4.8 Article

Elevated fetal steroidogenic activity in autism

期刊

MOLECULAR PSYCHIATRY
卷 20, 期 3, 页码 369-376

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/mp.2014.48

关键词

-

资金

  1. Medical Research Council UK (MRC)
  2. Nancy Lurie Marks Family Foundation
  3. Wellcome Trust
  4. Autism Research Trust
  5. British Academy
  6. Jesus College, Cambridge
  7. MRC [G0600977] Funding Source: UKRI
  8. Lundbeck Foundation [R155-2014-1724] Funding Source: researchfish
  9. Medical Research Council [G0600977] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Autism affects males more than females, giving rise to the idea that the influence of steroid hormones on early fetal brain development may be one important early biological risk factor. Utilizing the Danish Historic Birth Cohort and Danish Psychiatric Central Register, we identified all amniotic fluid samples of males born between 1993 and 1999 who later received ICD-10 (International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision) diagnoses of autism, Asperger syndrome or PDD-NOS (pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified) (n = 128) compared with matched typically developing controls. Concentration levels of Delta 4 sex steroids (progesterone, 17 alpha-hydroxy-progesterone, androstenedione and testosterone) and cortisol were measured with liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. All hormones were positively associated with each other and principal component analysis confirmed that one generalized latent steroidogenic factor was driving much of the variation in the data. The autism group showed elevations across all hormones on this latent generalized steroidogenic factor (Cohen's d = 0.37, P = 0.0009) and this elevation was uniform across ICD-10 diagnostic label. These results provide the first direct evidence of elevated fetal steroidogenic activity in autism. Such elevations may be important as epigenetic fetal programming mechanisms and may interact with other important pathophysiological factors in autism.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据