Genetic effects on infant handedness under spatial constraint conditions

Left-handedness should not be overrated as a risk factor for postoperative speech impairment in children after posterior fossa tumour surgery: a prospective European multicentre study

PURPOSE

Cerebellar mutism syndrome (CMS) is a severe neurological complication of posterior fossa tumour surgery in children, and postoperative speech impairment (POSI) is the main component. Left-handedness was previously suggested as a strong risk factor for POSI. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between handedness and the risk of POSI.

METHODS

We prospectively included children (aged < 18 years) undergoing surgery for posterior fossa tumours in 26 European centres. Handedness was assessed pre-operatively and postoperative speech status was categorised as either POSI (mutism or reduced speech) or habitual speech, based on the postoperative clinical assessment. Logistic regression was used in the risk factor analysis of POSI as a dichotomous outcome.

RESULTS

Of the 500 children included, 37 (7%) were excluded from the present analysis due to enrolment at a reoperation; another 213 (43%) due to missing data about surgery (n = 37) and/or handedness (n = 146) and/or postoperative speech status (n = 53). Out of the remaining 250 (50%) patients, 20 (8%) were left-handed and 230 (92%) were right-handed. POSI was observed equally frequently regardless of handedness (5/20 [25%] in left-handed, 61/230 [27%] in right-handed, OR: 1.08 [95% CI: 0.40-3.44], p = 0.882), also when adjusted for tumour histology, location and age.

CONCLUSION

We found no difference in the risk of POSI associated with handedness. Our data do not support the hypothesis that handedness should be of clinical relevance in the risk assessment of CMS.

Handedness in twins: meta-analyses

BACKGROUND

In the general population, 10.6% of people favor their left hand over the right for motor tasks. Previous research suggests higher prevalence of atypical (left-, mixed-, or non-right-) handedness in (i) twins compared to singletons, and in (ii) monozygotic compared to dizygotic twins. Moreover, (iii) studies have shown a higher rate of handedness concordance in monozygotic compared to dizygotic twins, in line with genetic factors playing a role for handedness.

METHODS

By means of a systematic review, we identified 59 studies from previous literature and performed three sets of random effects meta-analyses on (i) twin-to-singleton Odds Ratios (21 studies, n = 189,422 individuals) and (ii) monozygotic-to-dizygotic twin Odds Ratios (48 studies, n = 63,295 individuals), both times for prevalence of left-, mixed-, and non-right-handedness. For monozygotic and dizygotic twin pairs we compared (iii) handedness concordance Odds Ratios (44 studies, n = 36,217 twin pairs). We also tested for potential effects of moderating variables, such as sex, age, the method used to assess handedness, and the twins' zygosity.

RESULTS

We found (i) evidence for higher prevalence of left- (Odds Ratio = 1.40, 95% Confidence Interval = [1.26, 1.57]) and non-right- (Odds Ratio = 1.36, 95% Confidence Interval = [1.22, 1.52]), but not mixed-handedness (Odds Ratio = 1.08, 95% Confidence Interval = [0.52, 2.27]) among twins compared to singletons. We further showed a decrease in Odds Ratios in more recent studies (post-1975: Odds Ratio = 1.30, 95% Confidence Interval = [1.17, 1.45]) compared to earlier studies (pre-1975: Odds Ratio = 1.90, 95% Confidence Interval = [1.59-2.27]). While there was (ii) no difference between monozygotic and dizygotic twins regarding prevalence of left- (Odds Ratio = 0.98, 95% Confidence Interval = [0.89, 1.07]), mixed- (Odds Ratio = 0.96, 95% Confidence Interval = [0.46, 1.99]), or non-right-handedness (Odds Ratio = 1.01, 95% Confidence Interval = [0.91, 1.12]), we found that (iii) handedness concordance was elevated among monozygotic compared to dizygotic twin pairs (Odds Ratio = 1.11, 95% Confidence Interval = [1.06, 1.18]). By means of moderator analyses, we did not find evidence for effects of potentially confounding variables.

CONCLUSION

We provide the largest and most comprehensive meta-analysis on handedness in twins. Although a raw, unadjusted analysis found a higher prevalence of left- and non-right-, but not mixed-handedness among twins compared to singletons, left-handedness was substantially more prevalent in earlier than in more recent studies. The single large, recent study which included birth weight, Apgar score and gestational age as covariates found no twin-singleton difference in handedness rate, but these covariates could not be included in the present meta-analysis. Together, the secular shift and the influence of covariates probably make it unsafe to conclude that twinning has a genuine relationship to handedness.

Nine-month old infants' hand preference shows no link to concurrent or later vocabulary

Previous studies have shown a link between language abilities and right hand preference (RHP) for both object manipulation and pointing between 10 and 18 months of age. For infants, RHP can still be unstable. The purpose of the present study was to test whether the link between vocabulary and RHP exists among 9-month-old infants. The study included 88 infants who were observed in videotaped free-play interactions with their mothers at 9 months of age. The infants' hand preference was coded for touching objects and pointing. The children's vocabulary was measured at 9, 12, and 18 months of age. The results showed a small and significant RHP for touching objects and no significant RHP for pointing. The degree of RHP was not correlated with vocabulary scores at any age. One interpretation of these results is that, for the infants in this study, the lateralization for motor abilities was still stabilizing and therefore showed no relationship with their vocabulary. If so, this result is consistent with the argument that language lateralization builds on the lateralization for skilled and/or communicative movement.

Measuring infant handedness reliably from reaching: A systematic review

Researchers have utilized reaching paradigms to measure infant handedness for more than a century. However, methods vary widely. Recent research has identified that the number of trials used in assessment is critical with the recommendation that at least 15 trials are necessary to reliably classify infants into handedness categories via statistical cutoffs. As a first step towards establishing best practices for the field, we identified, categorized, and synthesized findings according to trial number from studies that utilized reaching to index handedness in infants across the first two years of life using PRISMA guidelines. Database searches were conducted in PsycINFO, PubMed, and Ovid MEDLINE®. All articles published through May 2018 were included. Additional records were identified through other sources. After removing duplicates, 1,116 records were screened using the online software program Abstrackr. Of these records, 125 full-text articles were further assessed for eligibility, and 87 articles were included in the qualitative synthesis. Results revealed that the majority of papers published since 1890 (70%) do not meet the 15-trial minimum criterion for statistically reliable measurement of infant handedness. Broad themes from articles meeting the measurement criterion and implications for future research are discussed.

Social encouragement can influence manual preference in 6 month-old-infants

The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of social encouragement on infants’ hand movements, in particular on manual preference. Thirty-six infants were observed at 5.5 months. In a first step, their spontaneous manual preference was recorded with an object placed at the midline position. The second step consisted in encouraging infants to use their non-preferred hand by putting the object near that hand and congratulating them. The third step was similar to the first one (object placed at the midline position) except that the infant continued to be congratulated when (s)he used the non-preferred hand for reaching the object. Results showed that half of the infants exhibited a spontaneous manual preference and that a majority of these infants could use their non-preferred hand when verbally encouraged. Moreover, infants showing a left hand preference modified their hand-use more easily than infants showing a right hand preference. Although our findings reveal only a temporary and short-term influence of the social context, results are discussed in light of a socio-cognitive perspective whereby social encouragement can model manual preference, in particular its strength and stability.

Highlights

• At 5.5 months, a manual preference was observed in 47.2% of the infants.

• The preference for the left hand was observed in 35.3% of the infants who presented a manual preference.

• Left-handers change more easily their hand-use than right handers.

Genetic and environmental structure of individual differences in hand, foot, and ear preferences: a twin study

Recent studies with large sample size have reported moderate heritability of hand preference. However, little is known about genetic and environmental factors for lateral preference. We examined the genetic and environmental factors for hand, foot, and ear preferences using a twin design study. A lateral preference questionnaire was administered to twin participants (N=956). Phenotypic correlation matrices of lateral preferences were computed for monozygotic and dizygotic twin pairs, and were subjected to Cholesky decomposition to compute additive genetic and unique environmental correlation matrices. Promax rotation factor analysis of each genetic and environmental correlation matrix yielded six genetic and four environmental factors. Factor-loading patterns for these factors indicated that hand and foot lateral activities were affected by different genetic factors. By contrast, each of the four environmental factors was mainly associated with hand, foot, or ear preference. These results suggest that the genetic structure for lateral preference may be more complex than the environmental structure. In particular, hand preference may be multidimensional in terms of genetic factors.

Two Cohort and Three Independent Anonymous Twin Projects at the Keio Twin Research Center (KoTReC)

The Keio Twin Research Center has conducted two longitudinal twin cohort projects and has collected three independent and anonymous twin data sets for studies of phenotypes related to psychological, socio-economic, and mental health factors. The Keio Twin Study has examined adolescent and adult cohorts, with a total of over 2,400 pairs of twins and their parents. DNA samples are available for approximately 600 of these twin pairs. The Tokyo Twin Cohort Project has followed a total of 1,600 twin pairs from infancy to early childhood. The large-scale cross-sectional twin study (CROSS) has collected data from over 4,000 twin pairs, from 3 to 26 years of age, and from two high school twin cohorts containing a total of 1,000 pairs of twins. These data sets of anonymous twin studies have mainly targeted academic performance, attitude, and social environment. The present article introduces the research designs and major findings of our center, such as genetic structures of cognitive abilities, personality traits, and academic performances, developmental effects of genes and environment on attitude, socio-cognitive ability and parenting, genes x environment interaction on attitude and conduct problem, and statistical methodological challenges and so on. We discuss the challenges in conducting twin research in Japan.

Left-handedness and language lateralization in children

This fMRI study investigated the development of language lateralization in left- and righthanded children between 5 and 18 years of age. Twenty-seven left-handed children (17 boys, 10 girls) and 54 age- and gender-matched right-handed children were included. We used functional MRI at 3T and a verb generation task to measure hemispheric language dominance based on either frontal or temporo-parietal regions of interest (ROIs) defined for the entire group and applied on an individual basis. Based on the frontal ROI, in the left-handed group, 23 participants (85%) demonstrated left-hemispheric language lateralization, 3 (11%) demonstrated symmetric activation, and 1 (4%) demonstrated right-hemispheric lateralization. In contrast, 50 (93%) of the right-handed children showed left-hemispheric lateralization and 3 (6%) demonstrated a symmetric activation pattern, while one (2%) demonstrated a right-hemispheric lateralization. The corresponding values for the temporo-parietal ROI for the left-handed children were 18 (67%) left-dominant, 6 (22%) symmetric, 3 (11%) right-dominant and for the right-handed children 49 (91%), 4 (7%), 1 (2%), respectively. Left-hemispheric language lateralization increased with age in both groups but somewhat different lateralization trajectories were observed in girls when compared to boys. The incidence of atypical language lateralization in left-handed children in this study was similar to that reported in adults. We also found similar rates of increase in left-hemispheric language lateralization with age between groups (i.e., independent of handedness) indicating the presence of similar mechanisms for language lateralization in left- and right-handed children.