Objective
To evaluate evidence for differences in pediatric brain tumor diagnoses by race and ethnicity using a cross-sectional study design in individuals with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1).
Study design
Subjects with NF1 were ascertained from the NF1 Patient Registry Initiative (NPRI) and through a clinical record database of patients at a large academic medical center. Logistic regression was employed to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to analyze differences in the odds of brain tumor diagnosis by race (White, Black, Asian, Other/Unknown) and ethnic (Hispanic vs. non-Hispanic) groups.
Results
Data from a total of 1546, 629, and 2038 individuals who were ascertained from the NPRI, clinical records, and pooled datasets were analyzed, respectively. After adjusting for birth year, we observed a significantly reduced odds of brain tumor diagnoses in individuals self identified or clinically reported as Black (OR=0.13, 95% CI 0.05–0.31), Asian (OR=0.15, 95% CI 0.04–0.64), and Other/Unknown (OR=0.61, 95% CI 0.41–0.93) race compared with those with reported as White race. There was no significant difference in the odds of pediatric brain tumor diagnosis by Hispanic ethnicity.
Conclusion
Consistent with prior smaller studies, these data suggest that pediatric brain tumor diagnoses vary by race in individuals with NF1. Reasons underlying observed differences by race warrant further investigation.
Background
Individuals with Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) are at increased risk for pediatric brain tumors (PBTs), especially optic gliomas; however, factors influencing their development are largely unknown. Extensive research suggests that allergic conditions protect against brain tumors, particularly gliomas in individuals without NF1. In this large cross-sectional study, we employed two different data sources to evaluate evidence for the hypothesis that allergic conditions (allergies, asthma, and eczema) may protect against PBT development in individuals with NF1.
Methods
We used self- and parent/legal guardian reported questionnaire data from participants in the NF1 Patient Registry Initiative (NPRI, n=1660) born from 1933–2014 to ascertain allergic condition and PBT diagnosis histories. Medical records (MRs) of 629 NF1 patients at a large medical center born from 1930–2012 were also reviewed for PBT and allergic condition diagnoses to evaluate additional evidence for our hypothesis. We used logistic regression to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations between allergic condition diagnoses and PBTs.
Results
Both data sources provided limited to no support for a protective effect of allergies or eczema on PBT development. Non-significant inverse associations between asthma and PBTs were observed (NPRI: OR=0.80, 95% CI 0.55–1.17; MR: OR=0.71, 95% CI 0.40–1.28) with stronger associations for optic gliomas specifically. Additionally, a significant inverse association was observed in an NPRI subgroup analysis where the reported asthma diagnosis age was younger than the reported PBT diagnosis age (OR=0.57; 95% CI 0.36–0.89).
Conclusion
Our study supports the hypothesis that asthma protects against PBT development in NF1.
This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.