Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Corrigendum

A corrigendum for this article has been published. To view the corrigendum, please click here.

Behavioural Neurology
Volume 2016 (2016), Article ID 8781725, 14 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/8781725
Review Article

Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury and Autism: Elucidating Shared Mechanisms

1Department of Neurosurgery, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Morgantown, WV 26505, USA
2Department of Basic Pharmaceutical Sciences, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Morgantown, WV 26505, USA
3Department of Medical Sciences, University of Florida School of Medicine, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA
4Department of Psychology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA

Received 2 October 2016; Accepted 23 November 2016

Academic Editor: Akin Ojagbemi

Copyright © 2016 Rahul Singh et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Pediatric traumatic brain injury (TBI) and autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are two serious conditions that affect youth. Recent data, both preclinical and clinical, show that pediatric TBI and ASD share not only similar symptoms but also some of the same biologic mechanisms that cause these symptoms. Prominent symptoms for both disorders include gastrointestinal problems, learning difficulties, seizures, and sensory processing disruption. In this review, we highlight some of these shared mechanisms in order to discuss potential treatment options that might be applied for each condition. We discuss potential therapeutic and pharmacologic options as well as potential novel drug targets. Furthermore, we highlight advances in understanding of brain circuitry that is being propelled by improved imaging modalities. Going forward, advanced imaging will help in diagnosis and treatment planning strategies for pediatric patients. Lessons from each field can be applied to design better and more rigorous trials that can be used to improve guidelines for pediatric patients suffering from TBI or ASD.

1. Introduction

Awareness about autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has continued to increase over the past few years. One in 110 eight year olds were on the spectrum in the United States in 2006, which increased to one in 68 children on the spectrum in 2010 based on data collected from the Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) Network [1]. The percentage of males affected is much higher than females with some variability between studies [2]. Although the number of patients diagnosed with autism has increased, it is unclear if this is actually due to an increased prevalence or reflective of changes in diagnostic criteria, as the physiologic changes underlying this disease are not well characterized [1]. Recent evidence suggests that cerebellar injury can contribute to autism development [3]. Other causes of ASD such as obstetric complications and neonatal jaundice have also been reported in the literature but are not the focus of this paper. Interestingly, the number of reported cases for several different types of pediatric traumatic brain injury (TBI) has been increasing during this time period as well [4]. Is it possible that moderate-to-severe TBI leads to damage that is rewiring circuits? What is currently known about the shared mechanisms between moderate-to-severe TBI and autism? Can lessons from management of each be used to develop better treatment options? In this review, we discuss what is currently known about the shared mechanisms between moderate-to-severe pediatric TBI and ASD and highlight the importance of advanced imaging to answer these important questions.

2. Disorders

The Office of Special Education started collecting data for TBI as a disability category in the same year that it began collecting data for ASD. The prevalence of both ASD and TBI among successive births of US school-aged children showed a marked increase in the period between 1992 and 2001 [5]. Cohort curves suggest that these two disorders exhibit similar increases in prevalence over that period. TBI from nonaccidental head injury may lead to substantial neurological and developmental deficits. A small study of children who suffered nonaccidental head injury (due to intentional abrupt impact or violent shaking) showed speech and language difficulties consistent with a diagnosis of ASD [6].

The sequelae of TBI in children include deficits in intelligence, memory, attention, learning, and social judgment [7]. Family and twin studies investigating ASD show that risk is determined by genetic factors. However, environmental insults including TBI may also contribute to risk of developing ASD [8]. Changes to areas in the brain associated with communication that are observed in TBI patients have also been noted in children diagnosed with ASD [9]. Ozgen and colleagues examined external morphological features in a large population sample of children with ASD versus normal controls. The results showed a high prevalence of morphological abnormalities in the patients with ASD without mental retardation but did not address the cause of these abnormalities [8]. Minor anomalies and major abnormalities are common variants significantly more prevalent in children diagnosed with ASD or TBI compared to normal controls [10]. Males showed a trend for more abnormalities than females. Males have increased risk of TBI, which can potentially predispose to these morphological anomalies [11].

2.1. Natural Progression of Pediatric TBI

Children with TBI must be identified and treated in a timely manner in order to limit secondary brain injury and improve outcomes. Initial assessment of any traumatic injury patient begins with completion of the primary survey and stabilization of potentially fatal conditions related to airway, breathing, and circulation [12]. This is followed by a secondary survey that includes a neurological assessment [12].

The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is a grading system used to assess consciousness and thus grade the severity of TBI by stratifying the sum of three tests: verbal, eye, and motor responses [51]. The GCS describes the severity of TBI as follows: mild (GCS 13–15), moderate (GCS score of 9–12), and severe (GCS score of 8 or less) [51]. Since its inception, the original GCS has been modified for use in children [52].

Neurologically intact patients with a GCS of 14 or greater may be discharged home under the supervision of a responsible adult with instructions on discharge to seek immediate medical care in the event of worsening headaches or signs of neurological injury. Pediatric patients with a GCS of less than 13 should undergo a computed tomography scan to evaluate traumatic intracranial injury and be admitted [53].

Patients with an intracranial hemorrhage without significant mass effect should be admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit for close monitoring. An intracranial pressure monitor should be placed in patients with severe TBI and a poor GCS score to evaluate intracranial hypertension [54]. Intracranial hypertension reflects a sustained increase in intracranial pressure and warrants intervention. Initial management should focus on conservative measures such as optimizing head position to ensure adequate venous outflow, ensuring adequate pain control and sedation [12]. Further escalation of care would involve administering hyperosmolar therapy, mild hyperventilation, and CSF diversion with a ventriculostomy drain [12].

Patients with intracranial hypertension refractory to the aforementioned therapies may benefit from a craniotomy to evacuate a hematoma or a decompressive craniectomy [55]. Surgical treatment should also be considered in patients with subdural, epidural, or intraparenchymal hematomas or posterior fossa mass lesions with associated mass effect [56, 57].

2.2. Important Considerations for Autism

Children with autism display unusual responses to environmental stimuli (e.g., loud sounds), problems making friends, difficulty understanding nonverbal social cues, blunted response to pain, and a focus on geometric patterns. The diagnosis of autism is often delayed despite the fact that parents often note concerning behavior by 18 months of age and less than 10% of children are diagnosed at initial presentation [58, 59]. A qualitative impairment in social interaction and communication as well as the presence of repetitive and stereotypic actions must be present for a diagnosis of autism [59]. Patients with autism often exhibit profound anxiety and this is exacerbated in the setting of traumatic injury [13]. Strategies to reduce anxiety include social stories and the use of games for distraction, as well as using favorite drinks to disguise medications. It is helpful to have a discussion with parents to help identify what may exacerbate or mollify anxiety in patients with autism [17].

2.3. Shared Symptoms

TBI and ASD share similar deficits in neurodevelopmental abilities and social dysfunction (Table 1). Because of this link in symptoms between TBI and ASD, novel treatment approaches used to regain social judgment and communication skills in ASD patients may be applicable to TBI patients. In 2007, Radice-Neumann and colleagues reviewed the long-term effects of TBI focusing on emotional and interpersonal relationship deficits. Following TBI, many areas of functioning are impaired: emotional decision-making, self-regulatory behavior, emotional perception difficulties, and facial affect recognition [13]. Neuroanatomical changes that occur with TBI can result in deficits of facial recognition [13]. These are the same deficits that define ASD. This suggests that interventions, which are currently standard of practice for ASD, can be incorporated into the treatment paradigm for TBI patients to increase their social function and improve quality of life. We discuss a few of these interventions in a later section.

Table 1: Shared behavioral symptoms between ASD and pediatric TBI.

An impairment of language is a cardinal feature in the diagnosis of ASD. Not surprisingly, neural activation during language tasks is altered following moderate-to-severe TBI in young children as well. Interestingly, genetic studies show susceptibility of certain individuals to brain injury and the subsequent impairment of language [60]. A small feasibility study of 8 children with TBI and 12 matched controls used fMRI imaging to define the network of brain region deficits following TBI [15]. They examined differences in neural activation during a language task in children with TBI relative to a matched group of children with orthopedic injuries. Performance status on standardized language tasks as well as activation patterns in language circuitry centers allowed the researchers to make conclusions about the concise areas of brain damage. Activation was noted to differ in the patients with TBI for the right superior temporal gyrus (BA22) and the right middle temporal gyrus (BA21). The data analyzed supports that a child’s brain function differs significantly following TBI and that language task dysfunction may be reflective of differences in neuropsychological task performance [15]. This suggests that cortical reorganization in children after TBI may be similar to the clinical presentation seen with ASD. The deficits in each may have similar neural underpinnings.

Executive function relating to social skills, language, and attention is decreased in children diagnosed with ASD. Studies examining deficits in executive function as it relates to location and severity of cerebral damage in children after TBI have produced mixed results [16]. Power and colleagues investigated the effects of location and severity of a lesion on executive function in early childhood TBI patients evaluating neuroimaging and clinical report measures for 36 patients. They were able to identify functional deficits regarding inhibitory control, including self-monitoring and self-regulation. These functional deficits were observed in all subjects with TBI, regardless of location or the site of damage [16]. Self-regulation deficits were also observed within groups for those diagnosed with ASD. Additional research is necessary to further evaluate the developmental progression of children who have suffered TBI in early childhood years.

3. Shared Biochemical Mechanisms

There are several mechanisms of nervous system dysregulation present in both autism and pediatric TBI which may contribute to similar symptoms present in both diseases. These common manifestations encompass gastrointestinal disorders, learning difficulties, seizures, and difficulties in sensory processing [14]. Further work is needed to delineate symptom manifestations between children diagnosed with ASD and those experiencing TBI. A likely reason for the difficulty in diagnosis is that both ASD and TBI share similar comorbidities [61]. Because of these comorbidities, it becomes increasingly important to investigate shared mechanisms that lead to symptom manifestations.

3.1. Gastrointestinal Disorders

A prominent area of ongoing research is disruption of the enteric nervous system. ASD is frequently associated with decreased viability of traditional gut microflora [62]. The connections defining the gut-brain axis fail to form correctly in some autistic individuals [63]. Without sufficient diversity of microflora in the intestines, the brain does not receive appropriate feedback and development is hindered [64]. In pediatric TBI, global metabolism is slowed leading to decreased survivability of microflora [65]. The underlying cause of microflora demise is partly mediated by the release of high mobility group box 1 protein from necrotic tissue in the intestines [66]. The release triggers a cytokine storm, which causes an inflammatory cascade [67]. The inflammatory cascade leads to increased permeability in the intestine, which further exacerbates the microbiome disruption [68]. To offset this sudden loss of microflora diversity, probiotic therapy has been administered with success in some individuals [69]. Future work is needed to elucidate if the microbiome is similar or different between children diagnosed with ASD compared to those experiencing TBI.

3.2. Learning Difficulties

It is well known that a subset of children diagnosed with ASD have severe learning difficulties [70]. The underlying cause has been postulated as a deficit in cortical plasticity mechanisms [18]. Additionally, poor communication skills limit the child from receiving adequate social feedback necessary for learning [71]. The learning deficits in children with ASD are therefore multifactorial and depend on both deficits in attention processing as well as the inability to attend to salient stimuli [72]. At a molecular level, neuroligin deficits contribute to decreased long-term potentiation in children with ASD [73]. TBI similarly disrupts the learning cascade by increasing attention deficits [74]. Not surprisingly, working-memory processing speed in children is also slowed following TBI [75]. The molecular process for pediatric TBI is based heavily upon the activation of secondary injury cascades following acute blood brain barrier disruption [76]. These cascades damage neuronal tissue forcing the brain to rewire in order to compensate [77]. How this rewiring contributes to permanent learning disability has yet to be elucidated but warrants further investigation especially in the context of ASD.

3.3. Seizures

Abnormal gray and white matter volume distribution is common in autism [19]. It is likely that this disrupted development contributes to epileptic activity. In a mouse autism model, astroglial glutamate transporter deficiency led to increased seizure activity [78]. Similarly, a downregulation of Pten phosphatase triggered hyperexcitability within the temporal cortex [79]. Seizure is also common following TBI in children. Approximately 12% of children experience seizure following moderate TBI [80]. The use of animal models has shown that dysfunction in lipid peroxidation contributes to the generation of epileptic foci [81]. Ultimately, structural damage leads to abnormal neurological findings [82]. In both autism and posttraumatic epilepsy, overactivation of the phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase/AKT pathway contributes to cellular mutations in epileptic regions [83]. Early life seizures can cause learning disabilities throughout life [84]. Understanding the mechanics of morphologic development may aid in improving treatment options for seizure in children with autism or who experience TBI [85].

3.4. Sensory Processing Disruption

For children with ASD, over 90% experience some type of sensory processing disruption [20]. The most common are visual and auditory [86]. The majority of these sensory disruptions are due to prolonged event-related potentials [87]. These prolonged potentials lead to delayed stimulus response latency [88]. Mouse studies have shown that these prolonged potentials may be due to loss of MeCP2 function [89]. Similarly, loss of Gabrb3 gene signaling is associated with deficits in sensory processing [90]. Post-TBI changes in plasticity can also lead to sensory processing deficits [91]. The sensory processing deficits observed following TBI are statistically different compared to the normal range seen in noninjured children [92]. Ongoing preclinical and clinical studies must be performed to determine the underlying causes of these deficits following TBI. It is likely that the deficits are closely related to location of injury, but it has yet to be determined whether they are due to prolonged event-related potentials as seen with ASD or due to another independent mechanism.

4. Advanced Imaging Correlations

4.1. Imaging for Autism

Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) has been used to determine functional connectivity for patients with ASD. Glerean and colleagues found both hypo- and hyperconnectivity in the ventrotemporal-limbic subnetwork. This system rewiring accounts for distinct connectivity differences compared to normotypical controls [93].

Additionally, diffusion-weighted MRI in ASD patients revealed increased anisotropy in the caudate and decreased signaling in the superior temporal pole, further supporting the idea of disconnectivity in patients with ASD [94]. Similarly, anisotropy is decreased in the internal capsule, corpus callosum, and cerebellum, indicating white matter damage [95]. Not surprisingly, children with ASD also have a decreased myelin water fraction [96]. This decreased axonal water fraction may indicate axonal injury and has been linked to decreased extra-axonal diffusivity [97].

Recently, it has been shown that disruption between the subcortical region and sensory cortical centers can lead to behavior disruptions such as poor social communication, behavioral inflexibility, and atypical sensory processing [98]. Going forward, it is essential that further research be conducted to link structural differences to functional changes in behavior.

4.2. Imaging for Pediatric TBI

Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) has shown that children with acute injury have decreased fractional anisotropy indicating white matter disruption similar to that seen in ASD [99]. These deficits have been linked to decreased sensory processing speeds and rewiring of circuitry [100]. Metabolomic studies have provided even further evidence of white matter disruption. The NAA/creatine and NAA/choline ratios were significantly reduced in white matter tracts following injury and were associated with significant cognitive dysfunction [101]. MRI has been used to show significant atrophy of the corpus callosum after injury, but whether this atrophy is due to axonal shearing or loss of myelin integrity is unknown [102]. Magnetization transfer imaging can be used to determine changes in the myelin integrity, but its use is still experimental and warrants further investigation [103].

Similar to ASD, sensory processing is a primary concern for pediatric TBI patients. Susceptibility weighted imaging (SWI) has been used to determine the expected behavioral dysfunction, decreased social interaction, and intellectual performance that is to be expected after injury [104]. When SWI is used concurrently with DTI, adequate detection of acute hemorrhage and diffuse axonal injury can be obtained [105]. Axonal injury can contribute to impaired sensory integration, which can be detected through visual and auditory exams [106]. Not surprisingly, Galvin and colleagues reported that the majority of children score outside the range of typical sensory processing when administered a sensory profile following TBI [92]. Future investigation will examine how biomarkers correlate with functional changes observed on imaging and behavioral changes detected on exam. Korley and colleagues found significant serum changes of brain-derived neurotrophic factor in children with functional imaging changes following TBI indicating increased susceptibility for depression [107]. Further studies are necessary to determine if sensory processing deficits are linked to changes in mood.

5. Behavioral Treatment Approaches

5.1. Autism

Applied behavioral analysis (ABA) is one of the most effective ways to help children with ASD [108]. B. F. Skinner originally targeted the application of ABA to help with the verbal aspect of behavior, but over time the approach has evolved to deal with the multiple deficits seen in ASD [109]. The purpose of ABA is to redirect a behavior that would be seen as unacceptable or harmful to a behavior that is something both useful and beneficial for the child with autism [110]. It is most successful when started at a young age because it can be used to redirect negative behaviors before they become lifetime habits [108]. ABA has many adaptive arms that address specialty situations such as social awkwardness, sensory overloads, and aphasia [111]. ABA benefits from echoic learning requiring the participant to verbalize what is heard. Through this process, the child builds upon repetitive intraverbalizations and over time puts emphasis on a given response to a nonverbal stimulus. Eventually, the child learns to ask for wants and needs contingent upon an extrinsic reinforcer [112]. This progressive learning process is very important in the treatment of verbal dysfunction associated with ASD but can also be applied to other behaviors such as attention and learning.

While ABA is the most widely used treatment for ASD, other therapy techniques are emerging [108]. The pivotal response therapy is an early-stage intervention tactic emphasizing a response to multiple cues. Similar to ABA, the older the child is at start of treatment, the harder it becomes to break habits that have already been conditioned for long periods of time [113]. Pivotal response therapy is an ongoing therapy and must be used at continuous intervals. The main focus of pivotal therapy is to adjust how parents and children respond to the multiple environmental cues that are part of their everyday lives. Pivotal therapy is practiced when the child is in his or her natural environment rather than a clinical setting offering an advantage over traditional approaches by enhancing motivation [114]. Another frequently used treatment is verbal behavior therapy. Verbal behavior therapy focuses on improving aspects related to the quality and expression of language. The primary goal is to help rewire connections in the brain to improve language understanding. By understanding language, the child is able to use it for effective communication [109]. These therapies are often used in conjunction with ABA to enhance child responsiveness [113].

5.2. Pediatric TBI

Because pediatric TBI produces similar deficits to those seen in ASD, ABA has recently been utilized to readapt children to their home environment after injury [115]. As was the case with ASD, the earlier the therapy is initiated, the more likely it will be effective [109]. For children suffering severe TBI, the benefit of therapy is progressive and behavior can continue to improve at extended time points [115]. ABA is multidimensional and can be used to target social interactions, communication, and activities of daily living [21]. Additionally, pivotal response therapy can be used in conjunction with ABA to allow the child to respond in the environmental setting that best suits him or her. It places less stress on the child and allows for him or her to receive the proper attention that might be needed following a severe TBI [116]. Similar to ABA, pivotal response therapies provide incremental stepwise improvements over time for TBI patients. These improvements are best maintained with multitherapy treatment approaches [117].

6. Pharmacologic Treatment Approaches

6.1. Autism

Though many theories on the origins of autism have been put forth and specific brain regions have been consistently implicated in the past decades, the etiology of autism remains largely elusive because many cases arise from a mixture of multiple environmental and genetic factors [118, 119]. Hence, many current interventions target the secondary behavioral symptoms of autism [120]. These targeted symptoms include insomnia, anxiety, depression, mood swings, agitation, repetitive motor behaviors, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, impulsivity, hyperactivity, aggression, and self-injurious behavior. No medications are currently available that directly impact the core social and cognitive impairments.

6.2. Neuroleptic Agents

Risperidone and aripiprazole are the only two US FDA-approved medications for autism and specifically for only the treatment of irritability, such as aggression, self-injurious behavior, temper tantrums, and mood swings [118, 121]. Risperidone is approved for patients that are at least five years old. It is an atypical antipsychotic that acts as an antagonist of both dopamine () and serotonin ( and others) receptors [122, 123]. Adverse events associated with risperidone use include including weight gain, increased appetite, fatigue, drowsiness, drooling, tremor, and constipation [118, 124127].

Aripiprazole is approved for ages six and up. It is also an atypical antipsychotic drug, impacting the dopamine and serotonin systems. Distinct from risperidone, which is a potent D2 antagonist, aripiprazole may act as D2 agonist, partial agonist, or antagonist depending on cellular location of D2 receptor [128]. This theory of functional selectivity confers aripiprazole the unique ability to be a dopamine agonist where levels are too low and a dopamine antagonist where levels are too high [129]. Because of its unique mechanism of action, aripiprazole may have a more favorable side-effect profile compared to risperidone [130]. Mild and transient effects such as sedation, drooling, tremors, and weight gain were noted in patients taking aripiprazole [131].

6.3. Selective Reuptake Inhibitors (SRI)

In autistic individuals, anxiety and repetitive and ritualistic behavior can hinder social interaction and learning [132, 133]. SRIs in general are effective in treating anxiety and obsessive-compulsive symptoms [134, 135]. In addition, accumulating evidence shows that serotonin system abnormalities may contribute to the etiology of autism [136139]. Consequently, these agents have been increasingly used in treating the disruptive behaviors in autistic individuals [140, 141]. A recent meta-analysis of the published literature provides support for a small but significant effect of SRI in the treatment of repetitive behaviors in ASD [140]. There is also some evidence to suggest that SRIs may be helpful for the proper management of comorbid anxiety in ASD [141]. However, to date, the clinical trials examining the use of SRIs in autism have been mostly limited by small sample sizes and mixed results, warranting the need for additional randomized controlled trials.

6.4. Other Therapies

At the neurochemical level, apart from dopamine and serotonin, abnormalities in a number of other key neurotransmitters and/or receptors have been implicated. This includes glutamate [142], GABA [143], the neuropeptide oxytocin [144146], and nicotinic acetylcholine receptors [147, 148] (Table 2).

Table 2: Selected compounds under consideration for the treatment of ASD.
6.5. Pediatric TBI

TBI can result in a variety of neurological and behavioral disturbances, including seizures, impulsivity, and cognitive decline. In recent years, there has been a rapid increase in the number of pharmacological targets evaluated in various animal models of TBI, many with significant positive outcomes. Unfortunately, their proven efficacy in the clinical setting are still lacking for both the adult and pediatric population [149, 150]. Table 3 summarizes selected clinical studies examining the therapeutic potential of pharmaceutical agents following pediatric TBI. With an increased understanding of the cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying the pathophysiological events after TBI, however, hope remains regarding the development of novel pharmaceutical therapies to better address the long-term patient outcomes [151].

Table 3: Selected compounds under consideration for the treatment of pediatric TBI.
6.6. Future Directions

No single agent likely will become the “magic bullet” in treating pediatric TBI and autism. As for pharmacologic research for the neurological sequela following TBI and the core symptoms of autism advances, a greater emphasis on a holistic approach, combining behavioral and pharmacologic therapy, may emerge. Currently, the only empirically supported behavioral treatments for autism are based on ABA [108], which has been combined with pharmacologic treatment in at least one trial [152]. In this study, the combination of an atypical antipsychotic and parent training resulted in greater reduction of serious maladaptive behavior than medication alone in children with ASD [152]. No studies, to our knowledge, have been conducted in adults or children following TBI using this combined therapy approach. In addition to combined pharmacology and behavioral therapy, it may be advantageous to use a polypharmacy approach and/or a drug with multiple and pleiotropic mechanism due to the complexity and heterogeneity present in TBI and autism [120, 153].

7. Conclusions

Children diagnosed with ASD or suffering pediatric TBI share similar symptoms based on pathophysiologic changes within the brain. In this review, we discussed several shared symptoms including dysfunction in communication, loss of executive function, and deficits in memory and intellectual processing. Not surprisingly, pediatric TBI patients and ASD patients share several underlying pathophysiologic changes that contribute to these symptoms and cause increased susceptibility for sensory processing dysfunction, seizures, and gastrointestinal disorders. Advanced imaging modalities are being used to track changes within the brain related to symptom manifestations. The similarities between TBI and ASD warrant continued investigation and improved classification criteria. Treatment approaches including ABA and pharmacologic agents may benefit patients with pediatric TBI or ASD. Future work will delineate the subtle differences between these spectrum disorders.

Disclosure

Equal contribution for first author is denoted.

Competing Interests

No competing interests are reported.

Acknowledgments

Brandon Lucke-Wold was supported by a Neurosurgery Research and Education Foundation Grant, American Foundation of Pharmaceutical Education Grant, Sigma Xi Grants in Aid of Research Grant, and American Medical Association Foundation Seed Grant. The authors would like to thank Paula Webster for her advice on the relevant autism spectrum disorder literature.

References

  1. K. Weintraub, “The prevalence puzzle: autism counts,” Nature, vol. 479, no. 7371, pp. 22–24, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. M.-C. Lai, M. V. Lombardo, and S. Baron-Cohen, “Autism,” The Lancet, vol. 383, no. 9920, pp. 896–910, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. S. S.-H. Wang, A. D. Kloth, and A. Badura, “The cerebellum, sensitive periods, and autism,” Neuron, vol. 83, no. 3, pp. 518–532, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. K. Bakker, C. Catroppa, and V. Anderson, “Olfactory dysfunction in pediatric traumatic brain injury: a systematic review,” Journal of Neurotrauma, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 308–314, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. C. J. Newschaffer, L. A. Croen, J. Daniels et al., “The epidemiology of autism spectrum disorders,” Annual Review of Public Health, vol. 28, pp. 235–258, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. K. Barlow, E. Thompson, D. Johnson, and R. A. Minns, “The neurological outcome of non-accidental head injury,” Pediatric Rehabilitation, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 195–203, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. R. L. Peterson, A. K. Connery, D. A. Baker, and M. W. Kirkwood, “Preinjury emotional-behavioral functioning of children with lingering problems after mild traumatic brain injury,” Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 280–286, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. H. Ozgen, G. S. Hellemann, R. K. Stellato et al., “Morphological features in children with autism spectrum disorders: a matched case-control study,” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 23–31, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. A. B. Brown and J. H. Elder, “Communication in autism spectrum disorder: a guide for pediatric nurses,” Pediatric Nursing, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 219–225, 2014. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. K. F. Linton and B. J. Kim, “Traumatic brain injury as a result of violence in native American and black communities spanning from childhood to older adulthood,” Brain Injury, vol. 28, no. 8, pp. 1076–1081, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. N. C. Collins, M. Molcho, P. Carney et al., “Are boys and girls that different? An analysis of traumatic brain injury in children,” Emergency Medicine Journal, vol. 30, no. 8, pp. 675–678, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. Brain Trauma Foundation, American Association of Neurological Surgeons, and Congress of Neurological Surgeons, “Guidelines for the management of severe traumatic brain injury,” Journal of Neurotrauma, vol. 24, supplement 1, pp. S1–S106, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  13. D. Radice-Neumann, B. Zupan, D. R. Babbage, and B. Willer, “Overview of impaired facial affect recognition in persons with traumatic brain injury,” Brain Injury, vol. 21, no. 8, pp. 807–816, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. S. Gorman, M. A. Barnes, P. R. Swank, M. Prasad, and L. Ewing-Cobbs, “The effects of pediatric traumatic brain injury on verbal and visual-spatial working memory,” Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 29–38, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. P. R. Karunanayaka, S. K. Holland, W. Yuan et al., “Neural substrate differences in language networks and associated language-related behavioral impairments in children with TBI: a preliminary fMRI investigation,” NeuroRehabilitation, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 355–369, 2007. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. T. Power, C. Catroppa, L. Coleman, M. Ditchfield, and V. Anderson, “Do lesion site and severity predict deficits in attentional control after preschool traumatic brain injury (TBI)?” Brain Injury, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 279–292, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. N. Taghizadeh, A. Davidson, K. Williams, and D. Story, “Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and its perioperative management,” Paediatric Anaesthesia, vol. 25, no. 11, pp. 1076–1084, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. B. A. Church, C. L. Rice, A. Dovgopoly et al., “Learning, plasticity, and atypical generalization in children with autism,” Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 1342–1348, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. K. Blackmon, “Structural MRI biomarkers of shared pathogenesis in autism spectrum disorder and epilepsy,” Epilepsy and Behavior, vol. 47, pp. 172–182, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. Y.-S. Chang, J. P. Owen, S. S. Desai et al., “Autism and sensory processing disorders: shared white matter disruption in sensory pathways but divergent connectivity in social-emotional pathways,” PLOS ONE, vol. 9, no. 7, Article ID e103038, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. M. Spreckley and R. Boyd, “Efficacy of applied behavioral intervention in preschool children with autism for improving cognitive, language, and adaptive behavior: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” Journal of Pediatrics, vol. 154, no. 3, pp. 338–344, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. S. Jacquemont, A. Curie, V. des Portes et al., “Epigenetic modification of the FMR1 gene in fragile X syndrome is associated with differential response to the mGluR5 antagonist AFQ056,” Science Translational Medicine, vol. 3, no. 64, Article ID 64ra1, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. M. G. Chez, Q. Burton, T. Dowling, M. Chang, P. Khanna, and C. Kramer, “Memantine as adjunctive therapy in children diagnosed with autistic spectrum disorders: an observation of initial clinical response and maintenance tolerability,” Journal of Child Neurology, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 574–579, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. C. A. Erickson, D. J. Posey, K. A. Stigler, J. Mullett, A. R. Katschke, and C. J. McDougle, “A retrospective study of memantine in children and adolescents with pervasive developmental disorders,” Psychopharmacology, vol. 191, no. 1, pp. 141–147, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. A. Ghaleiha, M. Asadabadi, M.-R. Mohammadi et al., “Memantine as adjunctive treatment to risperidone in children with autistic disorder: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial,” International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 783–789, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. T. Owley, J. Salt, S. Guter et al., “A prospective, open-label trial of memantine in the treatment of cognitive, behavioral, and memory dysfunction in pervasive developmental disorders,” Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 517–524, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. C. A. Erickson, J. E. Mullett, and C. J. McDougle, “Open-label memantine in fragile X syndrome,” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, vol. 39, no. 12, pp. 1629–1635, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. E. M. Berry-Kravis, D. Hessl, B. Rathmell et al., “Effects of STX209 (Arbaclofen) on neurobehavioral function in children and adults with fragile X syndrome: a randomized, controlled, phase 2 trial,” Science Translational Medicine, vol. 4, no. 152, Article ID 152ra127, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. C. A. Erickson, J. M. Veenstra-Vanderweele, R. D. Melmed et al., “STX209 (Arbaclofen) for autism spectrum disorders: an 8-week open-label study,” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 958–964, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. C. A. Erickson, M. Early, K. A. Stigler, L. K. Wink, J. E. Mullett, and C. J. McDougle, “An open-label naturalistic pilot study of acamprosate in youth with autistic disorder,” Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 565–569, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. C. A. Erickson, J. E. Mullett, and C. J. McDougle, “Brief report: acamprosate in fragile X syndrome,” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, vol. 40, no. 11, pp. 1412–1416, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. C. A. Erickson, L. K. Wink, B. Ray et al., “Impact of acamprosate on behavior and brain-derived neurotrophic factor: an open-label study in youth with fragile X syndrome,” Psychopharmacology, vol. 228, no. 1, pp. 75–84, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. C. A. Erickson, L. K. Wink, M. C. Early et al., “Brief report: pilot single-blind placebo lead-in study of acamprosate in youth with autistic disorder,” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 981–987, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. M. R. Dadds, E. MacDonald, A. Cauchi, K. Williams, F. Levy, and J. Brennan, “Nasal oxytocin for social deficits in childhood autism: a randomized controlled trial,” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 521–531, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. E. Hollander, J. Bartz, W. Chaplin et al., “Oxytocin increases retention of social cognition in autism,” Biological Psychiatry, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 498–503, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. A. J. Guastella, S. L. Einfeld, K. M. Gray et al., “Intranasal oxytocin improves emotion recognition for youth with autism spectrum disorders,” Biological Psychiatry, vol. 67, no. 7, pp. 692–694, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. E. Hollander, S. Novotny, M. Hanratty et al., “Oxytocin infusion reduces repetitive behaviors in adults with autistic and Asperger's disorders,” Neuropsychopharmacology, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 193–198, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. E. Andari, J.-R. Duhamel, T. Zalla, E. Herbrecht, M. Leboyer, and A. Sirigu, “Promoting social behavior with oxytocin in high-functioning autism spectrum disorders,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 107, no. 9, pp. 4389–4394, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. E. Anagnostou, L. Soorya, W. Chaplin et al., “Intranasal oxytocin versus placebo in the treatment of adults with autism spectrum disorders: a randomized controlled trial,” Molecular Autism, vol. 3, article no. 16, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. A. Y. Hardan and B. L. Handen, “A retrospective open trial of adjunctive donepezil in children and adolescents with autistic disorder,” Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 237–241, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. B. L. Handen, C. R. Johnson, S. McAuliffe-Bellin, P. J. Murray, and A. Y. Hardan, “Safety and efficacy of donepezil in children and adolescents with autism: neuropsychological measures,” Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 43–50, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. M. Hertzman, “Galantamine in the treatment of adult autism: a report of three clinical cases,” The International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 395–398, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. M. G. Chez, M. Aimonovitch, T. Buchanan, S. Mrazek, and R. J. Tremb, “Treating autistic spectrum disorders in children: utility of the cholinesterase inhibitor rivastigmine tartrate,” Journal of Child Neurology, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 165–169, 2004. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. P. D. Patrick, M. L. Buck, M. R. Conaway, and J. A. Blackman, “The use of dopamine enhancing medications with children in low response states following brain injury,” Brain Injury, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 497–506, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. P. D. Patrick, J. A. Blackman, J. L. Mabry, M. L. Buck, M. J. Gurka, and M. R. Conaway, “Dopamine agonist therapy in low-response children following traumatic brain injury,” Journal of Child Neurology, vol. 21, no. 10, pp. 879–885, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. L. B. Green, J. E. Hornyak, and E. A. Hurvitz, “Amantadine in pediatric patients with traumatic brain injury: a retrospective, case-controlled study,” American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, vol. 83, no. 12, pp. 893–897, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. S. E. Williams, M. D. Ris, R. Ayyangar, B. K. Schefft, and D. Berch, “Recovery in pediatric brain injury: is psychostimulant medication beneficial?” Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 73–81, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. M. Trovato, B. Slomine, F. Pidcock, and J. Christensen, “The efficacy of donepezil hydrochloride on memory functioning in three adolescents with severe traumatic brain injury,” Brain Injury, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 339–343, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. P. L. Pearl, R. McCarter, C. L. McGavin et al., “Results of phase II levetiracetam trial following acute head injury in children at risk for posttraumatic epilepsy,” Epilepsia, vol. 54, no. 9, pp. e135–e137, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  50. B. Young, R. P. Rapp, J. A. Norton, D. Haack, and J. W. Walsh, “Failure of prophylactically administered phenytoin to prevent post-traumatic seizures in children,” Child's Brain, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 185–192, 1983. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  51. G. Teasdale and B. Jennett, “Assessment of coma and impaired consciousness. A practical scale,” The Lancet, vol. 304, no. 7872, pp. 81–84, 1974. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. S. R. Beers, S. R. Wisniewski, P. Garcia-Filion et al., “Validity of a pediatric version of the glasgow outcome scale-extended,” Journal of Neurotrauma, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 1126–1139, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. C. Arienta, M. Caroli, and S. Balbi, “Management of head-injured patients in the emergency department: a practical protocol,” Surgical Neurology, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 213–219, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  54. R. Bullock, R. M. Chesnut, G. Clifton et al., “Guidelines for the management of severe head injury,” European Journal of Emergency Medicine, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 109–127, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  55. M. R. Bullock, R. Chesnut, J. Ghajar et al., “Surgical management of traumatic parenchymal lesions,” Neurosurgery, vol. 58, supplement 3, pp. S25–S46, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  56. M. R. Bullock, R. Chesnut, J. Ghajar et al., “Surgical management of acute epidural hematomas,” Neurosurgery, vol. 58, no. 3, pp. S7–S15, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  57. M. R. Bullock, R. Chesnut, J. Ghajar et al., “Surgical management of acute subdural hematomas,” Neurosurgery, vol. 58, no. 3, pp. S216–S224, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  58. G. Baird, H. Cass, and V. Slonims, “Diagnosis of autism,” British Medical Journal, vol. 327, no. 7413, pp. 488–493, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  59. P. A. Filipek, P. J. Accardo, S. Ashwal et al., “Practice parameter: screening and diagnosis of autism: report of the quality standards subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the Child Neurology Society,” Neurology, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 468–479, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  60. S. Lanfranconi, G. Franco, L. Borellini et al., “Genetics of cerebral hemorrhage and microbleeds,” Panminerva Medica, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 11–28, 2013. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  61. K. Singh and A. W. Zimmerman, “Sleep in autism spectrum disorder and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder,” Seminars in Pediatric Neurology, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 113–125, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  62. C. S. Rosenfeld, “Microbiome disturbances and autism spectrum disorders,” Drug Metabolism & Disposition, vol. 43, no. 10, pp. 1557–1571, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  63. M. Carabotti, A. Scirocco, M. A. Maselli, and C. Severi, “The gut-brain axis: interactions between enteric microbiota, central and enteric nervous systems,” Annals of Gastroenterology, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 203–209, 2015. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  64. M. Douglas-Escobar, E. Elliott, and J. Neu, “Effect of intestinal microbial ecology on the developing brain,” JAMA Pediatrics, vol. 167, no. 4, pp. 374–379, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  65. R. K. Naviaux, “Metabolic features of the cell danger response,” Mitochondrion, vol. 16, pp. 7–17, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  66. K. Babinska, M. Bucova, V. Durmanova et al., “Increased plasma levels of the high mobility group box 1 protein (HMGB1) are associated with a higher score of gastrointestinal dysfunction in individuals with autism,” Physiological Research, vol. 63, supplement 4, pp. S613–S618, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  67. M. Samsam, R. Ahangari, and S. A. Naser, “Pathophysiology of autism spectrum disorders: revisiting gastrointestinal involvement and immune imbalance,” World Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 20, no. 29, pp. 9942–9951, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  68. M. M. H. van De Sande, V. J. van Buul, and F. J. P. H. Brouns, “Autism and nutrition: the role of the gut-brain axis,” Nutrition Research Reviews, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 199–214, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  69. E. A. Mayer, D. Padua, and K. Tillisch, “Altered brain-gut axis in autism: comorbidity or causative mechanisms?” BioEssays, vol. 36, no. 10, pp. 933–939, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  70. A. P. Hill, J. van Santen, K. Gorman, B. H. Langhorst, and E. Fombonne, “Memory in language-impaired children with and without autism,” Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, vol. 7, article 19, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  71. H. B. Cygan, P. Tacikowski, P. Ostaszewski, I. Chojnicka, and A. Nowicka, “Neural correlates of own name and own face detection in autism spectrum disorder,” PLoS ONE, vol. 9, no. 1, Article ID e86020, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  72. D. J. Greene, N. Colich, M. Iacoboni, E. Zaidel, S. Y. Bookheimer, and M. Dapretto, “Atypical neural networks for social orienting in autism spectrum disorders,” NeuroImage, vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 354–362, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  73. P. Jedlicka, M. Vnencak, D. D. Krueger, T. Jungenitz, N. Brose, and S. W. Schwarzacher, “Neuroligin-1 regulates excitatory synaptic transmission, LTP and EPSP-spike coupling in the dentate gyrus in vivo,” Brain Structure and Function, vol. 220, no. 1, pp. 47–58, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  74. T. J. Ornstein, S. Sagar, R. J. Schachar et al., “Neuropsychological performance of youth with secondary attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder 6- and 12-months after traumatic brain injury,” Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, vol. 20, no. 10, pp. 971–981, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  75. S. Gorman, M. A. Barnes, P. R. Swank, M. Prasad, and C. S. Cox, “Does processing speed mediate the effect of pediatric traumatic brain injury on working memory?” Neuropsychology, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 263–273, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  76. R. Moretti, J. Pansiot, D. Bettati et al., “Blood-brain barrier dysfunction in disorders of the developing brain,” Frontiers in Neuroscience, vol. 9, article 40, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  77. J. H. Coyne, J. M. Borg, J. Deluca, L. Glass, and J. F. Sumowski, “Retrieval practice as an effective memory strategy in children and adolescents with traumatic brain injury,” Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, vol. 96, no. 4, pp. 742–745, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  78. T. Aida, J. Yoshida, M. Nomura et al., “Astroglial glutamate transporter deficiency increases synaptic excitability and leads to pathological repetitive behaviors in mice,” Neuropsychopharmacology, vol. 40, no. 7, pp. 1569–1579, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  79. M. R. Williams, T. De-Spenza Jr., M. Li, A. T. Gulledge, and B. W. Luikart, “Hyperactivity of newborn pten knock-out neurons results from increased excitatory synaptic drive,” The Journal of Neuroscience, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 943–959, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  80. K. Liesemer, S. L. Bratton, C. M. Zebrack, D. Brockmeyer, and K. D. Statler, “Early post-traumatic seizures in moderate to severe pediatric traumatic brain injury: rates, risk factors, and clinical features,” Journal of Neurotrauma, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 755–762, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  81. N. Golden, S. Darmadipura, and N. A. Bagiada, “The difference in seizure incidences between young and adult rats related to lipid peroxidation after intracortical injection of ferric chloride,” Singapore Medical Journal, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 105–109, 2010. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  82. M. S. Bessisso, M. F. El-Said, N. A. Almula, S. B. Azzam, H. A. Sweid, and M. G. Al-Ali, “Risk of seizure recurrences after first unprovoked seizure during childhood,” Neurosciences, vol. 6, pp. 95–98, 2001. View at Google Scholar
  83. R. F. Hevner, “Brain overgrowth in disorders of RTK-PI3K-AKT signaling: a mosaic of malformations,” Seminars in Perinatology, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 36–43, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  84. P. B. Bernard and T. A. Benke, “Early life seizures: evidence for chronic deficits linked to autism and intellectual disability across species and models,” Experimental Neurology, vol. 263, pp. 72–78, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  85. S. Budday, C. Raybaud, and E. Kuhl, “A mechanical model predicts morphological abnormalities in the developing human brain,” Scientific Reports, vol. 4, article 5644, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  86. J. M. Baruth, M. F. Casanova, L. Sears, and E. Sokhadze, “Early-Stage visual processing abnormalities in high-functioning autism spectrum disorder (asd),” Translational Neuroscience, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 177–187, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  87. M. F. Casanova, J. M. Baruth, A. El-Baz, A. Tasman, L. Sears, and E. Sokhadze, “Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) modulates event-related potential (ERP) indices of attention in autism,” Translational Neuroscience, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 170–180, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  88. T. P. L. Roberts, S. Y. Khan, M. Rey et al., “MEG detection of delayed auditory evoked responses in autism spectrum disorders: towards an imaging biomarker for autism,” Autism Research, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 8–18, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  89. W. Liao, M. J. Gandal, R. S. Ehrlichman, S. J. Siegel, and G. C. Carlson, “MeCP2+/− mouse model of RTT reproduces auditory phenotypes associated with Rett syndrome and replicate select EEG endophenotypes of autism spectrum disorder,” Neurobiology of Disease, vol. 46, pp. 88–92, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  90. T. M. DeLorey, P. Sahbaie, E. Hashemi, W.-W. Li, A. Salehi, and D. J. Clark, “Somatosensory and sensorimotor consequences associated with the heterozygous disruption of the autism candidate gene, Gabrb3,” Behavioural Brain Research, vol. 216, no. 1, pp. 36–45, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  91. N. Li, Y. Yang, D. P. Glover et al., “Evidence for impaired plasticity after traumatic brain injury in the developing brain,” Journal of Neurotrauma, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 395–403, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  92. J. Galvin, E. H. Froude, and C. Imms, “Sensory processing abilities of children who have sustained traumatic brain injuries,” American Journal of Occupational Therapy, vol. 63, no. 6, pp. 701–709, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  93. E. Glerean, R. K. Pan, J. Salmi et al., “Reorganization of functionally connected brain subnetworks in high-functioning autism,” Human Brain Mapping, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 1066–1079, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  94. U. Roine, T. Roine, J. Salmi et al., “Abnormal wiring of the connectome in adults with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder,” Molecular Autism, vol. 6, article 65, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  95. C. C. Dougherty, D. W. Evans, S. M. Myers, G. J. Moore, and A. M. Michael, “A comparison of structural brain imaging findings in autism spectrum disorder and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder,” Neuropsychology Review, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 25–43, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  96. S. C. L. Deoni, J. R. Zinkstok, E. Daly et al., “White-matter relaxation time and myelin water fraction differences in young adults with autism,” Psychological Medicine, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 795–805, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  97. M. Lazar, L. M. Miles, J. S. Babb, and J. B. Donaldson, “Axonal deficits in young adults with high functioning autism and their impact on processing speed,” NeuroImage: Clinical, vol. 4, pp. 417–425, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  98. L. Cerliani, M. Mennes, R. M. Thomas, A. Di Martino, M. Thioux, and C. Keysers, “Increased functional connectivity between subcortical and cortical resting-state networks in Autism spectrum disorder,” JAMA Psychiatry, vol. 72, no. 8, pp. 767–777, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  99. E. L. Dennis, Y. Jin, J. E. Villalon-Reina et al., “White matter disruption in moderate/severe pediatric traumatic brain injury: advanced tract-based analyses,” NeuroImage: Clinical, vol. 7, pp. 493–505, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  100. P. Kourtidou, S. R. McCauley, E. D. Bigler et al., “Centrum semiovale and corpus callosum integrity in relation to information processing speed in patients with severe traumatic brain injury,” Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 433–441, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  101. B. L. Bartnik-Olson, B. Holshouser, H. Wang et al., “Impaired neurovascular unit function contributes to persistent symptoms after concussion: a pilot study,” Journal of Neurotrauma, vol. 31, no. 17, pp. 1497–1506, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  102. T. C. Wu, E. A. Wilde, E. D. Bigler et al., “Longitudinal changes in the corpus callosum following pediatric traumatic brain injury,” Developmental Neuroscience, vol. 32, no. 5-6, pp. 361–373, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  103. J. V. Hunter, E. A. Wilde, K. A. Tong, and B. A. Holshouser, “Emerging imaging tools for use with traumatic brain injury research,” Journal of Neurotrauma, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 654–671, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  104. M. H. Beauchamp, R. Beare, M. Ditchfield et al., “Susceptibility weighted imaging and its relationship to outcome after pediatric traumatic brain injury,” Cortex, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 591–598, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  105. S. J. Suskauer and T. A. G. M. Huisman, “Neuroimaging in pediatric traumatic brain injury: current and future predictors of functional outcome,” Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 117–123, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  106. M. Königs, W. D. Weeda, L. W. E. van Heurn et al., “Impaired visual integration in children with traumatic brain injury: an observational study,” PLoS ONE, vol. 10, no. 12, Article ID e0144395, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  107. F. K. Korley, R. Diaz-Arrastia, A. H. B. Wu et al., “Circulating brain-derived neurotrophic factor has diagnostic and prognostic value in traumatic brain injury,” Journal of Neurotrauma, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 215–225, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  108. D. Granpeesheh, J. Tarbox, and D. R. Dixon, “Applied behavior analytic interventions for children with autism: a description and review of treatment research,” Annals of Clinical Psychiatry, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 162–173, 2009. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  109. M. L. Sundberg and J. Michael, “The benefits of Skinner's analysis of verbal behavior for children with autism,” Behavior Modification, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 698–724, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  110. D. M. Baer, M. M. Wolf, and T. R. Risley, “Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis,” Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 91–97, 1968. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  111. L. Y. Tsai, “Brief report: comorbid psychiatric disorders of autistic disorder,” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 159–163, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  112. M. L. Sundberg, B. S. Juan, M. Dawdy, and M. Arguelles, “The acquisition of tacts, mands, and intraverbals by individuals with traumatic brain injury,” The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, vol. 8, pp. 83–99, 1990. View at Google Scholar
  113. A. M. Steiner, G. W. Gengoux, A. Klin, and K. Chawarska, “Pivotal response treatment for infants at-risk for autism spectrum disorders: a pilot study,” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 91–102, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  114. F. Mohammadzaheri, L. K. Koegel, M. Rezaei, and E. Bakhshi, “A randomized clinical trial comparison between Pivotal Response Treatment (PRT) and adult-driven Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) intervention on disruptive behaviors in public school children with autism,” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, vol. 45, no. 9, pp. 2899–2907, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  115. M. Ylvisaker, L. Turkstra, C. Coehlo et al., “Behavioural interventions for children and adults with behaviour disorders after TBI: a systematic review of the evidence,” Brain Injury, vol. 21, no. 8, pp. 769–805, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  116. S. L. Wade, H. G. Taylor, A. Cassedy et al., “Long-term behavioral outcomes after a randomized, clinical trial of counselor-assisted problem solving for adolescents with complicated mild-to-severe traumatic brain injury,” Journal of Neurotrauma, vol. 32, no. 13, pp. 967–975, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  117. J. L. Matson and J. Jang, “Treating aggression in persons with autism spectrum disorders: a review,” Research in Developmental Disabilities, vol. 35, no. 12, pp. 3386–3391, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  118. G. Dawson and R. Bernier, “A quarter century of progress on the early detection and treatment of autism spectrum disorder,” Development and Psychopathology, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 1455–1472, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  119. S. Q. Mehta and P. Golshani, “Clinical neurogenetics: autism spectrum disorders,” Neurologic Clinics, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 951–968, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  120. C. Farmer, A. Thurm, and P. Grant, “Pharmacotherapy for the core symptoms in autistic disorder: current status of the research,” Drugs, vol. 73, no. 4, pp. 303–314, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  121. M. L. McPheeters, Z. Warren, N. Sathe et al., “A systematic review of medical treatments for children with autism spectrum disorders,” Pediatrics, vol. 127, no. 5, pp. e1312–e1321, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  122. P. A. J. Janssen, C. J. E. Niemegeers, F. Awouters, K. H. L. Schellekens, A. A. H. P. Megens, and T. F. Meert, “Pharmacology of risperidone (R 64 766), a new antipsychotic with serotonin-S2 and dopamine-D2 antagonistic properties,” Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, vol. 244, no. 2, pp. 685–693, 1988. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  123. J. E. Leysen, W. Gommeren, A. Eens, D. De Chaffoy de Courcelles, J. C. Stoof, and P. A. J. Janssen, “Biochemical profile of risperidone, a new antipsychotic,” Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, vol. 247, no. 2, pp. 661–670, 1988. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  124. O. S. Jesner, M. Aref-Adib, and E. Coren, “Risperidone for autism spectrum disorder,” Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, no. 1, Article ID CD005040, 2007. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  125. J. T. McCracken, J. McGough, B. Shah et al., “Risperidone in children with autism and serious behavioral problems,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 347, no. 5, pp. 314–321, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  126. C. J. McDougle, L. Scahill, M. G. Aman et al., “Risperidone for the core symptom domains of autism: results from the study by the Autism Network of the Research Units on Pediatric Psychopharmacology,” American Journal of Psychiatry, vol. 162, no. 6, pp. 1142–1148, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  127. S. Shea, A. Turgay, A. Carroll et al., “Risperidone in the treatment of disruptive behavioral symptoms in children with autistic and other pervasive developmental disorders,” Pediatrics, vol. 114, no. 5, pp. e634–e641, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  128. D. A. Shapiro, S. Renock, E. Arrington et al., “Aripiprazole, a novel atypical antipsychotic drug with a unique and robust pharmacology,” Neuropsychopharmacology, vol. 28, no. 8, pp. 1400–1411, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  129. P. J. Goodnick and J. M. Jerry, “Aripiprazole: profile on efficacy and safety,” Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy, vol. 3, no. 12, pp. 1773–1781, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  130. C. A. Farmer and M. G. Aman, “Aripiprazole for the treatment of irritability associated with autism,” Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 635–640, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  131. H. Ching and T. Pringsheim, Aripiprazole for Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD), The Cochrane Library, 2012.
  132. Y.-C. Chang, J. Quan, and J. J. Wood, “Effects of anxiety disorder severity on social functioning in children with autism spectrum disorders,” Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 235–245, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  133. J. J. Wood and K. D. Gadow, “Exploring the nature and function of anxiety in youth with autism spectrum disorders,” Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 281–292, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  134. B. Bandelow, U. Seidler-Brandler, A. Becker, D. Wedekind, and E. Rüther, “Meta-analysis of randomized controlled comparisons of psychopharmacological and psychological treatments for anxiety disorders,” The World Journal of Biological Psychiatry, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 175–187, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  135. G. M. Soomro, D. Altman, S. Rajagopal, and M. Oakley-Browne, “Selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus placebo for obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD),” The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, no. 1, Article ID CD001765, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  136. E. H. Cook Jr. and B. L. Leventhal, “The serotonin system in autism,” Current Opinion in Pediatrics, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 348–354, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  137. B. Devlin, E. H. Cook Jr., H. Coon et al., “Autism and the serotonin transporter: the long and short of it,” Molecular Psychiatry, vol. 10, no. 12, pp. 1110–1116, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  138. S. E. Maloney, M. A. Rieger, and J. D. Dougherty, “Identifying essential cell types and circuits in autism spectrum disorders,” International Review of Neurobiology, vol. 113, pp. 61–96, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  139. A. Oblak, T. T. Gibbs, and G. J. Blatt, “Reduced serotonin receptor subtypes in a limbic and a neocortical region in autism,” Autism Research, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 571–583, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  140. M. Carrasco, F. R. Volkmar, and M. H. Bloch, “Pharmacologic treatment of repetitive behaviors in autism spectrum disorders: evidence of publication bias,” Pediatrics, vol. 129, no. 5, pp. e1301–e1310, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  141. A. Kolevzon, K. A. Mathewson, and E. Hollander, “Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in autism: a review of efficacy and tolerability,” Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, vol. 67, no. 3, pp. 407–414, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  142. P. R. Choudhury, S. Lahiri, and U. Rajamma, “Glutamate mediated signaling in the pathophysiology of autism spectrum disorders,” Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior, vol. 100, no. 4, pp. 841–849, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  143. S. Coghlan, J. Horder, B. Inkster, M. A. Mendez, D. G. Murphy, and D. J. Nutt, “GABA system dysfunction in autism and related disorders: from synapse to symptoms,” Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, vol. 36, no. 9, pp. 2044–2055, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  144. M. M. Lim, I. F. Bielsky, and L. J. Young, “Neuropeptides and the social brain: potential rodent models of autism,” International Journal of Developmental Neuroscience, vol. 23, no. 2-3, pp. 235–243, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  145. C. Modahl, L. Green, D. Fein et al., “Plasma oxytocin levels in autistic children,” Biological Psychiatry, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 270–277, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  146. K. B. Nelson, J. K. Grether, L. A. Croen et al., “Neuropeptides and neurotrophins in neonatal blood of children with autism or mental retardation,” Annals of Neurology, vol. 49, no. 5, pp. 597–606, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  147. S. I. Deutsch, M. R. Urbano, S. A. Neumann, J. A. Burket, and E. Katz, “Cholinergic abnormalities in autism: is there a rationale for selective nicotinic agonist interventions?” Clinical Neuropharmacology, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 114–120, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  148. P. M. Lippiello, “Nicotinic cholinergic antagonists: a novel approach for the treatment of autism,” Medical Hypotheses, vol. 66, no. 5, pp. 985–990, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  149. K. Beauchamp, H. Mutlak, W. R. Smith, E. Shohami, and P. F. Stahel, “Pharmacology of traumatic brain injury: where is the “golden bullet”?” Molecular Medicine, vol. 14, no. 11-12, pp. 731–740, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  150. E. Chew and R. D. Zafonte, “Pharmacological management of neurobehavioral disorders following traumatic brain injury—a state-of-the-art review,” Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 851–878, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  151. D. J. Loane and A. I. Faden, “Neuroprotection for traumatic brain injury: translational challenges and emerging therapeutic strategies,” Trends in Pharmacological Sciences, vol. 31, no. 12, pp. 596–604, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  152. M. G. Aman, C. J. McDougle, L. Scahill et al., “Medication and parent training in children with pervasive developmental disorders and serious behavior problems: results from a randomized clinical trial,” Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, vol. 48, no. 12, pp. 1143–1154, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  153. S. Margulies and R. Hicks, “The combination therapies for traumatic brain injury workshop l: combination therapies for traumatic brain injury: prospective considerations,” Journal of Neurotrauma, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 925–939, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar