Autism spectrum conditions (ASC) affect more males than females in the general population. However, within ASC it is unclear if there are phenotypic sex differences. Testing for similarities and differences between the sexes is important not only for clinical assessment but also has implications for theories of typical sex differences and of autism. Using cognitive and behavioral measures, we investigated similarities and differences between the sexes in age- and IQ-matched adults with ASC (high-functioning autism or Asperger syndrome). Of the 83 (45 males and 38 females) participants, 62 (33 males and 29 females) met Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R) cut-off criteria for autism in childhood and were included in all subsequent analyses. The severity of childhood core autism symptoms did not differ between the sexes. Males and females also did not differ in self-reported empathy, systemizing, anxiety, depression, and obsessive-compulsive traits/symptoms or mentalizing performance. However, adult females with ASC showed more lifetime sensory symptoms (p = 0.036), fewer current socio-communication difficulties (p = 0.001), and more self-reported autistic traits (p = 0.012) than males. In addition, females with ASC who also had developmental language delay had lower current performance IQ than those without developmental language delay (p<0.001), a pattern not seen in males. The absence of typical sex differences in empathizing-systemizing profiles within the autism spectrum confirms a prediction from the extreme male brain theory. Behavioral sex differences within ASC may also reflect different developmental mechanisms between males and females with ASC. We discuss the importance of the superficially better socio-communication ability in adult females with ASC in terms of why females with ASC may more often go under-recognized, and receive their diagnosis later, than males.

SummaryAutism spectrum disorders (henceforth autism) are diagnosed in around 1% of the population [1]. Familial liability confers risk for a broad spectrum of difficulties including the broader autism phenotype (BAP) [2, 3]. There are currently no reliable predictors of autism in infancy, but characteristic behaviors emerge during the second year, enabling diagnosis after this age [4, 5]. Because indicators of brain functioning may be sensitive predictors, and atypical eye contact is characteristic of the syndrome [6–9] and the BAP [10, 11], we examined whether neural sensitivity to eye gaze during infancy is associated with later autism outcomes [12, 13]. We undertook a prospective longitudinal study of infants with and without familial risk for autism. At 6–10 months, we recorded infants' event-related potentials (ERPs) in response to viewing faces with eye gaze directed toward versus away from the infant [14]. Longitudinal analyses showed that characteristics of ERP components evoked in response to dynamic eye gaze shifts during infancy were associated with autism diagnosed at 36 months. ERP responses to eye gaze may help characterize developmental processes that lead to later emerging autism. Findings also elucidate the mechanisms driving the development of the social brain in infancy.

The 'self' is a complex multidimensional construct deeply embedded and in many ways defined by our relations with the social world. Individuals with autism are impaired in both self-referential and other-referential social cognitive processing. Atypical neural representation of the self may be a key to understanding the nature of such impairments. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging we scanned adult males with an autism spectrum condition and age and IQ-matched neurotypical males while they made reflective mentalizing or physical judgements about themselves or the British Queen. Neurotypical individuals preferentially recruit the middle cingulate cortex and ventromedial prefrontal cortex in response to self compared with other-referential processing. In autism, ventromedial prefrontal cortex responded equally to self and other, while middle cingulate cortex responded more to other-mentalizing than self-mentalizing. These atypical responses occur only in areas where self-information is preferentially processed and does not affect areas that preferentially respond to other-referential information. In autism, atypical neural self-representation was also apparent via reduced functional connectivity between ventromedial prefrontal cortex and areas associated with lower level embodied representations, such as ventral premotor and somatosensory cortex. Furthermore, the magnitude of neural self-other distinction in ventromedial prefrontal cortex was strongly related to the magnitude of early childhood social impairments in autism. Individuals whose ventromedial prefrontal cortex made the largest distinction between mentalizing about self and other were least socially impaired in early childhood, while those whose ventromedial prefrontal cortex made little to no distinction between mentalizing about self and other were the most socially impaired in early childhood. These observations reveal that the atypical organization of neural circuitry preferentially coding for self-information is a key mechanism at the heart of both self-referential and social impairments in autism.

BackgroundThere has been increasing interest in the potential for pre‐emptive interventions in the prodrome of autism, but little investigation as to their effect.MethodsA two‐site, two‐arm assessor‐blinded randomised controlled trial (RCT) of a 12‐session parent‐mediated social communication intervention delivered between 9 and 14 months of age (Intervention in the British Autism Study of Infant Siblings‐Video Interaction for Promoting Positive Parenting), against no intervention. Fifty‐four infants (28 intervention, 26 nonintervention) at familial risk of autism but not otherwise selected for developmental atypicality were assessed at 9‐month baseline, 15‐month treatment endpoint, and 27‐ and 39‐month follow‐up. Primary outcome: severity of autism prodromal symptoms, blind‐rated on Autism Observation Schedule for Infants or Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule 2nd Edition across the four assessment points. Secondary outcomes: blind‐rated parent–child interaction and child language; nonblind parent‐rated communication and socialisation. Prespecified intention‐to‐treat analysis combined estimates from repeated measures within correlated regressions to estimate the overall effect of the infancy intervention over time.ResultsEffect estimates in favour of intervention on autism prodromal symptoms, maximal at 27 months, had confidence intervals (CIs) at each separate time point including the null, but showed a significant overall effect over the course of the intervention and follow‐up period (effect size [ES] = 0.32; 95% CI 0.04, 0.60; p = .026). Effects on proximal intervention targets of parent nondirectiveness/synchrony (ES = 0.33; CI 0.04, 0.63; p = .013) and child attentiveness/communication initiation (ES = 0.36; 95% CI 0.04, 0.68; p = .015) showed similar results. There was no effect on categorical diagnostic outcome or formal language measures.ConclusionsFollow‐up to 3 years of the first RCT of a very early social communication intervention for infants at familial risk of developing autism has shown a treatment effect, extending 24 months after intervention end, to reduce the overall severity of autism prodromal symptoms and enhance parent–child dyadic social communication over this period. We highlight the value of extended follow‐up and repeat assessment for early intervention trials.