Genetic and epigenetic variants in the MTHFR gene are not associated with non-Hodgkin lymphoma

The methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) gene codes for the MTHFR enzyme which plays a key role in the pathway of folate and methionine metabolism. Polymorphisms of genes in this pathway affect its regulation and have been linked to lymphoma. In this study we examined whether we could detect an association between two common non-synonomous MTHFR polymorphisms, 677C>T (rs1801133) and 1298A>C (rs1801131), and susceptibility to non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) in an Australian case-control cohort. We found no significant differences between genotype or allele frequencies for either polymorphisms between lymphoma cases and controls. We also explored whether epigenetic modification of MTHFR, specifically DNA methylation of a CpG island in the MTHFR promoter region, is associated with NHL using blood samples from patients. No difference in methylation levels was detected between the case and control samples suggesting that although hypermethylation of MTHFR has been reported in tumour tissues, particularly in the diffuse large B-cell lymphoma subtype of NHL, methylation of this MTHFR promoter CpG island is not a suitable epigenetic biomarker for NHL diagnosis or prognosis in peripheral blood samples. Further studies into epigenetic variants could focus on genes that are robustly associated with NHL susceptibility.

R&D in clean technology: A project choice model with learning

In this study, we investigate the qualitative and quantitative effects of an R&D subsidy for a clean technology and a Pigouvian tax on a dirty technology on environmental R&D when it is uncertain how long the research takes to complete. The model is formulated as an optimal stopping problem, in which the number of successes required to complete the R&D project is finite and learning about the probability of success is incorporated. We show that the optimal R&D subsidy with the consideration of learning is higher than that without it. We also find that an R&D subsidy performs better than a Pigouvian tax unless suppliers have sufficient incentives to continue cost-reduction efforts after the new technology success-fully replaces the old one. Moreover, by using a two-project model, we show that a uniform subsidy is better than a selective subsidy.