↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of Treatment for Metabolic Disorders Associated with Autism:Reanalysis of Three Clinical Trials

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
30 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparison of Treatment for Metabolic Disorders Associated with Autism:Reanalysis of Three Clinical Trials
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, February 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2018.00019
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leanna M. Delhey, Marie Tippett, Shannon Rose, Sirish C. Bennuri, John C. Slattery, Stepan Melnyk, S. Jill James, Richard E. Frye

Abstract

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) affects about 1 in 45 individuals in the United States, yet effective treatments are yet to be defined. There is growing evidence that ASD is associated with abnormalities in several metabolic pathways, including the inter-connected folate, methylation and glutathione pathways. Several treatments that can therapeutically target these pathways have been tested in preliminary clinical trials. The combination of methylcobalamin (mB12) with low-dose folinic acid (LDFA) and sapropterin, a synthetic form of tetrahydrobiopterin (BH4) have been studied in open-label trials while high-dose folinic acid has been studied in a double-blind placebo controlled trial. All of these treatments have the potential to positively affect folate, methylation and glutathione pathways. Although the effect of mB12/LDFA and BH4 on methylation and glutathione metabolism have been examined in the open-label studies, these changes have not been compared to controls who received a placebo in order to account for the natural variation in the changes in these pathways. Furthermore, the recent study using high-dose folinic acid (HDFA) did not analyze the change in metabolism resulting from the treatment. Thus, we compared changes in methylation and glutathione metabolism and biomarkers of chronic oxidative stress as a result of these three treatments to individuals receiving placebo. In general, mB12/LDFA treatment had a significant effect on glutathione and cysteine metabolism with a medium effect size while BH4 had a significant effect on methylation and markers of chronic oxidative stress with a large effect size. HDFA treatment did not significantly influence biomarkers of methylation, glutathione or chronic oxidative stress. One caveat was that participants in the mB12/LDFA and BH4 studies had significantly worse markers of glutathione metabolism and chronic oxidative stress at baseline, respectively. Thus, the participants selected in these two clinical trials may have been those with the most severe metabolic abnormalities and most expected to respond to these treatments. Overall this study supports the notion that metabolic abnormalities in individuals with ASD may be amenable to targeted treatments and provide some insight into the mechanism of action of these treatments.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 16%
Researcher 3 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Other 6 19%
Unknown 10 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 25%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Psychology 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 11 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 July 2023.
All research outputs
#2,126,631
of 26,352,576 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#1,181
of 11,808 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,438
of 460,786 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#33
of 230 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,352,576 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,808 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 460,786 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 230 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.