Differential cognitive and behavioral development from 6 to 24 months in autism and fragile X syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Specifying early developmental differences among neurodevelopmental disorders with distinct etiologies is critical to improving early identification and tailored intervention during the first years of life. Recent studies have uncovered important differences between infants with fragile X syndrome (FXS) and infants with familial history of autism spectrum disorder who go on to develop autism themselves (FH-ASD), including differences in brain development and behavior. Thus far, there have been no studies longitudinally investigating differential developmental skill profiles in FXS and FH-ASD infants. METHODS: The current study contrasted longitudinal trajectories of verbal (expressive and receptive language) and nonverbal (gross and fine motor, visual reception) skills in FXS and FH-ASD infants, compared to FH infants who did not develop ASD (FH-nonASD) and typically developing controls. RESULTS: Infants with FXS showed delays on a nonverbal composite compared to FH-ASD (as well as FH-nonASD and control) infants as early as 6 months of age. By 12 months an ordinal pattern of scores was established between groups on all domains tested, such that controls > FH-nonASD > FH-ASD > FXS. This pattern persisted through 24 months. Cognitive level differentially influenced developmental trajectories for FXS and FH-ASD. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate detectable group differences by 6 months between FXS and FH-ASD as well as differential trajectories on each domain throughout infancy. This work further highlights an earlier onset of global cognitive delays in FXS and, conversely, a protracted period of more slowly emerging delays in FH-ASD. Divergent neural and cognitive development in infancy between FXS and FH-ASD contributes to our understanding of important distinctions in the development and behavioral phenotype of these two groups.

Subcortical Brain Development in Autism and Fragile X Syndrome: Evidence for Dynamic, Age- and Disorder-Specific Trajectories in Infancy.

OBJECTIVE: Previous research has demonstrated that the amygdala is enlarged in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). However, the precise onset of this enlargement during infancy, how it relates to later diagnostic behaviors, whether the timing of enlargement in infancy is specific to the amygdala, and whether it is specific to ASD (or present in other neurodevelopmental disorders, such as fragile X syndrome) are all unknown. METHODS: Longitudinal MRIs were acquired at 6-24 months of age in 29 infants with fragile X syndrome, 58 infants at high likelihood for ASD who were later diagnosed with ASD, 212 high-likelihood infants not diagnosed with ASD, and 109 control infants (1,099 total scans). RESULTS: Infants who developed ASD had typically sized amygdala volumes at 6 months, but exhibited significantly faster amygdala growth between 6 and 24 months, such that by 12 months the ASD group had significantly larger amygdala volume (Cohen's d=0.56) compared with all other groups. Amygdala growth rate between 6 and 12 months was significantly associated with greater social deficits at 24 months when the infants were diagnosed with ASD. Infants with fragile X syndrome had a persistent and significantly enlarged caudate volume at all ages between 6 and 24 months (d=2.12), compared with all other groups, which was significantly associated with greater repetitive behaviors. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first MRI study comparing fragile X syndrome and ASD in infancy, demonstrating strikingly different patterns of brain and behavior development. Fragile X syndrome-related changes were present from 6 months of age, whereas ASD-related changes unfolded over the first 2 years of life, starting with no detectable group differences at 6 months. Increased amygdala growth rate between 6 and 12 months occurs prior to social deficits and well before diagnosis. This gradual onset of brain and behavior changes in ASD, but not fragile X syndrome, suggests an age- and disorder-specific pattern of cascading brain changes preceding autism diagnosis.

PEAK Pre-Assessments: Preliminary Evidence Establishing Internal Consistency and Construct Validity.

Promoting the Emergence of Advanced Knowledge (PEAK) is a behavior-analytic tool that assesses and teaches language and cognitive abilities. PEAK preassessment total scores showed statistically significant correlations with measures of intelligence (r = .703, p = .023) and adaptive behavior (r = .618, p = .018), whereas no significant correlations were found between PEAK and age, autism diagnostic instruments, or aggression scales in a sample (N = 18) receiving behavior-analytic assessment in an autism clinic. Statistically significant correlations were found between all modules within the PEAK system (p ≤ .001). Results provide preliminary evidence of the construct validity and internal consistency of the PEAK preassessments.

Amygdala volume analysis in female twins with major depression.

BACKGROUND: Previous research examining the amygdala volumes in major depressive disorder (MDD) has found conflicting evidence for association. Furthermore, few of these studies have examined differences in individuals with an onset during childhood or adolescence. This study examined amygdala volume and its potential association with early onset major depression. METHODS: A community-based sample of 47 right-handed young adult female monozygotic and dizygotic twin pairs was examined. For 29 twin pairs, one twin per pair had a lifetime history of MDD, while 18 age-matched control twin pairs had no lifetime history of MDD or other Axis I disorder. Core, noncore, and total amygdala volumes were estimated based on a combination of manual tracing, automated segmentation, and expert rater regional boundary definitions. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in amygdala volumes between depressed, high-risk, or control subjects. However, analyses comparing control monozygotic twins to randomly created control subject pairs suggest that there are familial, perhaps genetic, influences on core and total amygdala volumes. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that although there were no significant differences in amygdala volumes between groups, familial factors influence amygdala volumes. Discrepancies between studies measuring amygdala volume in MDD may be due to differences in amygdala boundary definitions.