Task-based functional neural correlates of social cognition across autism and schizophrenia spectrum disorders
Lindsay D Oliver,Iska Moxon-Emre,Colin Hawco,Erin W Dickie,Arla Dakli,Rachael E Lyon,Peter Szatmari,John D Haltigan,Anna Goldenberg,Ayesha G Rashidi,Vinh Tan,Maria T Secara,Pushpal Desarkar,George Foussias,Robert W Buchanan,Anil K Malhotra,Meng-Chuan Lai,Aristotle N Voineskos,Stephanie H Ameis
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13229-024-00615-3
2024-09-04
Abstract:Background: Autism and schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSDs) both feature atypical social cognition. Despite evidence for comparable group-level performance in lower-level emotion processing and higher-level mentalizing, limited research has examined the neural basis of social cognition across these conditions. Our goal was to compare the neural correlates of social cognition in autism, SSDs, and typically developing controls (TDCs). Methods: Data came from two harmonized studies in individuals diagnosed with autism or SSDs and TDCs (aged 16-35 years), including behavioral social cognitive metrics and two functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) tasks: a social mirroring Imitate/Observe (ImObs) task and the Empathic Accuracy (EA) task. Group-level comparisons, and transdiagnostic analyses incorporating social cognitive performance, were run using FSL's PALM for each task, covarying for age and sex (1000 permutations, thresholded at p < 0.05 FWE-corrected). Exploratory region of interest (ROI)-based analyses were also conducted. Results: ImObs and EA analyses included 164 and 174 participants, respectively (autism N = 56/59, SSD N = 50/56, TDC N = 58/59). EA and both lower- and higher-level social cognition scores differed across groups. While canonical social cognitive networks were activated, no significant whole-brain or ROI-based group-level differences in neural correlates for either task were detected. Transdiagnostically, neural activity during the EA task, but not the ImObs task, was associated with lower- and higher-level social cognitive performance. Limitations: Despite attempting to match our groups on age, sex, and race, significant group differences remained. Power to detect regional brain differences is also influenced by sample size and multiple comparisons in whole-brain analyses. Our findings may not generalize to autism and SSD individuals with co-occurring intellectual disabilities. Conclusions: The lack of whole-brain and ROI-based group-level differences identified and the dimensional EA brain-behavior relationship observed across our sample suggest that the EA task may be well-suited to target engagement in novel intervention testing. Our results also emphasize the potential utility of cross-condition approaches to better understand social cognition across autism and SSDs.