A family study implicates GBE1 in the etiology of autism spectrum disorder.

Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are neurodevelopmental disorders with an estimated heritability of >60%. Family-based genetic studies of ASD have generally focused on multiple small kindreds, searching for de novo variants of major effect. We hypothesized that molecular genetic analysis of large multiplex families would enable the identification of variants of milder effects. We studied a large multigenerational family of European ancestry with multiple family members affected with ASD or the broader autism phenotype (BAP). We identified a rare heterozygous variant in the gene encoding 1,4-ɑ-glucan branching enzyme 1 (GBE1) that was present in seven of seven individuals with ASD, nine of ten individuals with the BAP, and none of four tested unaffected individuals. We genotyped a community-acquired cohort of 389 individuals with ASD and identified three additional probands. Cascade analysis demonstrated that the variant was present in 11 of 13 individuals with familial ASD/BAP and neither of the two tested unaffected individuals in these three families, also of European ancestry. The variant was not enriched in the combined UK10K ASD cohorts of European ancestry but heterozygous GBE1 deletion was overrepresented in large ASD cohorts, collectively suggesting an association between GBE1 and ASD.

Tracing Autism Traits in Large Multiplex Families to Identify Endophenotypes of the Broader Autism Phenotype.

Families comprising many individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) may carry a dominant predisposing mutation. We implemented rigorous phenotyping of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (BAP) in large multiplex ASD families using a novel endophenotype approach for the identification and characterisation of distinct BAP endophenotypes. We evaluated ASD/BAP features using standardised tests and a semi-structured interview to assess social, intellectual, executive and adaptive functioning in 110 individuals, including two large multiplex families (Family A: 30; Family B: 35) and an independent sample of small families (n = 45). Our protocol identified four distinct psychological endophenotypes of the BAP that were evident across these independent samples, and showed high sensitivity (97%) and specificity (82%) for individuals classified with the BAP. Patterns of inheritance of identified endophenotypes varied between the two large multiplex families, supporting their utility for identifying genes in ASD.

A randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled trial of a fixed dose of N-acetyl cysteine in children with autistic disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Oxidative stress, inflammation and heavy metals have been implicated in the aetiology of autistic disorder. N-acetyl cysteine has been shown to modulate these pathways, providing a rationale to trial N-acetyl cysteine for autistic disorder. There are now two published pilot studies suggesting efficacy, particularly in symptoms of irritability. This study aimed to explore if N-acetyl cysteine is a useful treatment for autistic disorder. METHOD: This was a placebo-controlled, randomised clinical trial of 500 mg/day oral N-acetyl cysteine over 6 months, in addition to treatment as usual, in children with a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision diagnosis of autistic disorder. The study was conducted in Victoria, Australia. The primary outcome measures were the Social Responsiveness Scale, Children's Communication Checklist-Second Edition and the Repetitive Behavior Scale-Revised. Additionally, demographic data, the parent-completed Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Social Communication Questionnaire and clinician-administered Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule were completed. RESULTS: A total of 102 children were randomised into the study, and 98 (79 male, 19 female; age range: 3.1-9.9 years) attended the baseline appointment with their parent/guardian, forming the Intention to Treat sample. There were no differences between N-acetyl cysteine and placebo-treated groups on any of the outcome measures for either primary or secondary endpoints. There was no significant difference in the number and severity of adverse events between groups. CONCLUSION: This study failed to demonstrate any benefit of adjunctive N-acetyl cysteine in treating autistic disorder. While this may reflect a true null result, methodological issues particularly the lower dose utilised in this study may be confounders.