Sex differences in sensory processing in children with autism spectrum disorder.

Despite the high prevalence of sensory processing difficulties in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), little research has focused on the sex differences in sensory processing. Furthermore, there is a lack of knowledge on the female-specific symptoms of ASD, contributing to later referral, diagnosis and intervention. In this study, we examined the sex differences in sensory processing symptoms in large cohorts of ASD children (N = 168; 26 females, 142 males) and typically developing (TD) children (N = 439; 209 females, 230 males). For this, we translated the sensory processing measure (SPM) and SPM - Preschool (SPM-P) Home Forms to French. The SPM/SPM-P are parent/caregiver questionnaires that assess typical behavioral responses to sensory stimuli. Overall, our results showed that the magnitude of the differences in sensory processing between males and females is larger in ASD children relative to TD children, with females showing more severe symptoms in Hearing, as well as Balance and Motion subscales. Additionally, linear discriminant analysis showed that the SPM/SPM-P are good at discriminating TD children from ASD, children with higher accuracy rates for females than for males. These findings are discussed in light of the heterogeneity of sensory processing difficulties present in ASD. Overall, our results suggest that there seem to be female-specific profiles in sensory processing difficulties in ASD. Implications of findings concerning sex differences in sensory processing and their potential for improving identification and diagnosis of ASD females are discussed. LAY SUMMARY: The present study examined sex differences in behavioral responses to sensory stimuli in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and typically developing (TD) children. While there is a small trend for TD males to show more sensory processing atypicalities, female ASD children show significantly more atypical responses compared to their male counterparts. This has important implications for characterizing female autism profiles, and ultimately improving the chance for earlier detection, diagnosis and treatment.

Touch and olfaction/taste differentiate children carrying a 16p11.2 deletion from children with ASD.

BACKGROUND: Sensory processing atypicalities are frequent in Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD). Different domains of sensory processing appear to be differentially altered in these disorders. In this study, we explored the sensory profile of two clinical cohorts, in comparison with a sample of typically developing children. METHODS: Behavioral responses to sensory stimuli were assessed using the Sensory Processing Measure (parent-report questionnaire). We included 121 ASD children, 17 carriers of the 16p11.2 deletion (Del 16p11.2) and 45 typically developing (TD) children. All participants were aged between 2 and 12 years. Additional measures included the Tactile Defensiveness and Discrimination Test-Revised, Wechsler Intelligence Scales and Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS-2). Statistical analyses included MANCOVA and regression analyses. RESULTS: ASD children score significantly higher on all SPM subscales compared to TD. Del16p11.2 also scored higher than TD on all subscales except for tactile and olfactory/taste processing, in which they score similarly to TD. When assessing sensory modulation patterns (hyper-, hypo-responsiveness and seeking), ASD did not significantly differ from del16p11.2. Both groups had significantly higher scores across all patterns than the TD group. There was no significant association between the SPM Touch subscale and the TDDT-R. LIMITATIONS: Sensory processing was assessed using a parent-report questionnaire. Even though it captures observable behavior, a questionnaire does not assess sensory processing in all its complexity. The sample size of the genetic cohort and the small subset of ASD children with TDDT-R data render some of our results exploratory. Divergence between SPM Touch and TDDT-R raises important questions about the nature of the process that is assessed. CONCLUSIONS: Touch and olfaction/taste seem to be particularly affected in ASD children compared to del16p11.2. These results indicate that parent report measures can provide a useful perspective on behavioral expression. Sensory phenotyping, when combined with neurobiological and psychophysical methods, might have the potential to provide a better understanding of the sensory processing in ASD and in other NDD.