Contact Us
Plans and Services Health and Wellness About Wellmark Member Employer Producer Provider
Home Provider Medical Policies and Authorizations Alphabetical Listing


» Working with Wellmark.com
» News
» BlueCard®
» Claims and Payment
» Medical Policies and Authorizations
» Health Management
» Credentialing and Contracting
» Medical, Dental, and Pharmacy
» Quality and Transparency
» Communications and Resources
» Health Care Reform for Providers
printer friendly Printer-Friendly Page

Vitamin D Testing

» Summary» Procedure Codes
» Description» Selected References
» Prior Approval» Policy History
» Policy
 

Medical Policy: 02.04.34 
Original Effective Date: November 2011 
Reviewed: March 2015 
Revised: July 2015 


Benefit Application
Benefit determinations are based on the applicable contract language in effect at the time the services were rendered. Exclusions, limitations or exceptions may apply. Benefits may vary based on contract, and individual member benefits must be verified. Wellmark determines medical necessity only if the benefit exists and no contract exclusions are applicable. This medical policy may not apply to FEP. Benefits are determined by the Federal Employee Program.

This Medical Policy document describes the status of medical technology at the time the document was developed. Since that time, new technology may have emerged or new medical literature may have been published. This Medical Policy will be reviewed regularly and be updated as scientific and medical literature becomes available.


Description: 

The term, vitamin D, is broad and includes several metabolically interrelated sterol substances that have hormonal activity. Vitamin D has 2 distinctive forms: Vitamin D2 and Vitamin D3.

 

Vitamin D’s chief biologic function is to maintain serum calcium and phosphorus concentrations within normal range by means of enhancing intestinal absorption of calcium and release of calcium and phosphorus from bone.

 

25 hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] has a half-life of 2-3 weeks and is the substance measured to assess nutritional adequacy most accurately. It is decreased in dietary vitamin D deficiency, liver disease, malabsorption, inadequate sun exposure, and nephrotic syndrome.

 

While 1,25-dihydroxy vitamin D is the most potent vitamin D metabolite, levels of the 25-OH forms of vitamin D more accurately reflect the body's vitamin D stores. Consequently, 25HDN / 25-Hydroxyvitamin D2 and D3 (cpt code 82306), Serum is the preferred initial test for assessing vitamin D status. However, in the presence of renal disease, 1,25-dihydroxy vitamin D levels (cpt code 82652) may be needed to adequately assess vitamin D status.

 

Optimal serum concentrations of 25(OH)D for bone and general health have not been established; they are likely to vary at each stage of life, depending on the physiological measures selected. Also, while serum 25(OH)D functions as a biomarker of exposure to vitamin D (from sun, food, and dietary supplements), the extent to which such levels serve as a biomarker of effect (i.e. health outcomes) is not clearly established.

 

The Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline recommends screening for vitamin D deficiency in individuals at risk for deficiency. The task force does not recommend population screening for vitamin D deficiency in individuals who are not at risk.

 

United States Preventative Services Task Force
The effect of vitamin D levels on health outcomes is difficult to evaluate. Lower vitamin D levels have been reported to increase risk for fractures, falls, functional limitations, some types of cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, depression, and death. However, observations of these associations are inconsistent and may vary by the cut point used to define low vitamin D levels and by subpopulation.

 

The USPSTF found no studies that evaluated the direct benefit of screening for vitamin D deficiency in adults. The USPSTF found adequate evidence that treatment of asymptomatic vitamin D deficiency has no benefit on cancer, type 2 diabetes mellitus, risk for death in community-dwelling adults, and risk for fractures in persons not selected on the basis of being at high risk for fractures. The USPSTF found inadequate evidence on the benefit of treatment of asymptomatic vitamin D deficiency on other outcomes, including psychosocial and physical functioning. Although the evidence is adequate for a few limited outcomes, the overall evidence on the early treatment of asymptomatic, screen-detected vitamin D deficiency in adults to improve overall health outcomes is inadequate.

 

Vitamin D Testing Protocol published by the Medical Services Commission
Measuring serum vitamin D as 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D [1,25-(OH)2-D] is seldom indicated, except in selected patients with advanced renal failure, mineral and/or bone diseases. Specialist consultation should be considered for patients with malabsorption, unexplained bone pain, unusual fractures or other evidence suggesting metabolic bone disorder.

 

Vitamin D Supplementation without Testing
Because vitamin D supplementation in the general adult population is safe, it is reasonable to advise supplementation without testing. Routine testing of vitamin D levels [25-hydroxyvitamin D or 25(OH)D] is not medically necessary prior to or after starting vitamin D supplementation.

 

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services

 

Guidelines for vitamin D intake and supplementation should be followed for asymptomatic, at-risk individuals such as elderly or infirm patients, or those who are believed to receive inadequate sun exposure. Baseline and/or follow-up vitamin D testing is unnecessary in this group.


Top


Prior Approval: 

 

 

Not applicable


Top


Policy: 

Routine testing of vitamin D levels [25-hydroxyvitamin D or 25(OH)D] is not medically necessary prior to or after starting vitamin D supplementation. Except in the small population where due to absorption or excretion problems general supplementation guidelines would pose a health risk. 

 

25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] serum testing may be considered medically necessary in patients with a clinically documented underlying disease or condition which is specifically associated with vitamin D deficiency (where monitoring plays a role in halting disease progression), toxicity, or decreased bone density/osteoporosis.

These include:

  • Osteoporosis
  • Osteomalacia
  • Osteopenia
  • Malabsorption Syndromes (Cystic Fibrosis, Celiac Disease, Bariatric Surgery)
  • Chronic Kidney Disease Stage III or greater
  • Cirrhosis
  • HIV
  • Rickets
  • Osteogenesis Imperfecta
  • Systemic lupus erythematosus
  • Hyperparathyroidism
  • Hypercalcemia
  • Granuloma forming Disorders (Sarcoidosis, Tuberculosis)

Testing and screening for vitamin D deficiency with 1,25 dihydroxyvitamin D [1,25(OH)2D] serum testing and 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] serum testing is considered not medically necessary for all other indications.

 

Other than in very complex cases (e.g. hypercalcemia with reportedly low endogenous levels of25-hydroxy vitamin D), there are rarely indications for ordering both 25-hydroxy vitamin D and1,25-dihydroxy vitamin D on the same specimen at the same time.

 

Rationale:

 

While the serum concentration of 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] is established as the best indicator of vitamin D status, there is significant uncertainty associated with its measurement. Tests that measure serum levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25OH)D] are not standardized.

 

Serum concentrations that define deficient or insufficient, adequate, and optimal levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)] are not clearly established.  Proposed cutoff points vary widely, leading to inconsistent endorsement among practitioners.  It is unclear how vitamin D test results can be used to guide treatment decisions compared to decisions that would be made in the absence of test results, particularly in asymptomatic individuals who are being advised to take vitamin D for their overall wellness, or for those with a condition for which the role of vitamin D has not been clearly defined.

 

Although vitamin D deviciency is prevalent, measurement of serum 25(OH)D levels is expensive, and universal screening is not supported.  However, vitamin D testing may benefit those at risk for severe deficiency or those with laboratory or radiographic findings commonly associated with vitamin D deficiency in these patients, knowledge of the 25(OH)D blood level provides an accurate assessment of vitamin D body stores, helps identify the need for vitamin D therapy, and may help to determine an effective dose.

 

Presently, no evidence-based clinical practice guideline recommends vitamin D screening of persons without a clinically documented underlying disease or condition which is specifically associated with the risk of decreased bone density or osteoporosis.  The role of vitamin D has recently received considerable media attention for a number of indications other than bone health, including cardiovascular disease and hypertension, diabetes and metabolic syndrome, colon, prostate, and breast cancer, reproductive health, immune function, and neuropsychological function. It is not known how or why vitamin D impacts the risk of developing any of these conditions, or whether altering exposure to vitamin D provides a protective effect. Large, randomized, controlled trials will be required to identify the role of vitamin D in these and other conditions to determine if low vitamin D levels are part of pathogenesis or just a marker for a corresponding non-skeletal condition.





Top


Procedure Codes and Billing Guidelines: 

  • To report provider services, use appropriate CPT* codes, Modifiers, Alpha Numeric (HCPCS level 2) codes, Revenue codes, and/or diagnosis codes.
  • 82306 Vitamin D; 25 hydroxy, includes fraction(s), if performed
  • 82652 Vitamin D; 1,25 dihydroxy, includes fraction(s), if performed 

Top


Selected References: 

  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Effectiveness and Safety of Vitamin D in Relation to Bone Health. Evaluation report. 2007.
  • Institute of Medicine of the National Academies. Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium and Vitamin D. November 2010.
  • Rosen CJ. Vitamin D Insufficiency. N Engl J Med 2011; 364(3):248-54.
  • Binkley N, Krueger DC, Morgan S et al. Current Status of Clinical 25-hydroxyvitamin D Measurement: An Assessment of Between-Laboratory Agreement. Clin Chim Acta. 2010 December 14;411(23-24):1976-82. doi: 10.1016/j.cca.2010.08.018.
  • Norman AW, Bouillon R, Whiting SJ et al. 13th Workshop Consensus for Vitamin D Nutritional Guidelines. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2007 March; 103(3-5):204-5.
  • National Institutes of Health Office of Dietary Supplements. Dietary Supplement fact Sheet: Vitamin D. Updated 2/25/2011.
  • Motiwala SR, Wang TJ. Vitamin D and cardiovascular disease. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens 2011 Apr 23. [Epub ahead of print].
  • Fang F, Kasperzyk JL, Shui I et al. Prediagnostic plasma vitamin D metabolites and mortality among patients with prostate cancer. PLoS ONE 6(4):e18625. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0018625
  • Rajakamur K, de Las Heras J, Chen TC et al. Vitamin d status, adiposity, and lipids in black american and caucasian children. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011 May;96(5):1560-7. Epub 2011 Mar 2.
  • Patel R, Rizvi A. Vitamin D deficiency in patients with congestive heart failure: mechanisms, manifestations, and management. May 2011;104(5):325-30. doi: 10.1097/SMJ.obo13e318213cf6b.
  • Melamed ML, Michos ED, Post W et al. 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels and the risk of mortality in the general population. Arch Intern Med 2008 Aug 11;168(15):1629-37.
  • Hollis BW. Assessment and Interpretation of Circulating 25-Hydroxyvitamin D and 1,25-Dihydroxyvitamin D in the clinical environment. Endocrinol Metab Clin N Am.2010 June;39(2):271-86. doi:10.1016/j.ecl.2010.02.012.
  • Hanley DA, Cranney A, Jones G et al. Vitamin D in adult health and disease: a review and guideline statement from Osteoporosis Canada (summary). CMAJ Sep 7 2010;182(12):1315-19. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.091062.
  • Holick MF, Binkley NC, Bischoff-Ferrari, et al. Evaluation, Treatment, and Prevention of Vitamin D Deficiency: An Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011 July;96(7):1911-1930.
  • Kennel K, Drake M, Hurley D. Vitamin D deficiency in adults: when to test and how to treat. Mayo Clinical Procedures. 2010 Aug 85(8) PMC2912737
  • Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium and Vitamin D. November 2010. Available at URL address: http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2010/Dietary-Reference-Intakes-for-Calcium-and-Vitamin-D.aspx
  • Medical Services Commission. Vitamin D testing protocol. Victoria (BC): British Columbia Medical Services Commission; 2010 Oct 1. 6 p
  • LeFevre  ML; US Preventive Services Task Force.  Screening for vitamin D deficiency in adults: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(2):133-140.
  • Moyer  VA; US Preventive Services Task Force.  Vitamin, mineral, and multivitamin supplements for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160(8):558-564.
  • Heaney  RP, Armas  LA.  Screening for vitamin D deficiency: is the goal disease prevention or full nutrient repletion? Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(2):144-145.
  • Manson JE, Bassuk SS. Vitamin D research and Clinical Practice. JAMA. Published online February 19, 2015. doi:10.1001/jama.2015.1353.

Top


Policy History: 

 

Date                                        Reason                               Action

May 2011                               Literature review                New policy

March 2012                            Annual review                    Policy renewed

March 2013                            Annual review                    Policy renewed

March 2014                            Annual review                    Policy revised

March 2015                            Annual review                    Policy revised

July 2015                               Interim review                    Policy revised


Top


Wellmark medical policies address the complex issue of technology assessment of new and emerging treatments, devices, drugs, etc.   They are developed to assist in administering plan benefits and constitute neither offers of coverage nor medical advice. Wellmark medical policies contain only a partial, general description of plan or program benefits and do not constitute a contract. Wellmark does not provide health care services and, therefore, cannot guarantee any results or outcomes. Participating providers are independent contractors in private practice and are neither employees nor agents of Wellmark or its affiliates. Treating providers are solely responsible for medical advice and treatment of members. Our medical policies may be updated and therefore are subject to change without notice.

*Current Procedural Terminology © 2012 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.

 
Contact Information
New information or technology that would be relevant for Wellmark to consider when this policy is next reviewed may be submitted to:
  Wellmark Blue Cross and Blue Shield
  Medical Policy Analyst
  P.O. Box 9232
  Des Moines, IA 50306-9232
FacebookTwitterInstagrampinterestLinked InYou Tube