Belva Vaughn appeals the district court’s 2 order affirming the Commissioner’s termination of Vaughn’s supplemental security income benefits, which had been awarded in part because of her alcoholism. Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude substantial evidence supported the Commissioner’s decision to end the benefits. See 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(2)(C) (individual shall not be considered disabled for purposes of this sub-chapter if alcoholism would be contributing factor material to Commissioner’s determination that individual is disabled); 20 C.F.R. § 416.935(b)(1) (2001) (“key factor” in determining whether alcoholism is material to determination of disability is whether claimant would still be found disabled if she stopped using alcohol); Pettit v. Apfel, 218 F.3d 901, 903 (8th Cir. 2000) (claimant who is no longer using alcohol still has initial burden of showing that remaining impairments are disabling); Rehder v. Apfel, 205 F.3d 1056, 1059 (8th Cir. 2000) (standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.