 
Rationale for Selecting Children with a Severe Asthma Exacerbation ........................................... 12 
7. 
Study Medications .................................................................................................................12 
7.1. 
Rationale for Vitamin D3 Dose and Treatment Duration ............................................................... 13 
7.2. 
Rationale for Placebo in the Control Arm ...................................................................................... 13 
8. 
Potential Benefits ..................................................................................................................14 
9. 
Risks and Discomforts ...........................................................................................................14 
9.1. 
Procedures ...................................................................................................................................... 14 
9.2. 
Study Intervention: Vitamin D ........................................................................................................ 16 
9.3. 
Study Intervention: Placebo ........................................................................................................... 17 
10. Informed Consent ..................................................................................................................18 
11. Adverse Events ......................................................................................................................18 
11.1. 
Definition and Documentation ....................................................................................................... 18 
11.2. 
Adverse Events Unrelated to Asthma ............................................................................................ 18 
11.3. 
Adverse Events Related to Asthma: Asthma Exacerbation ............................................................ 19 
11.4. 
Treatment Algorithm for Asthma Exacerbations ........................................................................... 19 
12. Clinical Management and Data Collection ...........................................................................22 
12.1. 
Recruitment (Visit 0) ....................................................................................................................... 23 
12.2. 
Screening (Visit 1, optional) ............................................................................................................ 23 
12.3. 
Run-In Period (Visit 2) ..................................................................................................................... 23 
12.4. 
Eligibility Determination and Randomization (Visit 3) ................................................................... 24 
12.5. 
Trial Phase (Visits 4-9, and follow up phone calls) ......................................................................... 24 
12.6. 
Protocol Violations ......................................................................................................................... 25 
12.7. 
Protocol Deviations ........................................................................................................................ 25 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
 
 
13. Specimen Handling ................................................................................................................26 
14. Data Management .................................................................................................................26 
14.1. 
Electronic Data Entry ...................................................................................................................... 26 
14.2. 
Data Quality .................................................................................................................................... 26 
14.3. 
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................................. 26 
14.4. 
Privacy and Data Security ............................................................................................................... 27 
14.5. 
Data Sharing ................................................................................................................................... 28 
15. Data and Safety Monitoring ..................................................................................................28 
15.1. 
Clinical Coordinating Center ........................................................................................................... 28 
15.2. 
Data Coordinating Center ............................................................................................................... 28 
15.3. 
Steering Committee ........................................................................................................................ 28 
15.4. 
Data and Safety Monitoring Board ................................................................................................. 28 
15.5. 
Institutional Review Board ............................................................................................................. 31 
15.6. 
Clinical Trial Site Monitoring .......................................................................................................... 31 
15.7. 
Reporting of Serious Adverse Events ............................................................................................. 31 
15.8. 
Withdrawal and Medication Discontinuation ................................................................................ 32 
15.9. 
Medical Monitors and Independent Safety Monitor ..................................................................... 32 
16. Statistical Analysis .................................................................................................................33 
16.1. 
Power Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 33 
16.2. 
Outcome Analyses .......................................................................................................................... 33 
16.3. 
Multiple Comparisons .................................................................................................................... 34 
16.4. 
Missing Data ................................................................................................................................... 34 
16.5. 
Interim Data Analysis and Safety Analysis ...................................................................................... 35 
 
References ..................................................................................................................................... 35 
 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 4 
 
1. 
ABOUT THIS PROTOCOL 
 
The purpose of this Protocol is to establish the framework for the Vit-D Kids Asthma Study, including 
defining the hypothesis, aims, and outcome measures; identifying members of the research team; 
describing potential risks and discomforts associated with participation and the importance of informed 
consent; outlining a system for safety monitoring, including tracking adverse events; and specifying a 
model for statistical analysis.  
 
Additions, deletions and other modifications will be made by the Data Coordinating Center (DCC), in 
consultation with the PI and co-PIs. The expectation is that study personnel will maintain electronic and 
hard copies, for quick and easy reference. 
 
2. BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE 
 
Asthma is a major public health problem in the United States1 and worldwide2. Severe disease 
exacerbations account for the majority of costs attributable to asthma in the United States3. 
  
Vitamin D is an essential nutrient with significant immuno-modulatory effects4,5. The observation that 
vitamin D deficiency and asthma share risk factors such as urban residence6,7, obesity8,9, and African 
American ethnicity10,11 has generated significant interest in exploring a link between these two 
conditions (recently reviewed in detail by Celedón and colleagues12). 
 
Results of experimental studies and genetic association studies of the vitamin D receptor (VDR)12-14 have 
motivated observational studies of vitamin D and asthma in humans. These observational studies have 
differed in study design, sample size, and assessment of vitamin D status, which may explain their 
seemingly conflicting findings12. Although there is insufficient evidence of a causal association between 
vitamin D status and asthma per se, reports of an inverse association between maternal intake of 
vitamin D during pregnancy (or cord blood vitamin D levels) and childhood wheeze15-18 have motivated 
ongoing clinical trials of vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy for primary prevention of asthma 
in the U.S. and Denmark12. 
 
In addition to a potential role in the primary prevention of asthma, there is considerable interest in 
assessing whether vitamin D protects against or reduces asthma morbidity. We found that vitamin D 
insufficiency or deficiency (defined as a 25[OH]D level <30 ng/ml (75 nmol/L)) was present in 175 (28%) 
of 616 children with asthma in Costa Rica19, in whom serum vitamin D level was inversely associated 
with total IgE, eosinophil count, hospitalizations for asthma, use of anti-inflammatory medications and 
airway hyper-responsiveness19. To follow up on those results, Brehm et al. conducted a longitudinal 
study of serum vitamin D and severe asthma exacerbations (defined as at least one hospitalization or 
visit to the Emergency Department for asthma) in 1,024 North American children with mild to moderate 
persistent asthma 20.  In that study, vitamin D insufficiency or deficiency (a 25[OH]D level < 30 ng/ml (75 
nmol/L)) at baseline was associated with increased risk of severe asthma exacerbations during four 
years of follow-up. The magnitude of the observed association was greater in children who did not 
receive inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and who had vitamin D insufficiency than in children who received 
ICS but had vitamin D insufficiency or in those who did not receive ICS but had sufficient levels of 
vitamin D. This finding and others12  suggest that vitamin D enhances steroid responsiveness. 
Further evidence that vitamin D may protect against severe exacerbations is given by two small trials in 
children and the VIDA trial in adults. A 6-month trial of vitamin D3 (500 IU/day) as adjuvant to ICS in 48 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 5 
 
Polish children with newly diagnosed asthma21 found no difference in 25(OH)D level between treatment 
groups. However, children in the intervention arm were less likely to have 25(OH) D level that decreased 
during the trial, and there were fewer children with an “exacerbation” in the vitamin D (4, 17%) than in 
the placebo (11, 46%) arm (P<0.05). A 6-month trial of vitamin D (2,000 IU/day) was conducted in 100 
Indian children aged 5-13 years with moderate/severe asthma: 82 completed follow up22. At the 6-
month visit, children in the intervention arm had a lower disease severity and fewer “exacerbations” (14 
or 28% vs. 30 or 60%, P=0.01), and lower ICS requirements than those in the placebo arm22. These trials 
are inconclusive because of: inclusion of children with normal/unknown vitamin D level21,22; no data on 
treatment22 or adherence21,22; no21/unknown22 occurrence of severe exacerbations, and low vitamin D 
dose21. 
 
The six-month VIDA trial of vitamin D (100,000 IU, followed by 4,000 IU/day) to prevent treatment 
failure in 408 adults with symptomatic persistent asthma (FEV1 ≥50% of predicted) on ICS and vitamin D 
insufficiency reported no effect on the primary outcome (treatment failure)23. However, there was a 
37% reduction in the overall exacerbation rate (0.26 person/yr) in the vitamin D arm compared with the 
placebo (0.40 person/yr) arm (95% CI for HR=0.39-1.01, P=0.05). Moreover, when the 157 vitamin D3-
treated subjects who achieved a 25(OH)D ≥30 ng/ml (75 nmol/L) (78% of 201 subjects in the 
intervention arm) were compared to 207 subjects on placebo, the risk of first exacerbation was 43% 
lower in the vitamin D (11%) than in the placebo (19%) arm (95% CI for HR=0.33-0.99, P=0.05). 
Compared with subjects on placebo, those who achieved vitamin D sufficiency had overall rates that 
were also 40% and 50% lower for treatment failure (95% CI=0.4-0.9, P=0.03) and exacerbations (95% CI 
=0.3-0.8, P=0.01), respectively. Of note, the rate of increment in 25(OH)D from baseline to 12 weeks was 
associated with a reduction in the overall rates of treatment failure and exacerbations, emphasizing the 
need to achieve rapid correction of vitamin D insufficiency in future trials, such as the one proposed. 
Among all subjects, those on vitamin D required an overall lower dose of budesonide for asthma control 
(by 14.9 µg/day) than those on placebo (Bonferroni-corrected P =0.03).  Given negative results for the 
primary outcome (treatment failure) and secondary outcomes such as lung function, VIDA is 
inconclusive. The 6-month VIDA trial was likely too short to adequately examine severe exacerbations, 
and the time needed to achieve sufficiency further accentuated this. Moreover, adults may have airway 
remodeling (reducing anti-inflammatory effects of vitamin D), and severe exacerbations were not 
defined by current standards. Further studies (particularly in children) are needed. 
 
3. STUDY DESIGN 
 
This is a 48-week randomized, double-masked, controlled trial of vitamin D3 (4,000 IU/day) to prevent 
severe asthma exacerbations in 400 high-risk children (aged 6 to 16 years) who have vitamin D 
insufficiency (serum 25(OH)D <30 ng/ml (75 nmol/L)) and are well-controlled on low-dose ICS at the end 
of a run-in period. After stratification by race/ethnicity and study site, using a permuted-blocked 
strategy, participants will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either 4,000 IU/day of vitamin D3 or placebo 
and then monitored, through clinic visits and phone calls. Participants will be recruited starting February 
2016, and all randomized participants will be followed for 48 weeks. Based on our randomization goals, 
the final children will be randomized by September 2019, and will complete their last visit in early 
September 2020.  
 
 
 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 6 
 
3.1. Hypothesis and Specific Aims 
 
We hypothesize that vitamin D supplementation reduces the incidence of severe asthma exacerbations 
in high-risk (so defined due to a recent exacerbation) children aged 6-16 years with vitamin D 
insufficiency. We further hypothesize that this protective effect results from reducing the severity of 
viral infections and enhanced response to ICS. 
 
The primary specific aim is to determine whether high-dose vitamin D3 supplementation (4,000 IU/day) 
is superior to placebo in preventing severe asthma exacerbations in high-risk school-aged children who 
have vitamin D insufficiency and who are on ICS for mild to moderate persistent asthma. 
 
The secondary specific aims are to determine whether, among high-risk school-age children with vitamin 
D insufficiency, vitamin D3 supplementation of 4000 IU/day is superior to placebo in: 
• 
Preventing severe asthma exacerbations resulting from viral infections 
• 
Reducing the daily dose of ICS, as well as the average cumulative dose of ICS, by the end of the 
trial 
 
3.2. Outcome Measures 
 
The primary outcome of the proposed trial will be severe asthma exacerbations, which will be defined 
following the most recent American Thoracic Society (ATS)/European Respiratory Society (ERS) 
guidelines24, as the occurrence of either: 
1) Use of systemic corticosteroids (tablets, suspension, or injection), or an increase from a stable 
maintenance dose, for at least 3 days; OR 
2) A hospitalization or ER visit because of asthma, requiring systemic corticosteroids.  
 
Secondary outcome measures are: 
1) Severe asthma exacerbations resulting from viral infections 
2) Reduction in ICS dose at visit 6 
3) Average cumulative dose of ICS at the end of the trial 
 
3.3. Questionnaires 
Eight questionnaires will be administered to the parents of participating children throughout the study 
(see Figure 1): 1) respiratory/general health (slightly modified from one used by the Collaborative Study 
of the Genetics of Asthma  and used in the Genetics of Asthma in Costa Rica Study [GACRS]25), 2) 
household characteristics (modified from ISAAC26 and previously used in the GACRS), 3) the subset of 
questions related to asthma therapy from the pediatric version of the asthma therapy assessment 
questionnaire (ATAQ)27, 4) the child or original version of the Asthma Control Test®  (C-ACT28 or ACT29) 
based on age, 5) the pediatric version of the  Asthma Quality of Life® (PAQLQ)30 and 6) the Checklist of 
Children Distress Symptoms (CCDS)31. Data obtained from these questionnaires will include a detailed 
history of asthma (e.g., age of onset of symptoms, hospitalizations, visits to the ED or urgent care, 
medication use, symptom triggers), asthma severity and control, past medical history (including 
gastroesophageal reflux and allergic diseases [allergic rhinitis, sinusitis, or eczema]), family history of 
asthma and allergies, and immunotherapy. In addition, data will be obtained on indicators of 
socioeconomic status (household income, employment status, marital status, paternal and maternal 
education), pet exposure (past and current), and household characteristics. 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 7 
 
 
3.4. ANTHROPOMETRY  
We will measure weight, height, and calculate BMI in all participants at visits 2 and 9. We will measure 
waist and hip circumferences according to standardized protocols, and we will assess body composition 
using bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA). BIA is a method that measures the body’s resistance and 
reactance and allows the calculation of total body water, total body fat, and total lean mass. 
4. FUNDING/SUPPORT 
 
This study is funded by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health 
((NIH 1U01HL119952-01A1). 
 
5. STUDY ORGANIZATION AND LEADERSHIP 
5.1. Study Principal Investigators 
 
The study’s principal investigators (PIs) are Juan Carlos Celedón, MD, DrPH and Dr. Stephen 
Wisniewski, PhD. Dr. Celedón is Chief of Pediatric Pulmonology, Allergy and Immunology, and the Niels 
K. Jerne Professor of Pediatrics at the University of Pittsburgh. A physician-scientist, Dr. Celedón is 
involved in research, clinical activities and mentoring at Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh and the 
University of Pittsburgh. He has a broad background in respiratory and genetic epidemiology, and has 
had formal education and training in genetics and epidemiology, along with significant administrative 
research experience. He laid the groundwork for the Vit-D Kids Asthma Study by leading or participating 
in other NIH-funded studies of childhood asthma; publishing on observational studies linking vitamin D 
insufficiency and severe asthma exacerbations, comprehensive reviews on vitamin D and asthma, and 
severe asthma exacerbations in children; conducting a pilot study to determine optimal dosing of 
vitamin D to correct vitamin D insufficiency in children with asthma; and establishing several 
multidisciplinary and multicenter research collaborations. 
 
Dr. Wisniewski a Professor of Epidemiology, Associate Vice-Provost for Planning, and Advisor to the 
Dean of the Graduate School of Public Health for special projects, all at the University of Pittsburgh. In 
the context of this study, he is the Co-Director of the Epidemiology Data Center (EDC) at the University 
of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, and the Principal Investigator and Director of the Data 
Coordinating Center. 
 
5.2. Clinical Coordinating Center 
The study will be conducted at four clinical centers in Pittsburgh, Saint Louis, Cleveland and Boston 
under the auspices of a Clinical Coordinating Center (CCC) chaired by Dr. Celedón, PI of the Pittsburgh 
site. The CCC will arrange for bi-weekly conference calls including the PIs (rotating attendance on a 
weekly basis, so that each PI attends a call every eight weeks) and study coordinators at all sites, to 
discuss recruitment and protocol issues. The CCC will also serve as the liaison to the sites’ IRBs, 
preparing and submitting applications and modifications and addressing concerns, and ensure 
compliance with HIPAA regulations. 
 
5.3. Data Coordinating Center 
 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 8 
 
The Epidemiology Data Center (EDC) of the Graduate School of Public Health at the U. of Pittsburgh, will 
serve as the Data Coordinating Center (DCC). Under the direction of Dr. Stephen Wisniewski, co-director 
of the EDC, the DCC will develop and maintain systems for data management, study monitoring, quality 
control, and data analysis. In addition, the DCC will handle regulatory and administrative functions, 
including scheduling meetings, conference calls, and web-conferences for team members; identify 
milestones; prepare reports for the DSMB, NHLBI, and other agencies; draft and update this protocol, 
train and certify study personnel; coordinate the publications process; and facilitate internal and 
external communication by creating and maintaining a public website, as well as a password-protected 
intranet, where study-related data and other information can be shared among members of the team. 
 
Quality control will begin with a two-day workshop to be conducted jointly by the CCC and DCC, at 
which study protocols will be distributed and carefully explained to the field staff. Bi-weekly conference 
calls with the DCC and the PIs/coordinators of the CCC sites will be scheduled to address any concerns 
regarding collection and quality of data.  
 
Throughout the duration of the study, the DCC will conduct biannual site visits to monitor the quality of 
data collection processes, conduct Source Document Verification; assure the reporting and 
documentation of adverse events, and assess security of confidential records and informed consent 
procedures. Site visit reports will be sent to the PI and included in DSMB reports. In addition, during 
these contacts, the monitor will: check and assess the progress of the study; review study data 
collected; identify any issues and address their resolution; and review the storage of samples. This will 
be done in order to verify that data are authentic, accurate, and complete, the safety and rights of 
subjects are being protected, and that the study is being conducted in accordance with the currently 
approved protocol (and any amendments) and all applicable regulatory requirements. 
 
5.4. Site Principal Investigators and Responsibilities 
 
In addition to heading up the Vit-D Kids Asthma Study, Dr. Celedón is the PI for the Pittsburgh site. 
 
The PI for the Washington University (U.) at Saint Louis (St. Louis) site is Leonard Bacharier, MD. Dr. 
Bacharier is the Donald B. Strominger Professor of Pediatrics, Clinical Director of the Division of Pediatric 
Allergy, Immunology & Pulmonary Medicine, and Unit Co-Leader of the Pediatric Patient Oriented 
Research Unit at Washington U. in St. Louis. Dr. Bacharier has been an active investigator in several NIH-
funded asthma programs, including the NHLBI’s Childhood Asthma Management Program (CAMP) and 
Childhood Asthma Research and Education (CARE) Network programs. He is currently Co-Principal 
Investigator (PI) of the NHLBI’s AsthmaNet St. Louis site, PI of the St. Louis site of the NIAID’s Inner City 
Asthma Consortium, and PI for the CCC of the NHLBI’s Vitamin D Antenatal Reduction Trial.  His major 
research interest is asthma in early life, including factors related to disease inception along with novel 
therapeutic strategies for the disorder. This has resulted in over 115 scientific articles and 17 book 
chapters. 
 
The PI of the Boston Children’s Hospital (Boston) site is Wanda Phipatanakul, MD, MS, a  Professor of 
Pediatrics at Harvard Medical School. Dr. Phipatanakul has a long-standing history of recruiting for 
pediatric asthma clinical trials of all ages. Her databases include thousands of eligible young children 
interested in studies, including children attending the BCH Allergy/Asthma Clinic for allergy skin testing. 
Dr. Phipatanakul has had success recruiting study participants from this Asthma/Allergy Clinic, which 
during this past year saw nearly 5,000 children with asthma. Her Center has always met or exceeded 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 9 
 
recruitment goals in pediatric clinical trials, such as the NHLBI-funded AsthmaNet. Dr. Phipatanakul has 
authored or co-authored over 130 peer-reviewed manuscripts on asthma and allergies. 
 
The PI of the Rainbow Babies and Children’s Hospital (Cleveland) site is Kristie Ross, MD, MS, an 
Assistant Professor of Pediatrics at Case Western Reserve University and the Clinical Director of the 
Division of Pediatric Pulmonary Medicine, Allergy and Immunology, and Sleep Medicine at Rainbow 
Babies and Children’s Hospital.  Dr. Ross has successfully served as an investigator in the NIH funded 
AsthmaNet asthma clinical trials network, the Inner City Asthma Consortium, the Severe Asthma 
Research Program, and many industry sponsored clinical trials in asthma, cystic fibrosis, and sleep 
medicine.  She currently serves as the co-lead of the Clinical Studies Core of a translational program 
project grant in airway biology, overseeing clinical protocol development and implementation of all 
clinical studies across the three projects.  
 
The PI of the Cincinnati Children’s Hospital and Medical Center (CCHMC) site is Theresa Guilbert, MD, 
MS, a Professor of Pediatrics at the University of Cincinnati and the Associate Director of the Asthma 
Center at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital. Dr. Guilbert has 18 years of experience in clinical and 
epidemiologic research. Dr. Guilbert was a key Co-Investigator in the NHLBI-funded AsthmaNet and 
Severe Asthma Research Program networks, where she served in the steering committees. She is 
currently the site PI for a multi-center NIH-funded trial to determine if IgE monoclonal antibody biologic 
therapy will prevent asthma development in preschool-aged children.  
The PI of the National Jewish Health (Denver) site is Ronina Covar, MD, an Associate Professor of 
Pediatrics at the University of Colorado. Dr. Covar has ample experience as a Co-Investigator and site 
Principal Investigator in NIH-funded clinical trials. She served as the Medical Director and Co-Investigator 
for the Denver site of the Childhood Asthma Management Program (CAMP, from 1999 to 2014) and the 
Childhood Asthma Research Education network (CARE, from 2004 to 2012), and as a Co-Investigator for 
the Denver site of AsthmaNet (2010-2018).  
As PIs of the St. Louis, Boston, Cleveland, Cincinnati, and Denver sites, Drs. Bacharier, Phipatanakul, 
Ross, Guilbert, and Covar will supervise training of study personnel, data collection, quality control of 
the data collected, transition of study personnel, human subjects protection (including communications 
with the IRB, the DCC, the FDA and the NHLBI staff, as appropriate), and communications with the DCC.  
They will participate in biweekly phone calls of the Steering Committee for the trial, weekly meetings of 
each site for the CCC, and (on a rotating basis with the PIs at the other sites) the bi-weekly conference 
calls of the coordinators for the study sites. 
 
Please note that the study previously had another study site at the University of California in San 
Francisco (UCSF), led by Dr. Michael Cabana. The UCSF study site was terminated from conducting new 
randomizations in March of 2017, due to insufficient subject recruitment. Six participants had been 
randomized at UCSF prior to termination, and those participants completed the trial in August of 2017.  
 
5.5. Co-Investigators 
 
Erick Forno, MD, MPH, Assistant Professor in Pediatrics and Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, was a 
key member of the team that designed and implemented the pilot study that provided some of the 
preliminary data for the Vit-D Kids Asthma Study. His research career has focused primarily on the 
epidemiology of asthma, with a specific interest in the etiology of severe asthma exacerbations. Dr. 
Forno will assist Dr. Celedón in training study personnel, supervising data collection and quality control 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 10 
 
of the data collected, human subjects protection (including communications with the IRB, the DCC, the 
FDA and the NHLBI staff, as appropriate), and communications with the DCC.  He will participate in 
biweekly phone calls of the Steering Committee for the trial, weekly meetings of the Pittsburgh site for 
the CCC, and monthly meetings with the DCC. 
 
Nadia Boutaoui, PhD, Research Assistant Professor in Pediatrics, University of Pittsburgh and Laboratory 
Director, Division of Pulmonary Medicine, Allergy and Immunology, Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh, is a 
molecular biologist/geneticist with an interest in understanding the effect of genetic, epigenetic and 
environmental exposures on human health, particularly on respiratory diseases such as asthma. She has 
extensive technical experience in molecular biology, genetics and epigenetics (including DNA/RNA 
extraction, genotyping, gene expression studies and pyrosequencing), and in measuring intermediate 
phenotypes of asthma, such as serum total and allergen-specific IgE.  She will supervise shipment and 
processing of all blood samples sent from the study sites to the Pittsburgh site, as well as processing of 
all samples (blood and nasal epithelium) collected at the Pittsburgh site. 
 
5.6. Consultants 
 
Augusto A. Litonjua, MD, MPH, Associate Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Associate 
Physician, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and Associate in Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical 
Center, is the Co-PI of the Vitamin D Antenatal Asthma Reduction Trial (VDAART) and an expert in 
asthma epidemiology, with a particular focus on the role of vitamin D in the pathogenesis of asthma. 
 
6. STUDY POPULATION 
 
Recruitment will be carried out by clinical centers in Pittsburgh, Cleveland, St. Louis and Boston. 
 
6.1. Inclusion Criteria 
 
Inclusion criteria to be eligible for run-in: 
• 
6 to 16 years old 
• 
Physician-diagnosed asthma for at least one year 
• 
At least one severe asthma exacerbation in the previous year1 
• 
Use of asthma medications (daily controller medication [ICS or leukotriene inhibitor] or inhaled 
β2-agonist [at least three days per week]) for at least six months in the previous year2 
• 
Vitamin D insufficiency (i.e., serum vitamin D (25(OH)D level <30 ng/ml (75 nmol/L)) 
• 
FEV1 ≥70 % of predicted 
 
 
                                                 
1  Use of systemic corticosteroids (tablets, suspension, or injection), or an increase from a stable maintenance 
dose, for at least 3 days; OR a hospitalization or ER visit because of asthma, requiring systemic corticosteroids. 
In other words, most asthma exacerbations treated with oral or IV steroids would be considered severe. 
2  For at least 6 months in previous year (not necessarily consecutive), used an Asthma controller (inhaled 
corticosteroid or leukotriene inhibitor) on a daily basis OR an inhaled β2-agonist at least three days per week. 
Common controller medications: Flovent (fluticasone), Pulmicort (budesonide), Advair, Asmanex 
(mometasone), Symbicort, Qvar (beclamethasone), Singulair (montelukast). Common inhaled β2-agonists: 
albuterol (Ventolin, ProAir, Proventil), Xopenex. 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 11 
 
• 
Positive BDR (i.e., increase in FEV1 ≥8% from baseline after inhaled short acting beta agonist 
[recently shown to be a better predictor of asthma in school-aged children than a cutoff of 
12%32]) or increased airway responsiveness to methacholine (PC20 ≤8 mg/ml if not on ICS or PC20 
≤16 mg/ml if on ICS) 
• 
Study protocol (i.e., age-appropriate dose of Flovent and no other asthma controller 
medications) approved by the child’s regular doctor 
• 
Parental consent and child’s assent to participate in the study. 
 
Additional inclusion criteria applied after the run-in period, to be eligible for randomization: 
• 
Adherence with ICS and study medication (≥75% use) during the run-in period 
• 
Willingness to be randomized and complete study 
 
6.2. Exclusion Criteria 
 
Exclusion criteria for entering the run-in period: 
• 
Serum calcium >10.8 mg/dl 
• 
Serum 25(OH) D <14 ng/ml (35 nmol/L)3 
• 
Chronic respiratory disorder other than asthma4 
• 
Severe asthma5 
• 
Hepatic/renal disease, rickets, malabsorption, or other diseases that would affect vitamin D 
metabolism 
• 
Current smoking, or former smoking if ≥5 pack-years 
• 
Immune deficiency, cleft palate (not including the occult submucosal variant) or Down’s 
syndrome6 
• 
Treatment with anticonvulsants or ≥1,000 IU/day of vitamin D2 or D3 
• 
Chronic oral corticosteroid therapy7 
• 
Inability to perform acceptable spirometry (defined as meeting Grade A, B, or C level) 
• 
Use of investigational therapies or participation in trials 30 days before or during the study8 
• 
Participant is currently breast feeding an infant 
• 
Pregnancy 
• 
Weight less than 10 kg  
• 
Plans to move out of the clinical site area in the next year 
 
Additional exclusion criteria applied after the run-in period: 
• 
Any severe asthma exacerbation during the run-in period 
• 
Need for asthma medications other than ICS and p.r.n. rescue inhalers during the run-in period 
                                                 
3  Children with a vitamin D level lower than 14 ng/ml will be referred to a pediatric endocrinologist for further 
evaluation. 
4  Examples include bronchiectasis, cystic fibrosis, lung transplant, bronchopulmonary dysplasia 
5  Intubation for asthma at any time OR ≥3 hospitalizations for asthma in previous year OR ≥6 severe asthma 
exacerbations in previous year 
6  These conditions may increase the risk of respiratory infections. 
7  Steroids taken regularly used to control asthma symptoms, and not simply to treat an asthma exacerbation. 
8  Investigational therapies include drugs that are not FDA approved, and which are being studied in a clinical trial. 
A clinical trial is defined by studies that provide children with an intervention (including both drug and non-
drug). Clinical studies that do not have an intervention are allowed. 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 12 
 
 
6.3. Reconsideration for Inclusion after Run-In Period 
 
A child who had a severe asthma exacerbation during the run-in period may be eligible for inclusion in 
the study if he/she has no severe asthma exacerbations after completion of a second (new) run-in 
period. See sections 12.2 through 12.4 for discussion of re-screening criteria. 
 
6.4. Rationale for Selecting Children with a Severe Asthma Exacerbation 
Children who have had at least one severe asthma exacerbation in the prior year are at increased risk 
for subsequent severe disease exacerbations. Participants will thus be selected on the basis of having 
had a severe asthma exacerbation in the prior year.24 
7. STUDY MEDICATIONS 
 
According to the 2007 guidelines developed by the NAEPP (National Asthma Education and Prevention 
Program) Expert Panel Report 3, 176 mcg total daily dose (88 mcg twice a day) of fluticasone is an 
acceptable low dose of ICS for children aged 6-11 years, and 220 mcg total daily dose (110 mcg twice a 
day) of fluticasone is an acceptable low dose of ICS for children 12 years and older. Children who are 
currently on these age-appropriate doses will continue on this medication. Children on a different dose, 
or on a different ICS, will be switched to fluticasone, which will be dosed according to their age (88 mcg 
inhaled twice a day for children 6-11 years, and 110 mcg bid for children 12-16 years). Children who turn 
12 after randomization will continue the standard dose on which they were randomized.  
 
In the absence of moderate or severe asthma exacerbations, participants may have their dose of ICS 
reduced by 50% if the following criteria are met at visit 6 (halfway through the Trial Phase): 
• 
ACT score greater than 19 
• 
Both pre-bronchodilator FEV1 and FEV1/FVC ≥80% of predicted 
• 
Use of ≤4 puffs of a rescue inhaler per week 
• 
≤1 day per month with asthma symptoms preventing full participation in usual daily activities 
• 
Clinician’s judgment regarding adequate asthma control 
 
 
Participants who develop a moderate to severe asthma exacerbation while on a reduced dose of ICS will 
be put back on their original dose of ICS. 
 
The vitamin D3 and placebo formulations will be in gel cap form and manufactured by Pharmavite 
(Mission Hills, CA). The gel caps will be manufactured using the same practices as for the currently 
marketed drug. Since these doses of vitamin D3 are not FDA-approved for an asthma indication, this 
study is operating under an Investigational New Drug (IND) protocol, with monitoring by the FDA. 
 
Data provided to the Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) will be labeled Treatment A or B. If the 
DSMB feels that knowledge of treatment groups is necessary for safety or data quality purposes, then 
the DCC will provide a code for study groups. Treatment assignment for individual subjects will be 
revealed only in the event of a medical emergency in which unmasking could change treatment. The 
Independent Safety Monitor (ISM) may unmask treatment for a participant. Unmasked participants will 
complete any remaining protocol visits.  
 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 13 
 
7.1. Rationale for Vitamin D3 Dose and Treatment Duration 
 
The safe upper intake for vitamin D3 was set at 3,000 IU/day for children aged 4-8 years and as 4,000 
IU/day for children ≥9 years by an IOM panel in 201133. A dose of 4,000 IU/day of vitamin D3 was well 
tolerated in our pilot study, and used in studies of atopic dermatitis (NCT00789880) and maternal 
supplementation (NCT00920621). Moreover, vitamin D3 doses of 5,500 and 11,000 IU daily for 20 weeks 
were well tolerated In relatively vitamin D-replete men (mean serum 25(OH)D=28 ng/ml (70 nmol/L))34. 
The dietary reference intake (DRI) of vitamin D3 or the desired thresholds of serum 25(OH)D for non-
skeletal effects are unknown. If the anti-infective or steroid-sparing effects of vitamin D3 are dose-
dependent, using a low dose could result in a Type II error. To reduce this concern, children aged 6 to 16 
years will be randomized to receive either 4,000 IU of vitamin D3) or placebo once daily for 48 weeks. If 
our proposed intervention dose is effective, dose-response studies can then be done to determine the 
lowest effective dose. The proposed dose and duration of vitamin D3 supplementation are safe and 
would optimize vitamin D status while allowing time to accrue a sufficient number of exacerbations in 
study participants. 
 
7.2. Rationale for Placebo in the Control Arm 
To examine whether vitamin D supplementation, at a low dose of 200 IU/day, could increase vitamin D 
levels bordering 30 ng/ml (and thus lead to levels ≥30 ng/ml), we conducted a pilot trial of 24 children 
ages 6 to 14 years who had a vitamin D level <30 ng/ml, in which 8 children with vitamin D insufficiency 
received 200 IU/day of cholecalciferol for 8 weeks. Two of those children achieved a level ≥30 ng/ml at 4 
weeks, and one of these children still had a level ≥30 ng/ml at 8 weeks. Therefore, supplementation with 
doses as low as 200 IU/day could lead to a false negative result if in fact a level ≥30 ng/ml suffices to 
prevent severe asthma exacerbations, as suggested by our prior work. This provides a scientific rationale 
for using placebo in the control arm. 
Vitamin D supplementation is not indicated for children with vitamin D levels between 20 ng/ml and 29 
ng/ml, thus justifying the use of placebo in this group of participants. The 2011 IOM Panel 
recommended vitamin D supplementation for children whose vitamin D levels are known to have 
vitamin D deficiency (a vitamin D level lower than 20 ng/ml), but did not recommend routine screening 
of vitamin D levels in healthy (asymptomatic) children. Moreover, the 2016 Global Consensus 
Recommendations on Prevention and Management of Nutritional Rickets do not advise routine 
measurement of vitamin D levels in healthy school-aged children35. Hence, most U.S. children with 
vitamin D deficiency are not screened for a low vitamin D level and do not receive any treatment, since 
they are often asymptomatic (due to the complex interplay between vitamin D deficiency and calcium 
intake in maintaining serum calcium concentrations and bone integrity)35.  
 
Current evidence suggests that a vitamin D level below 12-13.6 ng/ml (30-34 mmol/L) may be the critical 
threshold at which rickets could occur, with higher risk among children in whom deficiency (particularly 
at vitamin D levels below 10 ng/ml) is sustained over time (i.e. chronic deficiency)35. We are excluding 
children with vitamin D (25(OH)D levels <14 ng/ml (35 nmol/L)) from this trial, and our pilot study and 
recently published studies suggest that the vast majority of participants will not develop severe vitamin 
D deficiency (a vitamin D level <10 ng/ml) while on placebo. Therefore, using placebo is ethically 
acceptable for children with vitamin D levels between 14 ng/ml and 19 ng/ml, as there is no current 
indication for routine screening of children for vitamin D deficiency, and thus the risk to study 
participants is minimal and no greater than that encountered in daily life by healthy community-dwelling 
children. Moreover, we will provide dietary counseling to parents of study participants, while closely 
monitoring all participants for levels <14 ng/ml (35 nmol/L), which approach severe vitamin D deficiency 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 14 
 
(25(OH)D (defined as < 10 ng/ml (25 nmol/L)) and rickets (see below).  
 
The Pediatric Endocrine Society recommends a vitamin D intake of 400 IU/day for all children 36. More 
recently, the IOM panel recommended a DRI of vitamin D3 for children aged 6-14 years of 600 IU/day33 . 
The IOM’s recommendations were endorsed by the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2012, 
superseding the 2008 recommendations.37 The average dietary intake of vitamin D3 for school-aged 
children is 400 IU/day33 (a dose used in multi- vitamins), which will prevent rickets. Parents of all 
participants enrolled in the trial will be provided with a list of foods that are rich in vitamin D, and that 
are part of a balanced diet that contains 400 IU/day of vitamin D3, at the randomization visit (v3).  
                                                                                                                                                                                           
To further ensure the safety of participating children in the placebo group, we will provide additional 
dietary counseling to the parents of participating children whose vitamin D level is less than 14 ng/ml 
(35 nmol/L) at any study visit. Should the vitamin D level of these participants remain below 14 ng/ml 
(35 nmol/L) at the next scheduled safety testing (16 weeks later), they will be removed from the study 
medication and referred to a pediatric endocrinologist for further evaluation, while also providing the 
participant’s parent or guardian with her/his vitamin D level at the time of referral. Should the vitamin D 
level of these participants be below 10 ng/ml (25 nmol/L) at any study visit, the participant will be 
removed from the study medication and referred to a pediatric endocrinologist for further evaluation, 
while also providing the participant’s parent or guardian with his/her vitamin D level at the time of 
referral.  
 
8. POTENTIAL BENEFITS 
 
The response to available controller therapy for asthma (e.g., ICS) is variable, and there is a need to 
identify new treatments that can be used (alone or together with existing therapies) to prevent severe 
asthma exacerbations. This protocol will determine whether the addition of vitamin D to ICS reduces the 
risk of severe asthma exacerbations in children with asthma. If vitamin D supplementation were found 
to be effective, there would be important benefits for pediatric patients with asthma. Because we 
estimate the risks associated with this protocol to be low, we judge the potential benefit/risk ratio 
associated with this work to be highly favorable. 
 
Participating children and their parents will be provided with background information regarding asthma. 
The results of tests conducted in participating children will be communicated to their primary care 
physicians (with parental approval). The child’s parent or legal guardian will receive a letter with the 
research vitamin D level results at the end of the study or, if applicable, at the time of participant 
withdrawal from the study.  
 
 
9. RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS 
 
9.1. Procedures 
 
1) Phlebotomy: the potential risks of venipuncture are minimal and include hematoma at the skin site, 
minimal pain of venous puncture, and, rarely, fainting. The approximate amount of blood drawn at 
each visit is shown below. Children weighing less than 10 kg will not be eligible for this study. 
Visit number 
Specimens 
Total blood (approximate) 
Visit 1 (week -5) 
Serum vitamin D + calcium 
3 ml 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 15 
 
Visit 2 (week -4) 
None 
0 ml 
Visit 3 (week 0) 
Serum for biobanking, IgE (total 
and allergen specific), and 
vitamin D (10 ml) 
CBC with differential (4 ml) 
Blood DNA (10 ml)  
28 ml 
Visit 4 (week 8) 
None 
0 ml 
Visit 5 (week 16) 
Serum vitamin D (3 ml) 
3 ml 
Visit 6 (week 24) 
None 
0 ml 
Visit 7 (week 32) 
Serum vitamin D (3 ml) 
3 ml 
Visit 8 (week 40) 
None 
0 ml 
Visit 9 (week 48) 
Serum for biobanking, IgE (total 
and allergen specific), and 
vitamin D (10 ml) 
CBC with differential (4 ml) 
Blood DNA (10 ml) 
28 ml 
Unscheduled visit for elevated 
UCa/UCr 
Serum calcium 
3 ml 
 
2) Spirometry: the risks of spirometry are minimal and include lightheadedness from repeated 
spirometric maneuvers (blows) and (rarely) precipitation of bronchospasm, which would be treated 
by appropriate on-site medical and nursing personnel. Inhalation of either albuterol or levalbuterol 
(Xopenex) (to assess bronchodilator responsiveness) can cause tachycardia and tremulousness, 
which are short-lived and non-life threatening. We will use Xopenex for children who use this as 
their rescue inhaler. Other children will receive albuterol. 
 
3) Methacholine challenge testing (MCT): the major risk of MCT is severe bronchospasm. As a 
precaution, participants will not undergo MCT if their FEV1 is <70% of predicted. A trained technician 
will perform all MCT, and medications and equipment will be available at the study site to treat any 
major episodes of bronchospasm. Of note, we have not had any ED visit or hospitalization related to 
MCT in over 2,000 procedures conducted in children of school age for other studies of asthma, while 
using this protocol. More commonly, MCT can sometimes be associated with symptoms, including 
feeling of chest tightness, cough, or wheezing, which are of very short duration and can be promptly 
reversed or relieved by the bronchodilator (e.g. albuterol) administered at the end of the test. 
 
4) Questionnaire administration: the only possible risk in questionnaire administration involves the 
social-psychological risk resulting from inadvertent disclosure of medical history information. To 
minimize this risk, questionnaires will be administered electronically whenever possible, using a 
secure data management system created by the DCC. 
 
5) Genetic testing: Information about a child´s participation and results from the study will not be 
placed in the participant´s medical records. Participants will not be informed about any individual 
genetic data to be obtained from this study.  
 
6) Measurement of serum vitamin D and calcium, and urine collection for measurement of calcium/ 
creatinine ratio: There are no known risks. 
 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 16 
 
7) Nasal samples: The is a small risk of minor bleeding with nasal scrapings. We use a small (1/2 
teaspoon) amount of lidocaine spray (not an injection) in each nostril to reduce discomfort. 
Temporary redness, stinging, and swelling may occur at the application site.  
 
8) Break of confidentiality (overall risk): participant data will be identified by a unique study number 
assigned to each child, and entered into the Data Management System through a password-
protected website.  
 
9) Anthropometry: there are no known risks. 
 
9.2. Study Intervention: Vitamin D 
 
The current (2011) dietary reference intake (DRI) of vitamin D (600 IU/day) in children and adolescents is 
intended to promote skeletal health.33 The recommended dietary allowance of vitamin D3 or the desired 
thresholds of serum 25(OH)D for maximizing non-skeletal (e.g., immune-regulatory, anti-infective) 
effects of vitamin D are unknown. Should non-skeletal benefits of vitamin D3 be dose-dependent, using 
an insufficient dose could result in a Type II error. This is particularly relevant to vitamin D levels shown 
to be potentially relevant to severe asthma exacerbations, which are higher (≥30 ng/ml (75 nmol/L) in 
studies conducted by our group, see Background) than the minimal vitamin D level accepted for 
adequate musculoskeletal health (≥20 ng/ml (50 nmol/L)). 
 
The 2011 guidelines from the Institute of Medicine state that 3,000 IU/day is the highest intake (upper 
limit) of vitamin D3 that children aged 4 to 8 years can consume without adverse effects such as 
hypercalcemia.33 For children older than 8 years, the current upper limit of vitamin D intake is 4,000 
IU/day. In a randomized one-year trial of weekly placebo vs. daily vitamin D3 in 340 Lebanese children 
aged 10 to 17 years, daily intake of 2,000 IU of vitamin D3 was well-tolerated and increased serum 
25(OH)D levels from 15 ± 7 ng/mL to 36 ± 22 ng/mL (37 ± 17 nmol/L to 90 ± 55 nmol/L).38 A dose of 
2,000 IU/day of vitamin D3 was also safely used in a six-week study of infants and toddlers with 
hypovitaminosis.39 A dose of 4,000 IU/day of vitamin D3 has been used in studies of allergic diseases 
such as atopic dermatitis (NCT00789880, available from: www.clinicaltrials.gov) and in an ongoing study 
of vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy (NCT00920621, available from: www.clinicaltrials.gov). 
Pooled data from vitamin D trials in adults have shown that doses of vitamin D up to 10,000 IU/day are 
safe.40 In healthy men with mean serum 25(OH) D approaching an adequate level (28 ng/ml (70 
nmol/L)), vitamin D supplementation with 5,500 IU/day and 11,000 IU/daily for 20 weeks was well 
tolerated.34 
 
We propose to test a high but safe dose of vitamin D3 for this trial. If our proposed dose is beneficial, 
then subsequent dose-response studies can be considered to determine the lowest effective dose. Since 
the proposed dose of vitamin D3 (4,000 IU/day) is not FDA approved, this study is operating under an 
Investigatonal New Drug (IND) protocol, with monitoring by the FDA. 
 
Urinary calcium to creatinine (UCa/UCreat) ratios will be measured periodically for early detection of 
vitamin D toxicity. While others have found a dose of 4,000 IU/day vitamin D to be safe and effective at 
raising 25(OH)D levels, we will monitor UCa/UCreat ratios, as this is the earliest abnormality detected and 
most non-invasive way of monitoring for hypervitaminosis D41.  
 
Parents of participants will be given a flyer with instructions to have the child drink an adequate amount 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 17 
 
of fluids on the day prior to collection of the urine sample (i.e. 5-8 glasses of water, depending on the 
child’s age and gender). Given that different thresholds for a “normal” UCa/UCreat have been reported 
among school-aged children42-45, we chose the UCa/UCreat ratio at or below the 95th percentile for the first 
68 participants randomized into the study as the upper limit of “normal” values (0.26 mg/mg). If an 
elevation of the UCa/UCreat (≥0.27 mg/mg) is detected, parents of study participants will be told to stop 
the study medication and go to the Clinical Center as soon as possible (ideally, the following day) for a 
repeat measurement of UCa/UCreat. To exclude dehydration as a potential cause of the abnormal 
UCa/UCreat, parents of participants will be instructed to have the child drink at least two glasses of water 
or a non-caffeinated beverage prior to providing their urine sample at the Clinical Center. If the repeat 
UCa/UCreat is normal, the participant will be called and asked to restart the study medication.  
 
As an additional safety measure, we measure vitamin D levels at the same time as UCa/UCr ratios. If the 
vitamin D level is >100 ng/ml (250 nmol/L), or if the second UCa/UCreat is elevated, a serum calcium will be 
measured in the same sample as that used for the vitamin D measurement. If the serum calcium is 
normal, the participant will continue the study medication. If the serum calcium is >10.8 mg/dl, the 
participant will be withdrawn from study treatment.  
 
Vitamin D levels >150 ng/ml (374 nmol/L) will be considered toxic, regardless of other measurements.46 
Participants above this level will stop the study medication. 
 
Children in whom the study medication needs to be discontinued because any of the reasons stated 
above (i.e. hypercalcemia or a vitamin D level >150 ng/ml) will be referred to a pediatric endocrinologist 
or a pediatric nephrologist within 24 hours, and will remain in the study for follow-up visits. 
 
9.3. Study Intervention: Placebo 
There is a risk that vitamin D deficient participants will not get enough vitamin D. The average dietary 
intake of vitamin D3 for school-aged children is 400 IU/day33 (a dose used in multi- vitamins), which will 
prevent rickets. Parents of all participants enrolled in the trial will be provided with a list of foods that 
are rich in vitamin D, and that are part of a balanced diet that contains 400 IU/day of vitamin D3. Thus, 
we will encourage dietary intake of at least 400 IU/day for all participants. 
 
Children with very low vitamin D levels (<14 ng/ml (35 nmol/L)) will not be allowed to participate in this 
study (see above). We will be monitoring vitamin D levels throughout the study. To further ensure the 
safety of participants in the placebo group, additional dietary counseling will be provided to parents of 
participating children whose vitamin D level is less than 14 ng/ml (35 nmol/L) at any study visit. If the 
vitamin D level of these children remains below 14 ng/ml (35 nmol/L) at the next safety testing (e.g. 
their serum 25(OH) is 14 ng/ml or 35 nmol/L on two consecutive measurements), such children will be 
removed from the study medication and referred to a pediatric endocrinologist for further evaluation.  
 
Should the vitamin D level of a participant be below 10 ng/ml (25 nmol/L) at any study visit, the 
participant will be referred to a pediatric endocrinologist for further evaluation, while also providing the 
participant’s parent or guardian with his/her vitamin D level at the time of referral. Due to intention to 
treat principles, participants who are removed from the study medication due to a low vitamin D level or 
rickets will still be followed for the remainder of the study visits.  
 
All children whose vitamin D level is below 20 ng/ml (49.9 nmol/L)) at the end of the clinical trial will be 
referred to their pediatrician (if their level is between 14 ng/ml and 19 ng/ml) or a pediatric 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 18 
 
endocrinologist (if their level is below 14 ng/ml) for further evaluation. 
                                                                                                                                                                                                       
If a participant meets criteria for referral to a pediatrician or a pediatric endocrinologist (as outlined 
above) but decides to withdraw from the study or is lost to follow up, we will still conduct such referral 
and provide the participant’s parent or caretaker with his/her vitamin D level at the time of referral. 
Should the participant move to another city, we would still contact the participant’s parent or guardian 
by phone and mail, both to provide them with the child’s vitamin D level and to recommend that the 
child be referred to a pediatrician or a pediatric endocrinologist for treatment. In such instances, we will 
also recommend that the child’s new primary care provider contacts us at their earliest convenience. 
 
10. INFORMED CONSENT 
 
There are two informed consent forms: one for an optional prescreen and the other for the main study 
(see appendix). In both cases, consent will be sought from the parent/guardian and assent from the 
child, after a thorough discussion of potential risks and benefits (see above). 
 
11. ADVERSE EVENTS 
 
11.1. Definition and Documentation 
 
There is a risk of adverse events occurring over the course of the study. A clinical adverse event will be 
defined as any unintended worsening in the participant’s signs or symptoms, whether or not study-
related. This will include any side effect, injury, or sensitivity reaction, as well as any intercurrent event. 
A laboratory adverse event will be defined as any clinically-important worsening in a test variable which 
occurs during the study, whether or not it is drug-related. An adverse event will be deemed serious if it 
suggests a significant hazard, contraindication, side effect, or precaution. Serious adverse events will 
include any experience that is fatal, life-threatening, or permanently disabling; requires or prolongs 
inpatient hospitalization; or is a cancer, or overdose. Serious adverse events that we are specifically 
monitoring in this study include hospitalization for asthma, life-threatening asthma exacerbations 
(requiring invasive or noninvasive mechanical ventilation), hypercalcemia, hypervitaminosis D (serum 
levels >150 ng/ml (375 nmol/L)), and severe vitamin D deficiency (serum level < 10 ng/ml (25 nmol/L)). 
We will screen for adverse events at every patient contact, which occurs on a monthly basis. We also 
instruct study participants to notify us if they receive non-routine medical care. 
 
Documentation of an adverse event will be recorded on the Adverse Event Report Form and will include 
the following information: Description of the condition, dates of condition, seriousness (as defined 
above), expectedness, relatedness to study drug, event outcome, relationship of the adverse event to 
the study medication(s), and severity of the event. 
 
11.2. Adverse Events Unrelated to Asthma 
 
Adverse events due to concurrent illnesses other than asthma may be grounds for withdrawal if the 
illness is considered significant by the study investigator or if the participant is no longer able to 
effectively participate in the study. Participants experiencing minor intercurrent illnesses may continue 
in the study, provided that the nature, severity, and duration of the illness are recorded and that any 
unscheduled medications required to treat the illness are also recorded. Examples of minor intercurrent 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 19 
 
illnesses will include upper respiratory infections, urinary tract infections, and gastroenteritis. 
Medications will be allowed for treatment of these conditions in accordance with the judgment of the 
responsible study physician. 
 
11.3. Adverse Events Related to Asthma: Asthma Exacerbation  
 
Severe asthma exacerbations are the primary outcome variable for the study. Since participants have 
previously had a severe asthma exacerbation, it is anticipated that moderate to severe asthma 
exacerbations will occur. Asthma exacerbations and related complications (pneumothorax, 
pneumomediastinum, mechanical ventilation, etc.) will be documented as adverse events. Safety net 
procedures, including visits and frequent telephone contacts, should identify participants who 
experience a severe asthma exacerbation (the primary outcome) during the study. 
 
A severe asthma exacerbation (the primary endpoint of the study) during the run-in period is an 
exclusion criterion. A child may be rescreened after the exacerbation has resolved but if there is another 
severe asthma exacerbation during the new Run-In Period, he/she will not be eligible for the study. 
 
Study participants are instructed to contact their regular asthma provider in the event of worsening 
asthma symptoms. After they have received care, they are then instructed to notify study personnel of 
an asthma exacerbation. Study personnel will then determine the severity of the exacerbation based on 
the following criteria: 
 
A moderate asthma exacerbation will defined by the occurrence of at least one of the following24: 
      At home: 
1. An increase in prn rescue inhaler ≥8 puffs per 24 hours over baseline use  
                    for 48 hours. 
      At study visits: 
            1.        FEV1 <80% of baseline pre-bronchodilator value  
            2.        Use of additional inhaled ICS for asthma treatment by the study or treating  
                       physician 
            3.        An ACT or c-ACT score ≤ 19 
 
A severe asthma exacerbation will be defined as per the most recent American Thoracic Society 
(ATS)/European Respiratory Society (ERS) guidelines 24, as the occurrence of either: 
1. Use of systemic corticosteroids (tablets, suspension, or injection), or an increase from a 
stable maintenance dose, for at least 3 days; OR 
2. A hospitalization or ER visit because of asthma, requiring systemic corticosteroids.  
 
According the ATS/ERS asthma task force, the term “mild exacerbation” has no adequate definition, and 
should not be used. Any change in symptoms or medication use that does not meet the criteria for a 
moderate or severe asthma exacerbation will be considered as loss of asthma control. 
 
11.4. Treatment Algorithm for Asthma Exacerbations 
Study participants will be provided with a patient information card that contains information on how to 
manage a worsening of asthma symptoms at home (Initial Treatment, below). If these measures are not 
effective, or if the child’s parent or guardian is concerned about how to proceed, then they will be 
instructed to proceed to their asthma provider or the emergency department. The wallet card will 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 20 
 
contain recommendations for treatment of asthma exacerbations (Physician’s Office or Emergency 
Room Treatment, below). We will ask that the card be provided to the child’s asthma provider or ED 
physician at the time of treatment, but the asthma provider or ED physician may use his/her best 
judgment on how to treat the child. 
1. Initial Treatment for Loss of Asthma Control 
Patients who have increased symptoms may use up to three treatments of 2-4 puffs of their rescue inhaler 
by MDI/spacer, 20 minutes apart, for 60-90 minutes. If there is good response, they may continue their 
rescue inhaler every 4 hours for up to 24-48 hours. If the participant does not improve within 48 hours, 
they will be classified as non-responders, and treated as per Section 2 below. For safety reasons, all 
participants will also be asked to contact their usual provider of asthma care. 
If there are persistent symptoms (such as wheezing and/or coughing) without respiratory distress that 
have not improved after the first 60-90 minutes of therapy, they should contact their asthma provider 
urgently for further instruction. After communicating with their asthma provider, we ask that study 
participants also notify study personnel. 
If there is a poor response to treatment, with marked wheezing and/or respiratory distress, the patient 
should seek care in an emergency department for further management.   
2. Rescue Algorithm for Progressive Moderate or Severe Asthma Exacerbations  
Participants not responsive to the rescue algorithm will be managed according to the following rescue 
algorithms. Rescue algorithms are based on recommendations from the NAEPP Guidelines for Diagnosis 
and Management of Asthma47 and prior ACRN trials48. For severe acute episodes of asthma, treatment 
will be administered according to the best medical judgment of the treating physician. 
 
3. Physician’s Office or Emergency Room Treatment 
3a. Physician's office  
If the child needs treatment in a physician’s office, patients should initially be given up to 3 doses of 
short acting beta agonist by nebulizer (2.5mg) or MDI/spacer (2-4 puffs) every 20 min for the first 60-90 
minutes.  Depending on their response, a course of oral corticosteroids (see below) should be 
considered. 
3b. Emergency department treatment  
Patients will be assessed by history and physical examination (level of alertness, auscultation, use of 
accessory muscles, heart rate, respiratory rate, and oxygen saturation). For a moderate asthma 
exacerbation, up to 3 doses of rescue inhaler by MDI/spacer or nebulizer should be given in the 1st 
hour. Oral corticosteroids should be given if there is no immediate response. If, upon repeat 
assessment, there are still moderate symptoms, rescue inhaler can be given every 60 minutes, and 
treatment can be continued every 1-3 hours, provided there is improvement. A decision regarding 
patient disposition (home or hospital admission) should be made within 4 hours of treatment.  
If there is a good response to treatment, no respiratory distress and a normal physical exam, the patient 
can be discharged home to continue the rescue inhaler every 4 hours and complete a 3-5 day course of 
oral corticosteroids (see below). However, if there are severe symptoms on repeat assessment, with 
accessory muscle use and chest retractions, a nebulized short acting beta agonist should be given 
(hourly or continuously) with nebulized ipratropium. At this time, if there is an incomplete or poor 
response, a decision should be made for hospital admission.  
For a severe asthma exacerbation, short acting beta agonist via nebulizer or MDI should be given (every 
20 minutes or continuously for one hour) in addition to nebulized ipratropium and oral corticosteroids. 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 21 
 
If symptoms become moderate and are improved on repeat assessment, short acting beta agonists can 
be given every 60 minutes, and treatment can be continued every 1-3 hours, provided there is still 
improvement. A decision regarding patient disposition (home or hospital admission) should be made 
within 4 hours of treatment. However, if there are continued severe symptoms upon repeat assessment, 
with accessory muscle use and chest retractions,  nebulized short acting beta agonists should be given 
hourly or continuously. At this time, if there is an incomplete or poor response, a decision should be 
made for hospital admission.  
Prednisone treatment  
The recommended dose of prednisone is 2 mg/kg/day in single or 2 divided doses (a maximum of 60 mg 
per day) for 3 to 10 days. Typically a prednisone burst is given for 3-5 days.  
 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 22 
 
12. CLINICAL MANAGEMENT AND DATA COLLECTION 
 
Figure 1. Summary of Study Protocol 
Screening and Run-in 
Trial Phase 
V1 
Screening 
Target 
N=700  
V2 
V3 
Randomizati
on 
Target N=400 
V4 
V5 
V6 
V7 
V8 
V9 
Target 
N=340 
Week -5 
Week -4 
Week 0 
Week 8 
+/- 7 
days 
Week 16 
+/- 7 days 
Week 24 
+/- 7 days 
Week 32 
+/- 7 days 
Week 40 
+/- 7 
days 
Week 48 +/- 
7 days 
Informed 
consent 
(screening) 
Informed 
consent 
(trial) 
Adherence 
Adheren
ce 
Adherenc
e 
Adherenc
e 
Adherenc
e 
Adherenc
e 
Adherence 
Screening 
questionna
ire 
Dispense 
run-in study 
meds 
Dispense 
study meds 
Dispense 
study 
meds 
Dispense 
study 
meds 
Dispense 
study 
meds 
Dispense 
study 
meds 
Dispense 
study 
meds 
Physical 
examination, 
anthropomet
ry 
 
Physical 
examinatio
n, 
anthropom
etry  
Serum total 
and allergen-
specific IgE, 
nasal 
epithelial 
samples 
 
 
 
 
 
Serum total 
and allergen-
specific IgE, 
nasal 
epithelial 
samples 
 
RHQ, HHQ, 
ACT, ATAQ,  
DSEQ   
ACT, ATAQ, 
Fitzpatrick 
skin type, 
CCDS and 
PAQLQ 
s-RHQ, 
ACT and 
ATAQ 
s-RHQ, C-
ACT and 
ATAQ 
s-RHQ, 
ACT and 
ATAQ 
s-RHQ, 
ACT and 
ATAQ 
s-RHQ, 
ACT and 
ATAQ 
s-RHQ, ACT, 
ATAQ, and  
PAQLQ, 
CCDS, DSEQ 
  
Spirometry/
BD 
Spirometry/B
D  
Spiromet
ry 
Spirometr
y 
Spiromet
ry 
Spirometr
y 
Spiromet
ry 
Spirometry / 
BD  
 
Nasal blow± 
U Ca / UCrt    
 
U Ca / 
Ucrt 
 
U Ca / 
Ucrt 
 
U Ca / Ucrt  
Serum 
25(OH)D 
*MCT 
25(OH)D  
 
25(OH)D 
 
25(OH)D 
 
25(OH)D 
Serum 
calcium 
**Urine 
pregnancy 
test 
VDSEQ 
 
 
 
 
 
VDSEQ 
 
 
CBC 
 
 
 
 
 
CBC 
ICS=inhaled corticosteroids, RHQ=respiratory health questionnaire, HHQ=household questionnaire, VDSEQ=vitamin D 
intake/sun exposure questionnaire, ACT=asthma control test (child or standard), PAQLQ=pediatric asthma quality of life, 
CCDS=Checklist of Children’s Distress Symptoms, BD=bronchodilator, MCT=methacholine challenge testing (to be done 
only in children without BD response), CBC=complete blood count with differential **To be done in girls of child-bearing 
age prior to MCT, Uca/Ucrt=urinary calcium/creatinine ratio. ±For assessment of viral infections, §For RNA extraction  

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 23 
 
12.1. 
Recruitment (Visit 0) 
 
Recruitment will be conducted at several locations at each study site, which may include emergency 
departments, pulmonary clinics, and general pediatric clinics.  In addition, information will be available 
on the study website (http://www.vitdkidsasthma.pitt.edu) and ClinicalTrials.gov, to reach a broader 
population. 
 
A Referral Log (REF) will be used to track the age and gender of every child whose family is approached 
about the study or contacts one of the study sites (e.g., through TrialSpark). If the family agrees to 
further contact, a Contact Form (CON) will be completed and forwarded to the local study coordinator 
for follow up. 
 
12.2. 
Screening (Visit 1, optional) 
 
In some cases, referrals will be prescreened based on a subset of the initial inclusion and exclusion 
criteria. Prescreening will be optional. When prescreening occurs, it may be conducted by non-study 
personnel at recruitment sites. A special consent form has been developed for this purpose. If the child 
passes the prescreening, blood will be drawn to measure serum vitamin D and calcium. Results will be 
not available immediately, so the Prescreening Form (PSC) will be sent to the local study coordinator, 
along with the Contact Form (CON), if not previously sent. The study coordinator will record the blood 
test results and follow up with the family, as appropriate. 
 
If the serum calcium and vitamin D levels are consistent with inclusion/entry criteria, the child will be 
invited back for Visit 2. If the vitamin D level is too high for inclusion, but was drawn in the summer or 
fall, the child will be invited back for a re-screening in the winter, with a repeat serum vitamin D level. 
 
12.3. 
Run-In Period (Visit 2) 
 
Screening will be conducted only by trained study personnel using the Screening Form (SC), and will 
include a review of all initial and exclusion criteria, questionnaires, and spirometry. If prescreening did 
not take place, blood will be drawn at this visit, to measure serum vitamin D and calcium. In these cases, 
spirometry will be performed before the serum vitamin D and calcium levels are available. 
 
If the child’s bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) on the spirometry is negative, the child will be asked 
to return for a methacholine challenge test (MCT) within two weeks. Note that MCT will only be 
performed if the child’s serum vitamin D and calcium levels fall within the acceptable ranges for the 
study, as defined in the Protocol. 
 
Families of children who pass the screening will complete several questionnaires (see Figure 1, above) 
and then begin a month-long Run-In Period, to make sure the child is willing and able to take gel caps 
(all containing placebo) and use Flovent, as directed. If the child is not already taking an age-appropriate 
dose of Flovent and/or is taking additional asthma medications, study personnel will consult with the 
child’s regular doctor about implementing these changes, using data collected during Visit 2. Approval 
by the child’s regular doctor will be documented on the Run-In Preparation Form (RUN). 
 
Adherence to the run in medication (placebo) will be monitored using both an electronic MEMS cap 
(which records bottle openings) and gel cap count. Flovent inhalers have a built-in counter. Children and 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 24 
 
their families will be informed that adherence to the gel cap (placebo) and ICS protocols will be 
monitored. During the four weeks of the run-in period, research coordinators will perform weekly 
reminder phone calls to study participants. 
 
12.4. 
Eligibility Determination and Randomization (Visit 3) 
 
At the end of the Run-In Period, final inclusion/exclusion criteria will be reviewed, including adherence 
to the study protocol and willingness to be randomized, using the Eligibility Form (ELIG). Participants 
who do not meet adherence criteria may be offered a second chance to demonstrate adherence. 
Participants who are ineligible for other reasons (e.g. had an exacerbation during run-in) may be placed 
on a list for re-screening at a later date. 
 
If participants are found to be eligible, several questionnaires will be administered (see Figure 1, above) 
and participants will be randomized, based on a double-blinded assignment, to receive either 4,000 IU 
of Vitamin D3 or a placebo during the 48-week Trial Phase (see below).  
 
Randomization will be stratified on race/ethnicity and study site, using a permuted-blocked strategy. 
Study coordinators will execute a randomization module in the Data Management System that requires 
entry of stratification variables. The Data Management System will send an email to the site’s research 
pharmacist announcing the treatment assignment.  The pharmacist will prepare masked study 
medication bottles with vitamin D3 or placebo, labeled according to local requirements. 
 
Dr. Wisniewski will not unmask treatment assignment for interim analysis. Information will be provided 
to the Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) as Treatment A and Treatment B. Treatment 
assignment will be revealed only in the event of a medical emergency in which unmasking could change 
treatment. The Independent Safety Monitor (ISM) may unmask treatment for a subject. Unmasked 
subjects will complete any remaining protocol visits. Randomized participants will undergo blood draws 
for DNA, serum bio-banking, serum vitamin D level, and total and allergen specific IgE (B. germanica and 
D. pteronyssinus). We will collect urine for calcium and creatinine. Nasal epithelial cells will be collected 
at the Pittsburgh site only. 
 
12.5. 
Trial Phase (Visits 4-9, and follow up phone calls) 
 
The Trial Phase will last 48 weeks, with in-person visits and phone calls alternating monthly. According 
to the visit schedule (see Figure 1, above), questionnaires will be administered; blood will be collected 
for serum vitamin D levels, and urine will be collected for calcium and creatinine. Spirometry tests will 
be performed, with bronchodilator administration at visit 9. In addition, adherence with study 
medication (as determined by MEMS cap and gel cap count) will be measured, and additional study 
medication and Flovent will be dispensed. 
 
At the half-way point (Visit 6), the study team will decide whether it is appropriate to reduce the child’s 
ICS dose by 50%, per the Protocol (see section 7). 
 
Throughout the Trial Phase, if there is evidence of a moderate or severe asthma exacerbation (see 
section 11.3), the site coordinator will provide an appropriate referral (e.g., to the child’s primary care 
physician or the nearest medical emergency facility) and make arrangements to follow up again by 
phone as well as at the next scheduled visit. Children who are determined to have a severe asthma 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 25 
 
exacerbation will be seen by the research staff within 72 hours. At this acute exacerbation visit we will 
collect a nasal blow for a respiratory viral panel, perform spirometry, and administer several 
questionnaires. This asthma exacerbation visit will occur for up to three distinct severe exacerbations 
that a child has during the study. Children who have three severe asthma exacerbations will be 
withdrawn from the study drug but continue to complete study visits. 
 
12.6. 
Protocol Violations 
Protocol violations are defined as departures from accepted clinical research practices, study protocol, 
and/or Vit-D-Kids Asthma procedures that pose a risk to participant safety, adversely affect data quality 
and the integrity of the major scientific goals of the study, and/or involve a significant and repeated 
breach of participants’ privacy. Protocol violations include (but are not limited to):  
• failure to obtain informed consent appropriately  
• enrollment and/or randomization of ineligible participants 
• dispensation of study medications incorrectly or not at all  
• failure to follow the protocol safety monitoring plan  
• breaches of confidentiality resulting from lost, misplaced, or stolen study documents (e.g., a 
completed visit packet is missing)  
 
By the nature of their definition protocol violations are considered the most serious class of departure 
from the study protocol.  
 
12.7. Protocol Deviations  
Protocol deviations are defined as departures from a study protocol or Vit-D-Kids Asthma methods of 
procedure that do not pose a risk to subject safety, do not adversely affect the integrity of the major 
scientific goals of the study, and do not involve a significant and repeated breach of participant privacy. 
Protocol deviations include (but are not limited to):  
• failure to obtain appropriate source documentation  
• failure to achieve appropriate Vit-D-Kids Asthma certification prior to performing procedures  
• mistimed procedures (e.g., performing a lab test outside the window outlined in the protocol)  
• omission of protocol and/or Vit-D-Kids Asthma procedure elements that do not affect participant 
safety  
• failure to carry out study procedures in the appropriate order, when applicable  
• submission of an outdated version of a data collection form  
• submission of participant identifying information (e.g., name, address, phone number, social security 
number) to the DCC, CCC, or Gern lab. Repeated violations will be classified as a protocol violation. 
 
All protocol violations and deviations will be reported at the time of discovery using the Protocol 
Deviation form in the data management system. PD reports will be reviewed at regular meetings of the 
DCC (weekly), the Steering Committee (monthly), and the DSMB (bi-annually). The DCC will monitor 
accumulated violations and deviations to identify repeated departures from study protocol either by a 
particular study person, or within a particular site, and will report to the Steering Committee for 
determination of remedial action, which could include required recertification and / or clarification of 
study procedures in the Manual of Operations. 
 
 
 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 26 
 
13. SPECIMEN HANDLING 
 
Blood and urine samples collected during the screening process (Visits 1-2) will be processed and tested 
locally and study personnel at each site will enter results directly into the electronic data management 
system (DMS). Nasal blows will be sent to the laboratory of James Gern at the University of Wisconsin 
for processing, and results will be sent to the DCC in electronic format. Urine collected during the trial 
phase (for calcium and creatinine) will be processed and tested locally, and study personnel at each site 
will enter results directly into the electronic DMS. Blood collected for vitamin D at regularly scheduled 
visits during the trial phase will be aliquoted locally and then sent to Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh of 
UPMC for testing. Additional serum vitamin and calcium results (e.g. to check for toxicity when the urine 
calcium creatinine ratio is elevated) will be accessed only by a study staff member who will not have any 
contact with participants. Preprinted labels with unique bar code identifiers will be provided for samples 
that will be shipped.  
 
14. DATA MANAGEMENT 
 
14.1. Electronic Data Entry 
 
The Data Coordinating Center will create electronic versions of the forms, make them available for 
clinical personnel to use through a secure, web-based system, and assign permissions based on 
respondents’ respective roles in the study. 
 
14.2. Data Quality 
 
The Data Coordinating Center will import all study data into SAS, a powerful statistical program and data 
management tool. This database load will happen on a daily basis, with each extraction of the raw data 
archived in case there is a need to refer back to it later on. 
 
The DCC will identify missing data, range violations, and logical and chronological discrepancies, and 
work closely with the study team to resolve these concerns in a timely manner to ensure that the study 
yields the highest quality data for analysis. 
 
14.3. Data Analysis 
 
The primary outcome of this trial will be time to a severe asthma exacerbation. The main analysis (using 
the intent-to-treat principle) will be conducted using a Cox proportional hazards regression model fit to 
the time to a severe asthma exacerbation and adjusted for race/ethnicity and study site (as 
randomization will be stratified on these variables). If there is an unexpected significant imbalance in 
other relevant baseline covariates between treatment groups despite randomization, those covariates 
will be considered for inclusion in the multivariate analysis. 
 
The secondary outcomes will be time to a viral-induced severe asthma exacerbation, reduction in dose 
of ICS at or after visit 6, and reduction in the average cumulative dose of ICS during the trial. The 
analytical approach to time to viral-induced severe asthma exacerbation will be similar to that for the 
primary outcome. An analysis of covariance model will be used for the analysis of the difference in 
average cumulative dose of ICS between the vitamin D and placebo groups at the end of the trial, with 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 27 
 
treatment group as the primary explanatory variable, adjusting for race/ethnicity and study site. Logistic 
regression will be used for the analysis of the proportion of participants achieving a reduction in ICS 
dose at or after visit 6. As with the other analyses, the logistic regression models will be adjusted for 
race/ethnicity and study site. 
 
Exploratory analyses will allow for multiple severe asthma exacerbations or viral-induced exacerbations 
to be included per participant. This repeated measures Cox proportional hazards regression model can 
adjust for correlation among multiple responses in a participant.  
 
Additional exploratory analyses will be undertaken to identify potential baseline modifiers of the effect 
of the intervention (vitamin D) on severe asthma exacerbations. Selected baseline characteristics (all 
measured prior to randomization) to be examined will include those most likely to modify the effect of 
vitamin D on severe asthma exacerbations: race/ethnicity, study site, vitamin D deficiency (25(OH)D < 20 
ng/ml (50 nmol/L)), BMI-z score and atopy.   The approach to identification of effect modifiers will 
depend on the outcome and follow the same analytical strategy as that described for primary and 
secondary outcomes. A separate analysis will be conducted for each potential modifier of interest. Each 
model will include the main effects of the treatment group and the potential modifier (e.g. atopy) on the 
outcome, as well as a two-way interaction term.  
 
All pre-specified hypotheses will be tested individually at the α=0.05 level of significance, using a 
conservative two-sided alternative hypothesis (even when the stated hypothesis is one-sided). More 
specifically, results from the analyses of the effect of vitamin D on our primary and secondary outcomes 
will not be adjusted for multiple comparisons, since they have been defined a priori and are limited in 
scope. Findings from the exploratory analyses (e.g. testing for modification of the effect of vitamin D on 
our primary/secondary outcomes by selected baseline variables) will be adjusted for the number of 
models tested (e.g., using False Discovery Rate methods), and testing for effect modification will be 
limited to the variables specified above to reduce the potential for false positive results. In addition, 
findings from any exploratory analysis will be reported as such. 
 
To prevent or minimize the amount of missing data, careful data collection, data management and QC 
procedures will be implemented.  These measures may include training and certification of all study 
personnel, careful design of data collection forms, clear and thorough documentation of all study 
procedures, the implementation of a data management system that minimizes the probability of data 
entry errors, and reporting procedures that help track participants in longitudinal studies. 
 
14.4. Privacy and Data Security 
 
Procedures will be implemented to maintain the security and confidentiality of participant data, 
including assigning unique study identifiers rather than using names or other identifying information. 
 
Limited identifying information necessary for implementation of the study will be recorded, specifically, 
the participant’s date of birth and dates of clinical visits and medical events that occur. Upon study 
closure, the DCC will de-identify these data by converting dates to the number of days relative to 
delivery.  …will de-identify these data by employing a standard date-shifting algorithm to all dates in a 
participant's record. 
 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 28 
 
In keeping with IRB-approved consent procedures, participants’ records will be destroyed seven years 
after completion of the study. Thereafter, only de-identified data will be available for use in 
publications, presentations, etc. 
 
Databases will be backed up nightly, with previous versions archived for reference. 
 
14.5. Data Sharing 
 
De-identified data will be made available to the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute of the National 
Institutes of Health, as appropriate, for the purposes of study monitoring. 
 
15. DATA AND SAFETY MONITORING 
 
15.1. Clinical Coordinating Center 
 
The Clinical Coordinating Center (CCC) will be chaired by Dr. Celedón at the University of Pittsburgh 
School of Medicine. The CCC will help prepare applications to each site IRB, address any IRB concerns, 
assure compliance with HIPAA regulations, and arrange regularly scheduled conference calls so that 
clinical staff from both sites can discuss recruitment, retention, adherence, successes and challenges. 
 
15.2. Data Coordinating Center 
 
The Data Coordinating Center (DCC) will provide scientific oversight of the trial regarding the collection, 
management and analysis of study data. In particular, the DCC will: 
a. Create an electronic Data Management System 
b. Develop procedures and monitor quality 
c. Assume responsibility for reporting, statistical design and analysis 
d. Support communication among study personnel through a password-protected intranet 
 
15.3. Steering Committee 
 
The Steering Committee will include Dr. Celedón of the CCC, Dr. Wisniewski of the DCC, Dr. Ross (site PI 
for Cleveland site), Dr. Bacharier (PI of the St. Louis site), Dr. Phipatanakul (PI of the Boston site), and 
representatives from NIH. Most scientific decisions will be made by the Steering Committee, with input 
from co-investigators, other members of the research team, and the Data and Safety Monitoring Board. 
The steering committee will conduct conference calls on a biweekly basis. Research coordinators from 
all sites will have a separate bi-weekly conference call. 
 
15.4. Data and Safety Monitoring Board 
 
The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) has appointed a data and safety monitoring board 
(DSMB) composed of biostatistician(s), ethicist(s), and experts in clinical trials and pediatric asthma. This 
DSMB board (known as VITEL) oversees four NHLBI-funded trials. The first meeting of the DSMB to 
discuss this trial occurred on October 23rd, 2015. To avoid any appearance of conflict of interest, the 
DSMB members have no involvement in the study, vested interest in its outcome, ties to the study 
investigators (e.g., from the same institution and/or history of extensive collaboration), or financial ties 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 29 
 
to any commercial concerns likely to be affected by the study's outcome. The full list of DSMB members 
is included as an appendix to this protocol. 
 
During the initial discussion of this trial, the VITEL DSMB formulated its operating procedures, the Data 
and Safety Monitoring Plan. Procedural issues included: the Board’s meeting frequency; the types and 
formats of reports it will receive, the policy on whether and how the members may be unmasked; what 
interim data (if any) may be released to the study investigators (e.g., overall adverse event rate); and 
how minutes will be taken and distributed. Trial review issues include: study progress, including an 
assessment of data quality (monitored monthly); outcomes and adverse events data, including out-of-
range laboratory results (ongoing monitoring); any pertinent new information (monitored every 6 
months); study procedures designed to protect the privacy of the participants and the confidentiality of 
the data (monitored weekly); interim analysis and final conclusions evaluating benefit-to-risk ratio of 
study participation. Data and Safety Monitoring Plan reports will be submitted yearly to the site IRBs at 
the time of renewals. 
 
Before initiation of the trial, the DSMB conducted a conference call with Dr. Celedón (of the CCC) and Dr. 
Wisniewski (of the DCC) to review the study protocol (particularly the specific outcome definitions), 
halting rules, the interim and final analysis plan, the procedures for recording and reporting SAEs, and 
the monitoring proposal (including draft shells of reports and tables). The informed consent 
document/process was inspected to ensure that all required elements are included in language 
understandable to a typical study participant to be enrolled in the trial. 
 
The DSMB will meet periodically throughout the study and again after the final analysis has been 
completed. In no instance will more than 12 months elapse between DSMB reviews of cumulative safety 
data after the first participant has enrolled. DSMB meetings may occur by teleconference. The DSMB 
will monitor the study according to the guidelines specified in the study protocol and the operating 
procedures established at the initial meeting, unless the DSMB determines during the course of the trial 
that modification of the guidelines is in the best interest of the study and its participants. Such a 
decision may be based on new information that emerges during the course of the study (e.g., 
publication of the results of a similar trial), realization of inappropriate initial study assumptions, or the 
occurrence of an unanticipated scenario. The DSMB responsibilities conclude when the study is 
completed, data have been verified, and the initial findings (encompassing the primary and secondary 
aims) have been published. We anticipate ancillary research to be conducted using specimens and data 
collected during the trial. Manuscripts derived from this research will be made available to the DSMB for 
as long as it is still in service. 
 
The DSMB Chair will set the meeting agenda, which will usually include Open and Closed Sessions. The 
DSMB members, along with Drs. Celedón and Wisniewski, will participate in the Open Session, at which 
data concerning study conduct and aggregate safety data are discussed. Any safety and efficacy data 
analyzed by treatment arm will be discussed only in the Closed Session. It is critical that information 
presented in the Closed Session not be revealed to the study investigators, except as explicitly 
authorized by the DSMB to Dr. Wisniewski. Study investigators will remain masked to the interim data 
since knowledge of emerging trends between treatment arms may influence participant enrollment, 
management and evaluation, thus compromising the study. The format and reporting requirement of 
unmasked data was discussed and agreed upon by the VITEL DSMB. In general, Dr. Wisniewski will 
prepare study data reports and send them to DSMB members and the NHLBI at least 7 days prior to the 
meeting. These reports will contain the most up-to-date data permitted by the timeframe necessary for 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 30 
 
Dr. Wisniewski to prepare and review the analyses. Interim data reports will usually consist of two parts, 
corresponding to the Open and Closed Sessions of the DSMB meeting. Only the DSMB members and 
appropriate NHLBI staff, including statistician, executive secretary, and others as instructed, will receive 
copies of the Closed Session report. At the completion of the meeting, the members of the DSMB will be 
instructed to destroy any printed documentation. 
 
The Open Session report will focus on study participant accrual and demographics, data completeness, 
other study performance measures, any new information on the intervention or disease/disorder that 
may affect the outcome of the trial, and a list of publications or presentations. The Closed Session report 
will divide study participants according to cumulative data or coded treatment assignment (e.g., 
Treatments A vs. B), comparing participant demographics and baseline characteristics, rates of and 
reasons for treatment discontinuation and loss to follow-up, rates of SAEs, and, if an interim efficacy 
analysis is scheduled, rates of efficacy outcomes (depending on the DSMB operating procedures). 
 
Dr. Wisniewski will work with Dr. Celedón to prepare a report addressing specific concerns he 
anticipates the DSMB will have regarding the conduct of the study. This will be distributed to DSMB 
members, along with the Open Session report. Likewise, Dr. Wisniewski’s report for the Closed Session 
will usually contain an assessment of the progress of the trial, including recommendations on whether it 
should be terminated or modified. Interim data reports will generally include the following types of 
information, although only the Closed Session data reports will include comparisons by treatment 
group: 
• 
Monthly and cumulative accrual, overall and by site, compared with targets  
• 
Baseline characteristics, overall and by treatment group  
• 
Completeness and quality of data collection forms  
• 
Status of enrolled participants, overall and by treatment group  
• 
Participants’ off-protocol treatments  
• 
Compliance of study sites with eligibility criteria and other protocol requirements  
• 
Participant adherence to the treatment regimen, overall and by treatment group  
• 
Outcome rates by treatment group, if an interim efficacy analysis is scheduled  
• 
Individual SAEs by participant ID number and a table of event-specific cumulative rates, overall and 
by treatment group 
 
Dr. Wisniewski will work to ensure all of the information presented at the DSMB meetings remains 
confidential. Each report will be marked as such. No interim treatment outcome information will be 
presented to site investigators or to the scientific community. At the conclusion of each DSMB meeting, 
the members of the DSMB will be instructed to destroy their printed documentation. The DSMB will 
then submit recommendations to the NHLBI regarding the continuation of the trial. The NHLBI will 
generate reports summarizing the DSMB recommendations and send the reports to the study sites to be 
sent to the local IRBs. 
 
 
 
 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 31 
 
15.5. Institutional Review Board 
 
To protect research participants, this study will comply with all policies and procedures established by 
Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) at the University of Pittsburgh, Rainbow Babies and Children’s 
Hospital in Cleveland, Washington University at St. Louis and Boston Children’s Hospital. Modifications 
will be submitted for review prior to being implemented. 
 
15.6. Clinical Trial Site Monitoring 
 
Drs. Celedón and Wisniewski have extensive experience in all areas of clinical trial oversight, including 
developing quality assurance benchmarks, enforcing quality control, and monitoring protocol-specific 
activities through ongoing reporting structures and on-site evaluations. The DCC will be responsible for 
generating site-specific reports on recruitment and follow-up; quality control reports, which include the 
quality of data received; participant follow-up adherence data, which include missed visits; and 
participant characteristics. The DCC will also monitor the study sites to ensure that all regulatory 
procedures are met. This will include assuring that all study personnel (including those hired after the 
trial begins) have completed required training and received certification to conduct human subjects 
research. 
 
15.7. Reporting of Serious Adverse Events 
 
Reporting to the IRB: 
A report will be sent to the Institutional Review Board within 24 hours of learning of any unexpected 
serious adverse events associated with the research intervention. Unexpected adverse reactions of 
moderate severity in association with the research interventions will be reported to the Institutional 
Review Board within 5 days. Generated safety reports will be submitted to the Institutional Review 
Board within 30 days of their receipt. 
 
Reporting to the DSMB: 
Reports of all SAEs, irrespective of relatedness and expectedness, will be sent to the chair of the DSMB 
and NHLBI staff within 48 hours. In addition, monthly line-item reports of all SAEs and a 6-month report 
of all adverse events will be submitted to the DSMB. The following elements will be reviewed under the 
Data and Safety Monitoring Plan: study progress, including an assessment of data quality (monitored 
monthly); outcomes and adverse events data, including out-of-range laboratory results (ongoing 
monitoring); any pertinent new information (monitored every 6 months); study procedures designed to 
protect the privacy of the participants and the confidentiality of the data, i.e., data and charts are stored 
in locked area, data are recorded to protect the identity of the participant (monitored weekly); interim 
analysis and final conclusions evaluating benefit-to-risk ratio of study participation. Data and Safety 
Monitoring Plan reports will be submitted yearly to the Institutional Review Board at the time of 
renewals. 
 
Reporting to the FDA: 
We will notify the FDA in a written IND safety report, of any adverse experience associated with the use 
of the drug that was both serious and unexpected. These reports will be filed as soon as possible, and no 
later than 15 calendar days after we determine that an SAE occurred, and 7 days for fatal or life 
threatening events. 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 32 
 
 
15.8. Withdrawal and Medication Discontinuation 
 
Withdrawal is defined as termination from the study without further follow-up. This is distinct from 
discontinuation of study medications (discussed later in this section). Withdrawal may be initiated at any 
time by the participant, his/her parent/guardian, a healthcare provider, a study team member, or 
another party. If this occurs, the reason will be documented on the Withdrawal Form (WD). We will 
complete a withdrawal visit (with the same procedures as visit 9) if the child and family are willing. 
Otherwise no further data will be collected from that child. However, data already collected for study 
purposes, including biological samples, will be used. If a child misses either two consecutive follow-up 
visits or three non-consecutive follow-up visits, he/she will be withdrawn from the study. 
 
Note that an adverse event due to a concurrent illness other than asthma (section 11.2) may be grounds 
for withdrawal if the illness is considered significant by the study investigator or if the participant is no 
longer able to effectively participate in the study.  
 
Participants experiencing minor intercurrent illnesses may continue in the study provided that the 
nature, severity, and duration of the illness are documented, and that any unscheduled medications 
required to treat the illness are also documented. Examples of minor intercurrent illnesses include 
upper respiratory infections, urinary tract infections, and gastroenteritis. Medications will be allowed for 
treatment of these conditions in accordance with the judgment of the responsible study physician. 
 
Participants experiencing a severe asthma exacerbation during the run-in period will be deemed 
ineligible for the study, but offered the opportunity to reapply after a period of at least 4 weeks 
following resolution of the event. If another exacerbation occurs during the subsequent run-in period, 
the child will be deemed ineligible and excluded from participation. 
 
Once randomization has occurred, intention-to-treat principles will apply; withdrawn participants will be 
analyzed using available data according to the treatment to which they were randomized. Participants 
who experience three (3) or more severe asthma exacerbations will have their study medication 
discontinued, but will continue to be monitored through clinic visits and phone calls. 
 
15.9. Medical Monitors and Independent Safety Monitor 
Dr. Michael Cabana (who previously served as a site investigator at UCSF) will serve as the medical 
monitor for all study sites. The medical monitor will review every serious adverse event to confirm study 
relatedness, unexpectedness, and appropriateness of follow-up care provided. 
 
The Independent Safety Monitor (ISM) is a clinician with clinical trial expertise, and who is not involved 
in the study. The ISM will adjudicate conflicts between the medical monitors regarding characterization 
of serious adverse events. The ISM may unmask treatment for a participant in order to determine 
whether the outcome was related to the study drug. 
 
 
 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 33 
 
16. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS 
 
16.1. Power Analysis 
 
Primary Aim 
While we will make concerted efforts to retain all of the 400 participants, we conservatively assume that 
up to 30 (15%) of the 200 children within each group will drop out or be lost to follow-up. Thus, we 
expect that ≥170 children in each group (vitamin D vs. control) will be retained in the study.  We also 
conservatively assume an incidence of severe asthma exacerbations of 40% in the control group over 
the follow-up period. Under these assumptions and a two-sided alpha of .05, we will have 88% power to 
detect a reduction in the rate of severe asthma exacerbations from 40% in the control group to 24% in 
the intervention group (a 16% reduction).  Under the same assumptions, we will have 79% power to 
detect a reduction in the rate of severe asthma exacerbations from 40% to 26% (a 14% reduction).  If the 
incidence of severe asthma exacerbations in the control group were only 30%, we would have ≥90% 
power to detect a significant difference between the study groups if the rate of severe asthma 
exacerbations in the vitamin D group were 15% (a 15% difference in rates).  
Our statistical power is shown comparing proportions of severe asthma exacerbations to illustrate that 
we can detect realistic important clinical differences. In fact, we will have somewhat greater statistical 
power, given that the primary statistical analyses will employ time to event methods. 
 
Secondary aims  
The number of participants to be included in the study is defined by the sample size calculations for 
the primary aim.  Calculations for the secondary aims are based on the sample size for the primary aim 
and the size of the effect that can be detected is estimated.    
Viral-induced severe asthma exacerbations: Using the same assumptions as above, while also 
assuming that 80% of the children in the placebo group who have at least one severe asthma 
exacerbation will have at least one viral-induced severe asthma exacerbation confirmed as viral-induced 
at Dr. Gern’s laboratory, we will have ≥80% power to detect a reduction in the rate of viral-induced 
severe exacerbations from 25% (30% of 80% in the placebo group) to 13% in the vitamin D group.   
     Reduction of ICS dose: On the basis of the assumptions above regarding sample size and type I 
error, we will have ≥80% power to detect: 1) an increment in the proportion of children in whom their 
ICS dose is halved from 50% in the placebo group to 64% in the vitamin D group, or 2) an increment in 
the proportion of children in whom their ICS dose is halved, from 70% in the placebo group to 83% in 
the vitamin D group. For the comparison of the average cumulative dose there is at least 80% power to 
detect and effect size of 0.13, assuming that that the correlation between the covariates in the analysis 
of covariance model (site, race/ethnicity) and the average cumulative dose is 0.2. 
 
16.2. Outcome Analyses 
 
The primary outcome of this trial will be time to a severe asthma exacerbation. The main analysis (using 
the intent-to-treat principle) will be conducted using a Cox proportional hazards regression model fit to 
the time to a severe asthma exacerbation and adjusted for race/ethnicity and study site (as 
randomization will be stratified on these variables). Should there be an unexpected significant 
imbalance in other relevant baseline covariates (see above) between treatment groups despite 
randomization, those covariates would be considered for inclusion in the multivariate analysis. 
 
The secondary outcomes will be time to a viral-induced severe asthma exacerbation, and reduction in 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 34 
 
the ICS dose and average cumulative dose during the Trial Phase. Our analytical approach to time to 
viral-induced severe asthma exacerbation will be similar to that outlined for our primary outcome. An 
analysis of covariance model will be used for the analysis of the difference in average cumulative dose of 
ICS between the vitamin D and placebo groups at the end of the trial, with treatment group as the 
primary explanatory variable, adjusting for race/ethnicity and study site.  Logistic regression will be used 
for the analysis of the proportion of participants achieving a reduction in ICS dose at or after v6. As with 
the other analyses, the logistic regression models will be adjusted for race/ethnicity and study site. 
 
Exploratory Analyses will allow for multiple severe asthma exacerbations or viral-induced exacerbations 
to be included per participant. This repeated measures Cox proportional hazards regression model can 
adjust for correlation among multiple responses in a participant (using SUDAAN Software for the 
Statistical Analysis of Correlated Data, Release 9.0, Research Triangle Institute 2004). 
 
Additional exploratory analyses will be undertaken to identify potential baseline modifiers of the effect 
of the intervention (vitamin D) on severe asthma exacerbations. Selected baseline characteristics (all 
measured prior to randomization) to be examined will include those most likely to modify the effect of 
vitamin D on severe asthma exacerbations: race/ethnicity, study site, deficient (< 20 ng/ml (50 nmol/L)) 
25(OH)D (comprising approximately 45% of children in our pilot study and 53% of adults in the VIDA 
trial), BMI-z score and atopy. The approach to identification of effect modifiers will depend on the 
outcome and follow the same analytical strategy as that described for our primary and secondary 
outcomes. A separate analysis will be conducted for each potential modifier of interest. Each model will 
include the main effects of the treatment group and the potential modifier (e.g. atopy) on the outcome, 
as well as a two-way interaction term. 
 
16.3. Multiple Comparisons 
 
All pre-specified hypotheses will be tested individually at the α=0.05 level of significance, using a 
conservative two-sided alternative hypothesis (even when the stated hypothesis is one-sided). More 
specifically, results from the analyses of the effect of vitamin D on our primary and secondary outcomes 
will not be adjusted for multiple comparisons, since they have been defined a priori and are limited in 
scope. Findings from our exploratory analyses (e.g. testing for modification of the effect of vitamin D on 
our primary or secondary outcomes by selected baseline variables) will be adjusted for the number of 
models tested (e.g., using False Discovery Rate methods), and testing for effect modification will be 
limited to the variables specified above to reduce the potential for false positive results. In addition, 
findings from any exploratory analysis will be reported as such. 
 
16.4. Missing Data 
 
Investigators at the DCC are well aware of the problems caused by missing data, and subscribe to the 
credo that the best solution to these problems is the elimination or reduction of missing data.  To 
prevent or minimize the amount of missing data, careful data collection, data management and QC 
procedures must be implemented. These measures may include, among others, training and 
certification of all study personnel, careful design of data collection forms, clear and thorough 
documentation of all study procedures, the implementation of a data management system that 
minimizes the probability of data entry errors and reporting procedures that help track participants in 
longitudinal studies. 
 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 35 
 
However, it is prudent to acknowledge that some loss to follow-up and some missing data may occur in 
any study. In this case, it is critical to understand what events or factors are responsible for data that are 
missing. That is, are the missing data:  (1) missing completely at random (MCAR), (2) missing at random 
(MAR) or (3) non-ignorable. By knowing how the data are missing (e.g., MAR), the most appropriate 
analytic approach can be selected. To understand how those individuals with missing data differ from 
those without missing data, comparisons of the baseline characteristics and the last observed 
measurement of participants with missing data will be made to those without missing data and tests for 
MAR and MCAR will be applied when applicable. 
 
Because of the possibility of drop-outs and other missed visits, there will be some missing data. The 
statistical models and analyses that are planned for the primary and secondary outcomes assume that 
the data are missing-at-random (MAR). Because likelihood-based methods will be applied, MAR data still 
yield valid estimates. In the unlikely event that the MAR assumption is violated, we would use 
alternative approaches such as pattern-mixture modeling. 
 
16.5. Interim Data Analysis and Safety Analysis 
 
There will be three aspects of the interim analysis. First, for efficacy, the Lan and Demets approach will 
be utilized to conduct the interim efficacy analysis. This approach is preferable over other approaches 
because it is flexible to the number of interim analyses conducted during the course of the study. The 
Lan and DeMets approach requires the use of a spending function to allocate the type I error to the 
interim analysis. The O'Brien and Fleming spending function which minimizes the type I error allocated 
to the interim analysis, saving the vast majority for the primary analyses will be used. For the proposed 
interim analysis, assuming that 50% of the study will be completed, it is estimated that the type I error 
allocated to the interim analysis will be 0.005, leaving 0.048 of the type I error for the primary outcome 
analysis 
 
Concurrent with the interim analysis, a futility analysis will be conducted. The conditional power, the 
power available to detect the projected intervention effect size based on the observed overall event 
rate, will be calculated. A conditional power lower than 0.3 would be used to trigger a discussion with 
the DSMB regarding futility. 
 
In addition to the interim efficacy analysis and futility analysis, a safety analysis will be conducted at 
each DSMB meeting.   Two aspects of safety will be conducted, one for deficiency and one for 
toxicity.  The rates of severe vitamin D deficiency (defined as a serum vitamin D level <10 ng/ml) 
observed at any time during follow-up will be compared between the two treatment arms using a chi-
square or Fisher's Exact test.  The same approach will be carried out to compare the rates of toxicity 
(defined as a serum vitamin D level >150 ng/ml or a serum calcium level >10.8 mg/dl), and multivariate 
linear regression (adjusting for age) will be used to compare UCa/UCreat ratios. A subgroup analysis will be 
conducted among those a baseline vitamin D levels of 10-14 ng/ml.  In this instance, a Fisher's Exact test 
will be used to compare the proportion of participants with severely deficient levels at any time during 
follow-up.  A separate subgroup analysis will be conducted among those with a baseline vitamin D level 
of 26-30 ng/ml.  In this instance, a Fisher's Exact test will be used to compare the proportion of 
participants with vitamin D toxicity at any time during follow-up and a two-sample t-test or linear 
regression (as above) will be used to compare mean UCa/UCr ratios.  
 
 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 36 
 
_______________________________ 
REFERENCES 
 
1. 
Akinbami LJ, Moorman JE, Liu X. Asthma prevalence, health care use, and mortality: 
United States, 2005-2009. Natl Health Stat Report 2011:1-14. 
2. 
Asher MI, Montefort S, Bjorksten B, et al. Worldwide time trends in the prevalence of 
symptoms of asthma, allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, and eczema in childhood: ISAAC Phases One 
and Three repeat multicountry cross-sectional surveys. Lancet 2006;368:733-43. 
3. 
Barnett SB, Nurmagambetov TA. Costs of asthma in the United States: 2002-2007. J 
Allergy Clin Immunol 2011;127:145-52. 
4. 
Ginde AA, Sutherland ER. Vitamin D in asthma: panacea or true promise? J Allergy Clin 
Immunol 2010;126:59-60. 
5. 
Gregori S, Casorati M, Amuchastegui S, Smiroldo S, Davalli AM, Adorini L. Regulatory 
T cells induced by 1 alpha,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 and mycophenolate mofetil treatment 
mediate transplantation tolerance. J Immunol 2001;167:1945-53. 
6. 
Manicourt DH, Devogelaer JP. Urban tropospheric ozone increases the prevalence of 
vitamin D deficiency among Belgian postmenopausal women with outdoor activities during 
summer. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2008;93:3893-9. 
7. 
Masoli M, Fabian D, Holt S, Beasley R, Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA). The global 
burden of asthma: executive summary of the GINA Dissemination Committee Report. Allergy 
2004;59:469-78. 
8. 
Dixon AE, Holguin F, Sood A, et al. An official American Thoracic Society Workshop 
report: obesity and asthma. Proceedings of the American Thoracic Society 2010;7:325-35. 
9. 
Wortsman J, Matsuoka LY, Chen TC, Lu Z, Holick MF. Decreased bioavailability of 
vitamin D in obesity. Am J Clin Nutr 2000;72:690-3. 
10. 
Celedon JC, Sredl D, Weiss ST, Pisarski M, Wakefield D, Cloutier M. Ethnicity and skin 
test reactivity to aeroallergens among asthmatic children in Connecticut. Chest 2004;125:85-92. 
11. 
Rajakumar K, Fernstrom JD, Janosky JE, Greenspan SL. Vitamin D insufficiency in 
preadolescent African-American children. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 2005;44:683-92. 
12. 
Paul G, Brehm J, Alcorn JF, Holguin F, Aujla S, Celedon JC. Vitamin D and Asthma. 
Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2011. 
13. 
Poon AH, Laprise C, Lemire M, et al. Association of vitamin D receptor genetic variants 
with susceptibility to asthma and atopy. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2004;170:967-73. 
14. 
Raby BA, Lazarus R, Silverman EK, et al. Association of vitamin D receptor gene 
polymorphisms with childhood and adult asthma. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2004;170:1057-65. 
15. 
2. 
Hedges DJ GT, Yang S, Bademci G, Diaz A, Andersen A, Hulme WF, Linker S, 
Mehta A, Edwards YJK, Beecham GW, Martin ER, Pericak-Vance MA, Zuchner S, Vance JM, 
Gilbert JR.  . Comparison of Three Targeted Enrichment Strategies on the SOLiD Sequencing 
Platform. PLoS ONE 2011; 6(4): e18595. 2011. 
16. 
Miyake Y, Sasaki S, Tanaka K, Hirota Y. Dairy food, calcium and vitamin D intake in 
pregnancy, and wheeze and eczema in infants. Eur Respir J 2010;35:1228-34. 
17. 
Camargo CA, Jr., Rifas-Shiman SL, Litonjua AA, et al. Maternal intake of vitamin D 
during pregnancy and risk of recurrent wheeze in children at 3 y of age. Am J Clin Nutr 
2007;85:788-95. 
18. 
Camargo CA, Jr., Ingham T, Wickens K, et al. Cord-blood 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels 
and risk of respiratory infection, wheezing, and asthma. Pediatrics 2011;127:e180-7. 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 37 
 
19. 
Brehm JM, Celedon JC, Soto-Quiros ME, et al. Serum Vitamin D Levels and Markers of 
Severity of Childhood Asthma in Costa Rica. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2009. 
20. 
Brehm JM, Schuemann B, Fuhlbrigge AL, et al. Serum vitamin D levels and severe 
asthma exacerbations in the Childhood Asthma Management Program study. J Allergy Clin 
Immunol 2010;126:52-8 e5. 
21. 
Bateman ED, Hurd SS, Barnes PJ, et al. Global strategy for asthma management and 
prevention: GINA executive summary. Eur Respir J 2008;31:143-78. 
22. 
Yadav M, Mittal K. Effect of Vitamin D Supplementation on Moderate to Severe 
Bronchial Asthma. Indian J Pediatr 2013. 
23. 
Castro M, King TS, Kunselman SJ, et al. Effect of vitamin D3 on asthma treatment 
failures in adults with symptomatic asthma and lower vitamin D levels: the VIDA randomized 
clinical trial. JAMA 2014;311:2083-91. 
24. 
Reddel HK, Taylor DR, Bateman ED, et al. An official American Thoracic 
Society/European Respiratory Society statement: asthma control and exacerbations: 
standardizing endpoints for clinical asthma trials and clinical practice. Am J Respir Crit Care 
Med 2009;180:59-99. 
25. 
Hunninghake GM, Soto-Quiros ME, Avila L, et al. Sensitization to Ascaris lumbricoides 
and severity of childhood asthma in Costa Rica. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2007;119:654-61. 
26. 
ISAAC SC. Phase II modules of the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in 
Childhood. (ISAAC). 1998; Munster. 
27. 
Skinner EA, Diette GB, Algatt-Bergstrom PJ, et al. The Asthma Therapy Assessment 
Questionnaire (ATAQ) for children and adolescents. Dis Manag 2004;7:305-13. 
28. 
Liu AH, Zeiger R, Sorkness C, et al. Development and cross-sectional validation of the 
Childhood Asthma Control Test. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2007;119:817-25. 
29. 
Nathan RA, Sorkness CA, Kosinski M, et al. Development of the asthma control test: a 
survey for assessing asthma control. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2004;113:59-65. 
30. 
Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Feeny DH, Ferrie PJ, Griffith LE, Townsend M. Measuring 
quality of life in children with asthma. Qual Life Res 1996;5:35-46. 
31. 
Martinez P, Richters JE. The NIMH community violence project: II. Children's distress 
symptoms associated with violence exposure. Psychiatry 1993;56:22-35. 
32. 
Tse SM, Gold DR, Sordillo JE, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of the bronchodilator response 
in children. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2013;132:554-9 e5. 
33. 
Ross AC, Manson JE, Abrams SA, et al. The 2011 Report on Dietary Reference Intakes 
for Calcium and Vitamin D from the Institute of Medicine: What Clinicians Need to Know. J 
Clin Endocrinol Metab 2010. 
34. 
Heaney RP, Davies KM, Chen TC, Holick MF, Barger-Lux MJ. Human serum 25-
hydroxycholecalciferol response to extended oral dosing with cholecalciferol. Am J Clin Nutr 
2003;77:204-10. 
35.       Munns CF, Shaw N, Kiely M, Specker BL, Thacher TD, Ozono K, Michigami T, 
Tiosano D, Mughal MZ, Mäkitie O, Ramos-Abad L, Ward L, DiMeglio LA, Atapattu N, 
Cassinelli H, Braegger C, Pettifor JM, Seth A, Idris HW, Bhatia V, Fu J, Goldberg G, Sävendahl 
L, Khadgawat R, Pludowski P, Maddock J, Hyppönen E, Oduwole A, Frew E, Aguiar M, 
Tulchinsky T, Butler G, Högler W. Global consensus recommendations on prevention and 
management of rickets. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2016; 101(2):394-415) 
36. 
Misra M, Pacaud D, Petryk A, et al. Vitamin D deficiency in children and its 
management: review of current knowledge and recommendations. Pediatrics 2008;122:398-417. 

 
Protocol (06/19/2018) 
 
 
Page 38 
 
37. 
New IOM calcium, vitamin D dietary guidelines endorsed. 2012. at 
http://www.aappublications.org/content/33/11/14.2 ) 
38. 
Maalouf J, Nabulsi M, Vieth R, et al. Short- and long-term safety of weekly high-dose 
vitamin D3 supplementation in school children. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2008;93:2693-701. 
39. 
Gordon CM, Williams AL, Feldman HA, et al. Treatment of hypovitaminosis D in 
infants and toddlers. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2008;93:2716-21. 
40. 
Vieth R. Vitamin D supplementation, 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations, and safety. 
Am J Clin Nutr 1999;69:842-56. 
41. 
Hollis BW. Assessment and interpretation of circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D and 1,25-
dihydroxyvitamin D in the clinical environment. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am 2010;39:271-
86, table of contents. 
42.       Oliveira da Costa Mattos Rde C, Xavier EC Jr, Domingos Mainenti HR, Mitri Nogueira 
S, Ribeiro de Carvalho MA, Ramos Moreira Mde F, Vargas de Carvalho LB, Tabalipa 
M, Borges R, Malizia Alves Mde F. Evaluation of calcium excretion in Brazilian infantile and 
young population environmentally exposed to lead. Hum Exp Toxicol. 2009;28(9):567-75. 
43.       Hilgenfeld MS, Simon S, Blowey D, Richmond W, Alon US. Lack of seasonal variations 
in urinary calcium/creatinine ratio in school-age children. Pediatr Nephrol 2004;19(10):1153-5. 
44.       El Mallah C, Ghattas H, Shatila D, Francis S, Merhi K, Hlais S, Toufeili I, Obeid O. 
Urinary magnesium, calcium, and phosphorus to creatinine ratios of healthy elementary school 
Lebanese children. Biol Trace Elem Res. 2016;170(2):264-70. 
45.       Sorkhi H, Haji Aahmadi M. Urinary calcium to creatinine in children. Indian J Pediatr. 
2005;72(12):1055-6. 
46. 
Rubin M T-JS, Chan F, Koberle L, Bilezikian J. Hypercalcemia Due to Vitamin D 
Toxicity. In: Feldman D WPJ, Glorieux FH, ed. Vitamin D. 2nd ed2005. 
447. 
National Asthma Education and Prevention Program: Expert panel report III: Guidelines 
for the diagnosis and management of asthma. Bethesda, MD: National Heart, Lung, and Blood 
Institute, 2007. (NIH publication no. 08-4051). at 
www.nhlbi.nih.gov/guidelines/asthma/asthgdln.htm (Accessed December 12, 2008).) 
48. 
Lemanske RF, Jr., Sorkness CA, Mauger EA, et al. Inhaled corticosteroid reduction and 
elimination in patients with persistent asthma receiving salmeterol: a randomized controlled trial. 
JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association 2001;285:2594-603.