Search

Background: Associations have been found between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the MTHFR gene and cognitive outcomes in cancer survivors. Prior research has demonstrated that the presence of MTHFR SNPs (rs1801131 and rs1801133) in survivors of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) corresponds to impairments in attention and executive functioning. The current study examines the associations between rs1801131 and/or rs1801133 SNPs and cognitive performance in long-term survivors of medulloblastoma. Procedure: Eighteen pediatric medulloblastoma survivors, on average 12.42 years post-diagnosis, completed the Digit Span Forward, Digit Span Backward, California Verbal Learning Test Trial 1, and Auditory Consonant Trigrams tests. MTHFR SNPs were detected using whole genome sequencing data and custom scripts within R software. Results: Survivors with a rs1801131 SNP performed significantly worse on Digit Span Backward than survivors without this SNP exhibiting a large effect (p = 0.049; d = 0.95). Survivors with a rs1801131 SNP performed worse on Digit Span Forward (d = 0.478) and the CVLT Trial 1 (d = 0.417) with medium effect sizes. In contrast to rs1801131, relationships were not identified between a rs1801133 SNP and these performance measures. Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate the potential links between MTHFR SNPs and cognitive outcomes following treatment in brain tumor survivors. The current findings establish a novel relationship between rs1801131 and working memory in medulloblastoma. Increases in homocysteine levels and oxidative damage from radiation may lead to adverse long-term outcomes. This establishes the need to look beyond leukemia and methotrexate treatment to consider the risk of MTHFR SNPs for medulloblastoma survivors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: On April 1, 2017, California Proposition 56 (Prop 56) was implemented, increasing the excise tax on cigarettes by $2/pack. This study compares the association of Prop 56 with smoking prevalence and smoking intensity across racial/ethnic groups, further examining distinctions across income subgroups within each racial/ethnic group.Aims and Methods: The study used pooled cross-sectional data from the 2012-2018 California Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. We examined two outcomes: current smoking prevalence and smoking intensity conditional on current smoking. A two-part econometric model was used to estimate the association of Prop 56 with smoking prevalence and intensity using multiple logistic regression and multiple linear regression, respectively. The two-part model was run separately for all adults (full sample) and each racial/ethnic group. Within each racial/ethnic group, we ran stratified analyses by income subgroups.Results: The results indicated that Prop 56 was negatively associated with smoking prevalence among full sample, Hispanic, White, and African American adults and negatively associated with smoking intensity among full sample and White smokers. Stratified analyses by race/ethnicity and income showed that Prop 56 was negatively associated with smoking prevalence among low-income full sample and White adults and among middle-income smokers in the full, Hispanic, White, African American, and Asian samples. Prop 56 was negatively associated with smoking intensity among middle-income Hispanic and high-income White smokers. The association between Prop 56 and smoking intensity was positive among high-income African American smokers.Conclusion: Prop 56 was associated with a reduction in smoking prevalence across multiple racial/ethnic groups, particularly within the low- and middle-income subgroups.Implications: Our findings indicate that the reduction in smoking prevalence immediately following the implementation of Prop 56 tobacco tax increase was significant across a variety racial/ethnic groups, particularly low- and middle-income subgroups. We found differential responses in smoking prevalence across income groups among Whites but not among racial/ethnic minorities. We found no evidence of any significance association between Proposition 56 and smoking intensity among minorities and economically vulnerable populations, except for middle-income Hispanics. Researchers, policy makers, and advocates should consider the additional merits of targeted, community-based, noneconomic tobacco control interventions in reaching low- and middle-income groups within racial/ethnic minorities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. To compare the association of California Proposition 56 (Prop 56), which increased the cigarette tax by $2 per pack beginning on April 1, 2017, with smoking behavior among low- and high-income adults. Methods. Drawing on a sample of 17 206 low-income and 21 324 high-income adults aged 21 years or older from the 2012 to 2018 California Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data, we explored 2 outcomes: current smoking prevalence and smoking intensity (average number of cigarettes per day among current smokers). For each income group, we estimated a multivariable logistic regression to analyze the association of Prop 56 with smoking prevalence and a multivariable linear regression to analyze the association of Prop 56 with smoking intensity. Results. Although we observed no association between smoking intensity and Prop 56, we found a statistically significant decline in smoking prevalence among low-income adults following Prop 56. No such association was found among the high-income group. Conclusions. Given that low-income Californians smoke cigarettes at greater rates than those with higher incomes, our results provide evidence that Prop 56 is likely to reduce income disparities in cigarette smoking in California. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]