The Potential Role of Gut Peptide Hormones in Autism Spectrum Disorder

Effects of sleep deprivation on sleep and sleep electroencephalogram in secretin-receptor knockout mice

Recent studies has consistently demonstrated a relationship between secretin and autism-like behavior in mice. Therefore, secretin-receptor knockout (SCTR-KO) mice are used to study autism. However, with respect to humans, some studies have reported that secretin administration could improve autistic symptoms in contrast to other studies. A consistent finding revealed that several patients with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) experience comorbid sleep disorders. To examine the relationship between secretin and sleep, we recorded the core body temperature and locomotor activity of SCTR-KO (-/-) and wild-type (WT) (+/+) mice in the baseline condition and after 4 h of sleep deprivation. No significant differences were observed between the SCTR-KO and control mice in the baseline condition. However, during the first dark period following sleep deprivation, we observed an increase in non-rapid eye movement sleep in the SCTR-KO group, which demonstrated that the absence of secretin induces fragmentation making it difficult for the SCTR-KO mice to maintain sleep and wakefulness. Our results follow previous reports that a large proportion of patients with ASD complain of drowsiness and decreased focus during the day. Secretin functions as an intestinal peptide that neutralizes gastric acid and as a neuropeptide in the brain; it also affects social cognitive behavior and acts as a neurotrophic factor. We have proposed that secretin might be a contributing factor to the modulation of sleep.

Mini review of molecules involved in altered postnatal neurogenesis in autism

The neurobiology of autism is complex, but emerging research points to potential abnormalities and alterations in neurogenesis. The aim of the present review is to describe the advances in the understanding of the role of selected neurotrophins, neuropeptides, and other compounds secreted by neuronal cells in the processes of postnatal neurogenesis in conjunction with autism. We characterize the fundamental mechanisms of neuronal cell proliferation, generation of major neuronal cell types with special emphasis on neurogenic niches - the subventricular zone and hippocampal areas. We also discuss changes in intracellular calcium levels and calcium-dependent transcription factors in the context of the regulation of neurogenesis and cell fate determination. To sum up, this review provides specific insight into the known association between alterations in the function of the entire spectrum of molecules involved in neurogenesis and the etiology of autism pathogenesis.

Pharmacological intervention for irritability, aggression, and self-injury in autism spectrum disorder (ASD)

BACKGROUND

Pharmacological interventions are frequently used for people with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) to manage behaviours of concern, including irritability, aggression, and self-injury. Some pharmacological interventions might help treat some behaviours of concern, but can also have adverse effects (AEs).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and AEs of pharmacological interventions for managing the behaviours of irritability, aggression, and self-injury in ASD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, 11 other databases and two trials registers up to June 2022. We also searched reference lists of relevant studies, and contacted study authors, experts and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of participants of any age with a clinical diagnosis of ASD, that compared any pharmacological intervention to an alternative drug, standard care, placebo, or wait-list control.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Primary outcomes were behaviours of concern in ASD, (irritability, aggression and self-injury); and AEs. Secondary outcomes were quality of life, and tolerability and acceptability. Two review authors independently assessed each study for risk of bias, and used GRADE to judge the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 131 studies involving 7014 participants in this review. We identified 26 studies as awaiting classification and 25 as ongoing. Most studies involved children (53 studies involved only children under 13 years), children and adolescents (37 studies), adolescents only (2 studies) children and adults (16 studies), or adults only (23 studies). All included studies compared a pharmacological intervention to a placebo or to another pharmacological intervention. Atypical antipsychotics versus placebo At short-term follow-up (up to 6 months), atypical antipsychotics probably reduce irritability compared to placebo (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.25 to -0.55, 12 studies, 973 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), which may indicate a large effect. However, there was no clear evidence of a difference in aggression between groups (SMD -0.44, 95% CI -0.89 to 0.01; 1 study, 77 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Atypical antipsychotics may also reduce self-injury (SMD -1.43, 95% CI -2.24 to -0.61; 1 study, 30 participants; low-certainty evidence), possibly indicating a large effect. There may be higher rates of neurological AEs (dizziness, fatigue, sedation, somnolence, and tremor) in the intervention group (low-certainty evidence), but there was no clear evidence of an effect on other neurological AEs. Increased appetite may be higher in the intervention group (low-certainty evidence), but we found no clear evidence of an effect on other metabolic AEs. There was no clear evidence of differences between groups in musculoskeletal or psychological AEs. Neurohormones versus placebo At short-term follow-up, neurohormones may have minimal to no clear effect on irritability when compared to placebo (SMD -0.18, 95% CI -0.37 to -0.00; 8 studies; 466 participants; very low-certainty evidence), although the evidence is very uncertain. No data were reported for aggression or self -injury. Neurohormones may reduce the risk of headaches slightly in the intervention group, although the evidence is very uncertain. There was no clear evidence of an effect of neurohormones on any other neurological AEs, nor on any psychological, metabolic, or musculoskeletal AEs (low- and very low-certainty evidence). Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)-related medications versus placebo At short-term follow-up, ADHD-related medications may reduce irritability slightly (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.01; 10 studies, 400 participants; low-certainty evidence), which may indicate a small effect. However, there was no clear evidence that ADHD-related medications have an effect on self-injury (SMD -0.62, 95% CI -1.63 to 0.39; 1 study, 16 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No data were reported for aggression. Rates of neurological AEs (drowsiness, emotional AEs, fatigue, headache, insomnia, and irritability), metabolic AEs (decreased appetite) and psychological AEs (depression) may be higher in the intervention group, although the evidence is very uncertain (very low-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a difference between groups for any other metabolic, neurological, or psychological AEs (very low-certainty evidence). No data were reported for musculoskeletal AEs. Antidepressants versus placebo At short-term follow-up, there was no clear evidence that antidepressants have an effect on irritability (SMD -0.06, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.18; 3 studies, 267 participants; low-certainty evidence). No data for aggression or self-injury were reported or could be included in the analysis. Rates of metabolic AEs (decreased energy) may be higher in participants receiving antidepressants (very low-certainty evidence), although no other metabolic AEs showed clear evidence of a difference. Rates of neurological AEs (decreased attention) and psychological AEs (impulsive behaviour and stereotypy) may also be higher in the intervention group (very low-certainty evidence) although the evidence is very uncertain. There was no clear evidence of any difference in the other metabolic, neurological, or psychological AEs (very low-certainty evidence), nor between groups in musculoskeletal AEs (very low-certainty evidence). Risk of bias We rated most of the studies across the four comparisons at unclear overall risk of bias due to having multiple domains rated as unclear, very few rated as low across all domains, and most having at least one domain rated as high risk of bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence suggests that atypical antipsychotics probably reduce irritability, ADHD-related medications may reduce irritability slightly, and neurohormones may have little to no effect on irritability in the short term in people with ASD. There was some evidence that atypical antipsychotics may reduce self-injury in the short term, although the evidence is uncertain. There was no clear evidence that antidepressants had an effect on irritability. There was also little to no difference in aggression between atypical antipsychotics and placebo, or self-injury between ADHD-related medications and placebo. However, there was some evidence that atypical antipsychotics may result in a large reduction in self-injury, although the evidence is uncertain. No data were reported (or could be used) for self-injury or aggression for neurohormones versus placebo. Studies reported a wide range of potential AEs. Atypical antipsychotics and ADHD-related medications in particular were associated with an increased risk of metabolic and neurological AEs, although the evidence is uncertain for atypical antipsychotics and very uncertain for ADHD-related medications. The other drug classes had minimal or no associated AEs.

The Current View on the Paradox of Pain in Autism Spectrum Disorders

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder, which affects 1 in 44 children and may cause severe disabilities. Besides socio-communicational difficulties and repetitive behaviors, ASD also presents as atypical sensorimotor function and pain reactivity. While chronic pain is a frequent co-morbidity in autism, pain management in this population is often insufficient because of difficulties in pain evaluation, worsening their prognosis and perhaps driving higher mortality rates. Previous observations have tended to oversimplify the experience of pain in autism as being insensitive to painful stimuli. Various findings in the past 15 years have challenged and complicated this dogma. However, a relatively small number of studies investigates the physiological correlates of pain reactivity in ASD. We explore the possibility that atypical pain perception in people with ASD is mediated by alterations in pain perception, transmission, expression and modulation, and through interactions between these processes. These complex interactions may account for the great variability and sometimes contradictory findings from the studies. A growing body of evidence is challenging the idea of alterations in pain processing in ASD due to a single factor, and calls for an integrative view. We propose a model of the pain cycle that includes the interplay between the molecular and neurophysiological pathways of pain processing and it conscious appraisal that may interfere with pain reactivity and coping in autism. The role of social factors in pain-induced response is also discussed. Pain assessment in clinical care is mostly based on subjective rather than objective measures. This review clarifies the strong need for a consistent methodology, and describes innovative tools to cope with the heterogeneity of pain expression in ASD, enabling individualized assessment. Multiple measures, including self-reporting, informant reporting, clinician-assessed, and purely physiological metrics may provide more consistent results. An integrative view on the regulation of the pain cycle offers a more robust framework to characterize the experience of pain in autism.

Cell Type-Specific Predictive Models Perform Prioritization of Genes and Gene Sets Associated With Autism

Bulk transcriptomic analyses of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have revealed dysregulated pathways, while the brain cell type-specific molecular pathology of ASD still needs to be studied. Machine learning-based studies can be conducted for ASD, prioritizing high-confidence gene candidates and promoting the design of effective interventions. Using human brain nucleus gene expression of ASD and controls, we construct cell type-specific predictive models for ASD based on individual genes and gene sets, respectively, to screen cell type-specific ASD-associated genes and gene sets. These two kinds of predictive models can predict the diagnosis of a nucleus with known cell type. Then, we construct a multi-label predictive model for predicting the cell type and diagnosis of a nucleus at the same time. Our findings suggest that layer 2/3 and layer 4 excitatory neurons, layer 5/6 cortico-cortical projection neurons, parvalbumin interneurons, and protoplasmic astrocytes are preferentially affected in ASD. The functions of genes with predictive power for ASD are different and the top important genes are distinct across different cells, highlighting the cell-type heterogeneity of ASD. The constructed predictive models can promote the diagnosis of ASD, and the prioritized cell type-specific ASD-associated genes and gene sets may be used as potential biomarkers of ASD.