Marjorie Solomon1, Jong H Yoon2, J Daniel Ragland2, Tara A Niendam2, Tyler A Lesh2, Wonja Fairbrother3, Cameron S Carter2. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of California, Davis; M.I.N.D. Institute, Sacramento, California; University of California, Davis Imaging Research Center, Sacramento, California. Electronic address: marjorie.solomon@ucdmc.ucdavis.edu. 2. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of California, Davis; University of California, Davis Imaging Research Center, Sacramento, California. 3. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of California, Davis; M.I.N.D. Institute, Sacramento, California.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) involve impairments in cognitive control. In typical development (TYP), neural systems underlying cognitive control undergo substantial maturation during adolescence. Development is delayed in adolescents with ASD. Little is known about the neural substrates of this delay. METHODS: We used event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging and a cognitive control task involving overcoming a prepotent response tendency to examine the development of cognitive control in young (ages 12-15; n = 13 with ASD and n = 13 with TYP) and older (ages 16-18; n = 14 with ASD and n = 14 with TYP) adolescents with whole-brain voxelwise univariate and task-related functional connectivity analyses. RESULTS: Older ASD and TYP showed reduced activation in sensory and premotor areas relative to younger ones. The older ASD group showed reduced left parietal activation relative to TYP. Functional connectivity analyses showed a significant age by group interaction with the older ASD group exhibiting increased functional connectivity strength between the ventrolateral prefrontal cortex and the anterior cingulate cortex, bilaterally. This functional connectivity strength was related to task performance in ASD, whereas that between dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and parietal cortex (Brodmann areas 9 and 40) was related to task performance in TYP. CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents with ASD rely more on reactive cognitive control, involving last-minute conflict detection and control implementation by the anterior cingulate cortex and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, versus proactive cognitive control requiring processing by dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and parietal cortex. Findings await replication in larger longitudinal studies that examine their functional consequences and amenability to intervention.
BACKGROUND:Autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) involve impairments in cognitive control. In typical development (TYP), neural systems underlying cognitive control undergo substantial maturation during adolescence. Development is delayed in adolescents with ASD. Little is known about the neural substrates of this delay. METHODS: We used event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging and a cognitive control task involving overcoming a prepotent response tendency to examine the development of cognitive control in young (ages 12-15; n = 13 with ASD and n = 13 with TYP) and older (ages 16-18; n = 14 with ASD and n = 14 with TYP) adolescents with whole-brain voxelwise univariate and task-related functional connectivity analyses. RESULTS: Older ASD and TYP showed reduced activation in sensory and premotor areas relative to younger ones. The older ASD group showed reduced left parietal activation relative to TYP. Functional connectivity analyses showed a significant age by group interaction with the older ASD group exhibiting increased functional connectivity strength between the ventrolateral prefrontal cortex and the anterior cingulate cortex, bilaterally. This functional connectivity strength was related to task performance in ASD, whereas that between dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and parietal cortex (Brodmann areas 9 and 40) was related to task performance in TYP. CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents with ASD rely more on reactive cognitive control, involving last-minute conflict detection and control implementation by the anterior cingulate cortex and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, versus proactive cognitive control requiring processing by dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and parietal cortex. Findings await replication in larger longitudinal studies that examine their functional consequences and amenability to intervention.
Authors: Tara A Niendam; Angela R Laird; Kimberly L Ray; Y Monica Dean; David C Glahn; Cameron S Carter Journal: Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 3.282
Authors: Beth E Snitz; Angus MacDonald; Jonathan D Cohen; Raymond Y Cho; Theresa Becker; Cameron S Carter Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Eveline A Crone; Carter Wendelken; Sarah Donohue; Linda van Leijenhorst; Silvia A Bunge Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2006-05-31 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Marjorie Solomon; Michael J Frank; J Daniel Ragland; Anne C Smith; Tara A Niendam; Tyler A Lesh; David S Grayson; Jonathan S Beck; John C Matter; Cameron S Carter Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2014-10-31 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Min Tae M Park; Armin Raznahan; Philip Shaw; Nitin Gogtay; Jason P Lerch; M Mallar Chakravarty Journal: J Psychiatry Neurosci Date: 2018-05 Impact factor: 6.186
Authors: Aarthi Padmanabhan; Krista Garver; Kirsten O'Hearn; Natalie Nawarawong; Ran Liu; Nancy Minshew; John Sweeney; Beatriz Luna Journal: Autism Res Date: 2014-11-07 Impact factor: 5.216