Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
    • Special Collections
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
    • Editorial Board
    • ECR Advisory Board
    • Journal Staff
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
    • Accessibility
  • SUBSCRIBE

User menu

  • Log out
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Neuroscience
  • Log out
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Neuroscience

Advanced Search

Submit a Manuscript
  • HOME
  • CONTENT
    • Early Release
    • Featured
    • Current Issue
    • Issue Archive
    • Collections
    • Podcast
  • ALERTS
  • FOR AUTHORS
    • Information for Authors
    • Fees
    • Journal Clubs
    • eLetters
    • Submit
    • Special Collections
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
    • Editorial Board
    • ECR Advisory Board
    • Journal Staff
  • ABOUT
    • Overview
    • Advertise
    • For the Media
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Feedback
    • Accessibility
  • SUBSCRIBE
PreviousNext
Review

Resting-State Functional MRI and PET Imaging as Noninvasive Tools to Study (Ab)Normal Neurodevelopment in Humans and Rodents

Charissa Millevert, Nicholas Vidas-Guscic, Liesbeth Vanherp, Elisabeth Jonckers, Marleen Verhoye, Steven Staelens, Daniele Bertoglio and Sarah Weckhuysen
Journal of Neuroscience 6 December 2023, 43 (49) 8275-8293; https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1043-23.2023
Charissa Millevert
1Applied & Translational Neurogenomics Group, Vlaams Instituut voor Biotechnology (VIB) Center for Molecular Neurology, VIB, Antwerp 2610, Belgium
2Department of Neurology, University Hospital of Antwerp, Antwerp 2610, Belgium
5µNEURO Research Centre of Excellence, University of Antwerp, Antwerp 2610, Belgium
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nicholas Vidas-Guscic
3Bio-Imaging Lab, University of Antwerp, Antwerp 2610, Belgium
5µNEURO Research Centre of Excellence, University of Antwerp, Antwerp 2610, Belgium
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Liesbeth Vanherp
5µNEURO Research Centre of Excellence, University of Antwerp, Antwerp 2610, Belgium
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Elisabeth Jonckers
3Bio-Imaging Lab, University of Antwerp, Antwerp 2610, Belgium
5µNEURO Research Centre of Excellence, University of Antwerp, Antwerp 2610, Belgium
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Marleen Verhoye
3Bio-Imaging Lab, University of Antwerp, Antwerp 2610, Belgium
5µNEURO Research Centre of Excellence, University of Antwerp, Antwerp 2610, Belgium
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Steven Staelens
4Molecular Imaging Center Antwerp (MICA), University of Antwerp, Antwerp 2610, Belgium
5µNEURO Research Centre of Excellence, University of Antwerp, Antwerp 2610, Belgium
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniele Bertoglio
3Bio-Imaging Lab, University of Antwerp, Antwerp 2610, Belgium
4Molecular Imaging Center Antwerp (MICA), University of Antwerp, Antwerp 2610, Belgium
5µNEURO Research Centre of Excellence, University of Antwerp, Antwerp 2610, Belgium
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sarah Weckhuysen
1Applied & Translational Neurogenomics Group, Vlaams Instituut voor Biotechnology (VIB) Center for Molecular Neurology, VIB, Antwerp 2610, Belgium
2Department of Neurology, University Hospital of Antwerp, Antwerp 2610, Belgium
5µNEURO Research Centre of Excellence, University of Antwerp, Antwerp 2610, Belgium
6Translational Neurosciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, University of Antwerp, Antwerp 2610, Belgium
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Sarah Weckhuysen
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) are a group of complex neurologic and psychiatric disorders. Functional and molecular imaging techniques, such as resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) and positron emission tomography (PET), can be used to measure network activity noninvasively and longitudinally during maturation in both humans and rodent models. Here, we review the current knowledge on rs-fMRI and PET biomarkers in the study of normal and abnormal neurodevelopment, including intellectual disability (ID; with/without epilepsy), autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), in humans and rodent models from birth until adulthood, and evaluate the cross-species translational value of the imaging biomarkers. To date, only a few isolated studies have used rs-fMRI or PET to study (abnormal) neurodevelopment in rodents during infancy, the critical period of neurodevelopment. Further work to explore the feasibility of performing functional imaging studies in infant rodent models is essential, as rs-fMRI and PET imaging in transgenic rodent models of NDDs are powerful techniques for studying disease pathogenesis, developing noninvasive preclinical imaging biomarkers of neurodevelopmental dysfunction, and evaluating treatment-response in disease-specific models.

  • neurodevelopment
  • neurodevelopmental disorders
  • resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging
  • positron emission tomography
  • rodent models

Introduction

Neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) are, according to the DSM-5 (American Psychiatric Association, 2013), a broad group of complex neurologic and psychiatric disorders, including intellectual disability (ID), autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD; Thapar et al., 2017). Globally, the prevalence numbers of NDDs are highly variable and sparse for individuals living in low-income and middle-income countries (Francés et al., 2022). In general, the prevalence of ID, ASD, and ADHD, ranges from 0.6% to 1.4%, 0.7% to 3%, and 5% to 11%, respectively (Francés et al., 2022; Yang et al., 2022). Since people with NDDs often suffer from multiple comorbidities, like behavioral disturbances, epilepsy, and cognitive impairments, they represent a major public health problem (Thapar et al., 2017).

NDDs result from disturbances in the development of the central nervous system caused by environmental (e.g., trauma, infection, metabolic disorders) or genetic factors (Ismail and Shapiro, 2019). These disturbances are thought to occur at early stages of brain development, when the brain is still highly plastic and modifiable (Mohammadi-Nejad et al., 2018). We hypothesize that the abnormalities will continue to evolve as the immature brain develops into a mature brain. Therefore, it is crucial to study brain development in the immature brain and to follow brain development into adulthood in a noninvasive way. While in humans this process takes >18 years, rodent models have the advantage of reaching a mature adult brain in only three months (Flurkey et al., 2007). This makes rodent models ideal for studying disease mechanisms and assessing treatment response.

Imaging has been proposed as a powerful tool for the study of neurodevelopment. Structural imaging has been used in people with NDDs (Del Casale et al., 2022; Firouzabadi et al., 2022). However, structural imaging generally does not reveal abnormalities in brain volumetric parameters, and when abnormalities are found, they often do not correlate with neurodevelopmental outcomes (Green et al., 2019). Functional and molecular imaging techniques, on the other hand, could provide a bridge between functional and molecular neurodevelopmental abnormalities and outcome.

Resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) can be used to follow the development of functional networks without the need for active participation of the subject during scanning (Fröhlich, 2016). This makes rs-fMRI the perfect imaging technique to study intrinsic brain function in infants and animal models. Rs-fMRI detects blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) signals from volume elements (voxels) of the whole brain at rest, currently with a temporal resolution of 0.5–2 s within a 5- to 10-min scan period. Spontaneous low-frequency fluctuations (LFFs) in these BOLD signals are an indirect marker of changes in neuronal activity (Biswal et al., 1995). The correlations between the spontaneous LFFs of different voxels can thereby identify their functional connectivity (FC; Biswal et al., 1995; Fröhlich, 2016). In the absence of external stimuli, FC networks are referred to as resting-state networks (RSNs; Fröhlich, 2016).

Positron emission tomography (PET) is a molecular imaging technique that uses different radiotracers to detect biochemical and physiological changes, based on the quantification of the local tracer concentration (Kumar and Chugani, 2008). Changes in oxygen consumption, glucose consumption, cerebral blood flow (CBF), receptor densities, neurotransmitter levels, and cerebral protein synthesis can all be detected by PET, and these changes are thought to correlate with structural and functional maturation of different brain regions (Kumar and Chugani, 2008).

Both rs-fMRI and PET imaging are translational techniques that can be applied to both human and (transgenic) small-animal models in a (pre)clinical setting. In this review, we provide an overview of the current knowledge on neurodevelopment derived from rs-fMRI and PET data in healthy human and rodent models. We also give examples of how these two techniques have been used to study abnormal neurodevelopment in both models in specific NDDs (ID with or without epilepsy including genetic syndromes, ASD, and ADHD) and address the limitations of current studies.

Extrapolating Timing of Brain Development from Rodent Models to Humans

Rodent models are often used as proxies for human biological processes. When using rodent models in neurodevelopmental research, the ability to extrapolate the timing of brain development from rodents to humans is critical (Clancy et al., 2007b). Compared with humans, rodents have a shorter lifespan and, therefore neurodevelopment takes place in a shorter period of time. After an average gestation period of 19 d in mice and 22 d in rats, rodents are born with less mature brains than full-term infants (Clancy et al., 2001). Consequently, the critical period for synaptogenesis in human fetuses starts already in utero, whereas in rodents it occurs completely ex utero during the first three postnatal weeks (Semple et al., 2013). It has been suggested that approximately around postnatal day (P)7 to P13, the rat brain reaches a stage of development equivalent to that of a full-term human newborn in terms of white matter development and axonal outgrowth (Boksa, 2010; Semple et al., 2013; Fig. 1). In rodents, neurogenesis is complete by around P15, whereas in humans it can continue until 2.5 years of age (Semple et al., 2013). Myelination peaks at around P20 in rodents and between two and five years of age in humans, and continues into adulthood (Semple et al., 2013; Nishiyama et al., 2021). In addition, a rodent brain reaches 90–95% of its adult weight between P21 and P28. A similar plateau is reached in humans at two to three years of age (Semple et al., 2013). Although it is an oversimplification to translate developmental milestones by age between species using a linear scale, the first and second halves of rodent gestation and the first postnatal week roughly correspond to the first, second, and third trimesters of human pregnancy, respectively (Clancy et al., 2007a). Overall, the period from fetal age to three years of age is known to be the most important for brain development in humans, with rapid synaptogenesis, dendritic growth, myelination, and development of white matter fiber tracts, whereas in rodents this period encompasses the first three postnatal weeks.

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Comparison of neurodevelopmental age between humans and mice. Simplified schematic overview of corresponding neurodevelopmental stages in humans and rodents. Data obtained from: Boksa (2010), Clancy et al. (2007a), Nishiyama et al. (2021), and Semple et al. (2013).

Functional Connectivity Networks Using Resting-State Functional MRI Provide Insight into Normal Brain Development

Rs-fMRI in normally developing humans

Rs-fMRI studies in children before the age of three have significantly increased our knowledge of the maturation of FC during this important period of brain development (Gao et al., 2017; Mohammadi-Nejad et al., 2018). Therefore, we focus mainly on the FC changes detected by rs-fMRI during this period and relate these changes to neurodevelopmental milestones (Fig. 2).

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Timeline of development of functional connectivity in the human brain as derived from rs-fMRI from 20 weeks of gestation until adulthood. FC: functional connectivity.

From 20 weeks of gestation until birth

The earliest rs-fMRI studies were performed in utero on healthy human fetuses between 20 and 26 weeks of gestation. They showed the presence of immature RSNs and interhemispheric (long-range) FC (Schöpf et al., 2012; Thomason et al., 2013; Jakab et al., 2014; van den Heuvel et al., 2018). This is followed by a period of expansion, leading to an increase in the proportion and strength of interhemispheric and intrahemispheric (e.g., between frontal and temporal lobes) FC, and in short-range connections (e.g., within frontal and parietal lobes; Thomason et al., 2013; Jakab et al., 2014). Interestingly, fetuses with a mean gestational age of 33 weeks that have higher FC between the motor network and regions supporting motor function, will develop motor skills more rapidly in infancy. Moreover, in the same fetuses, reduced FC between the motor network and anterior cingulate, insula, and lateral cerebellar regions was also associated with advanced motor skills at four months of age (Thomason et al., 2018). Both findings support the idea that an earlier FC formation, as well as more active and earlier specialization are associated with faster neurodevelopment.

The neonatal period

At term birth, some primary cortical networks, such as the somatosensory, motor, and auditory networks, are functionally synchronized and resemble adult-like topologies soon after birth (Fransson et al., 2007; Lin et al., 2008; Doria et al., 2010; Smyser et al., 2010; Alcauter et al., 2014; Toulmin et al., 2015). Higher-order networks, on the other hand, are only primitively present at birth (Table 1; Doria et al., 2010; Gao et al., 2013; Alcauter et al., 2014). These primitive higher-order networks already have an important prognostic value, as early connections between these networks in preterm born infants are predictive of cognitive outcome at term equivalent age (Della Rosa et al., 2021). For example, higher FC strength between the medial prefrontal cortex [part of the default-mode network (DMN)] and the executive control network in newborns is associated with higher cognitive scores at six months of age (Della Rosa et al., 2021). Few thalamocortical connections, e.g., between the thalamus and the primary sensorimotor cortex and between the thalamus and the salience network, are also established in newborns (Alcauter et al., 2014; Toulmin et al., 2015). The latter may be important for the neonate, as the salience network guides selective attention, and the thalamus serves as a relay station for critical evaluation of different events (Gao et al., 2017). Finally, the amygdala shows FC with other brain regions, and the specific profile of these neonatal connections has been shown to be predictive of emerging anxiety and cognitive development at six months of age (Graham et al., 2016). In summary, the neonatal brain exhibits a balance between long-range connections and a high degree of local connectivity, termed “small-world” topology (Graham et al., 2021).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Information about function, development, and resting-state functional connectivity alterations of higher-order networks derived from resting-stage fMRI studies in humans and rodents

The first two years of life

Primary networks undergo little refinement and increase in volume and strength during the first two years of life (Gao et al., 2015). Higher-order networks and thalamocortical FC, on the other hand, undergo major changes with expansion of long-range FC, followed by further strengthening and refinement (Gao et al., 2013; Alcauter et al., 2014). This refinement leads to a significant reduction in short-range FC and the creation of long-range shortcuts (Gao et al., 2011). It is also known as functional specialization and enables global and efficient information transfer (Gao et al., 2011). For example, the DMN is well synchronized by one year of age, and that has an adult-like topology by two years of age (Gao et al., 2009). Like the DMN, the salience network develops relatively early, reflecting the rapid emergence of self-awareness in the first year of life (Alcauter et al., 2015). This is thought to lay the foundation for the development of other higher-order networks (Alcauter et al., 2015). The executive control network, on the other hand, is still in an immature state at one year of age (Gao et al., 2015).

From the age of one year, networks begin to interact, and these network interactions are thought to be essential for normal neurodevelopment. For example, the DMN is anticorrelated with the dorsal attention network (DAN), part of the task-positive network (TPN), and this anticorrelation is further strengthened during maturation (Gao et al., 2013). Thalamus-salience connections also develop, and the strength of this FC can significantly predict working memory performance and intelligence quotient (IQ; Alcauter et al., 2014). Next, FC transitions to asymmetry in language regions (inferior frontal gyrus and superior temporal gyrus). The rate of this transition in infants has been shown to predict language outcomes at four years of age (Emerson et al., 2016).

Overall, rs-fMRI studies show that the first two years of life are critical for brain development, as it is during this period that the higher-order networks develop, and that strengthening, functional specialization and interaction of the formed RSNs takes place.

From three years of age to adulthood

By three years of age, the basic functional networks are in place, after which neurodevelopment is mainly characterized by reorganization, “fine-tuning,” plasticity, and remodeling of the established networks (Gilmore et al., 2018). Small-world topology does not change significantly from childhood to adulthood in terms of path length (λ) and clustering coefficient (γ; Fair et al., 2009; Supekar et al., 2009). Nevertheless, the architecture of RSN connectivity is changing. They become more lateralised and form additional connections with other networks (Fair et al., 2007; Kelly et al., 2009). Functional specialization, characterized by a decrease in short-range FC and an increase in long-range FC, continues into adulthood (Fair et al., 2007, 2009; Kelly et al., 2009). This leads not only to an increase in overall FC strength, but also to an increase in global and local network efficiency (Fan et al., 2021).

In particular higher-order networks undergo a prolonged period of developmental maturation into adulthood (C.L. Li et al., 2019). For example, despite the relatively early formation of the DMN, regions within the DMN, particularly between the medial prefrontal cortex and the posterior cingulate cortex, are only sparsely functionally connected during the first decade (Fair et al., 2008; Kelly et al., 2009; Supekar et al., 2010). These FCs develop into a cohesive, interconnected network by adulthood (Fair et al., 2008; Kelly et al., 2009; Supekar et al., 2010). Overall FC increases from childhood to adulthood following a nonlinear asymptotic growth curve shape, the so-called functional maturation curve. This can be used to make accurate predictions about an individual's brain maturity (Dosenbach et al., 2010).

In summary, primary cortical networks generally develop before higher-order networks, but the critical neurodevelopmental period for each network differs between different networks (Gao et al., 2017). The formation of the basic RSNs occurs from the third trimester of pregnancy until three years of age. During this period, RSNs and network interactions have been shown to predict neurodevelopmental outcomes at later ages. Thereafter, RSNs strengthen and become functionally specialized, enabling efficient information processing.

Rs-fMRI in normally developing rodents

In the mid-2000s, several research groups have successfully performed rs-fMRI in rodents (Lu et al., 2006, 2007; Williams et al., 2006; Pawela et al., 2008; Zhao et al., 2008). They demonstrated the presence of brain networks in adult rats, including the primary somatosensory network, and the visual network, suggesting that BOLD fluctuations are conserved across species (Lu et al., 2007; Pawela et al., 2008; Zhao et al., 2008). Subsequent studies confirmed the presence of FC in (young) adult mice (Mechling et al., 2014; Stafford et al., 2014). They showed that several FC networks, including the somatosensory network, the visual network, and the DMN, as well as the “small-world topology,” could be identified in mice, and that these networks were highly translatable to human networks (Table 1; Mechling et al., 2014; Stafford et al., 2014).

Zoratto et al. (2018) performed rs-fMRI in anesthetized Wistar rats during the juvenile period at P21–P25, P28–P32, and P35–P39. They showed an increase in FC between the three time periods, particularly between the hippocampus and striatum (Zoratto et al., 2018). Another study characterized the developmental changes in FC from juvenile (P30) to adult (P70–P90) age in awake rats (Ma et al., 2018). A region-of-interest based FC analysis showed similar results to humans; first, the overall adult FC pattern was already present at juvenile age, but, to some extent, FC was still changing, especially between P30 and P49. Second, the maturation time of different RSNs differed between regions. Third, the authors demonstrated a decrease in interhemispheric FC between homotopic counterparts during neurodevelopment. This phenomenon indicates functional specialization. Functional specialization was further supported by a decrease in short-range FC, and an increase in long-range FC during development from juvenile to adult age (Ma et al., 2018). In conclusion, neurodevelopment continues at a slow pace during the juvenile period, with findings similar to those described in humans (Fair et al., 2007, 2009; Kelly et al., 2009). As the overall whole-brain FC pattern is largely established by juvenile age, imaging at earlier stages of development would provide more critical information regarding neurodevelopment.

Three Molecular Imaging with PET Provides Insight into Normal Brain Development

PET studies in normally developing humans

PET studies of neurodevelopment in the healthy pediatric population are rare because of the need for ionizing radiation. The high number of dividing neural progenitor cells makes the developing brain vulnerable to stressors, including ionizing radiation (Verreet et al., 2015). Indeed, exposure to high doses of ionizing radiation in utero has been shown to cause neurodevelopmental abnormalities in humans and rodents (Verreet et al., 2015; Pasqual et al., 2020). The embryonic period has been identified as the most vulnerable period in both species (Verreet et al., 2015; Pasqual et al., 2020). However, evidence for adverse effects of low doses (<100 mGy) on global cognitive function or specific cognitive subdomains in humans is limited or inconsistent (Pasqual et al., 2020).

Glucose metabolism

Brain maturation is thought to be associated with regional changes in cerebral metabolism (Kinnala et al., 1996). 2-Deoxy-2[18F]-fluoro-D-glucose ([18F]-FDG) PET allows the visualization and quantification of cerebral glucose metabolism (H.T. Chugani and Phelps, 1986). Studies using [18F]-FDG PET in normal neurodevelopment have only been performed in children with other disorders that are not thought to interfere with normal development, such as a history of suspected hypoxic-ischemic brain injury (Kinnala et al., 1996), extracranial malignancy (London and Howman-Giles, 2014, 2015), epilepsy (H.T. Chugani and Phelps, 1986; H.T. Chugani et al., 1987; Van Bogaert et al., 1998; Trotta et al., 2016; Pilli et al., 2019), or deafness (Kang et al., 2004). Earlier studies quantified the local cerebral metabolic rate of glucose (H.T. Chugani and Phelps, 1986; H.T. Chugani et al., 1987; Kinnala et al., 1996), whereas more recent studies calculated standard uptake values (SUV) of [18F]-FDG (London and Howman-Giles, 2014; Barber et al., 2018) or used statistical parametric methods (Van Bogaert et al., 1998; Kang et al., 2004; London and Howman-Giles, 2015; Trotta et al., 2016).

During the neonatal period, glucose metabolism is higher in subcortical than in cortical structures, and then gradually increases to reach adult levels by two years of age (H.T. Chugani and Phelps, 1986; H.T. Chugani et al., 1987; Kinnala et al., 1996). H.T. Chugani et al. (1987) also included older individuals (5 d to 15 years). They showed that glucose metabolism continues to increase, exceeding adult values by more than twofold at three years of age. The rate of glucose metabolism then remains stable until approximately nine years of age, after which it declines and returns to adult levels by the end of the second decade (Fig. 3; H.T. Chugani et al., 1987). In contrast, more recent studies have calculated SUVs, and have shown a progressive increase in [18F]-FDG uptake in different brain regions into adulthood (London and Howman-Giles, 2014; Barber et al., 2018). The SUV is the dimensionless ratio of the image-derived radioactivity concentration to a normalization factor, typically the injected dose of radioactivity divided by body weight (S.C. Huang, 2000). It is a semiquantitative measure of brain metabolism that is subject to many variables (e.g., body composition and dose to scan time; Barber et al., 2018). The calculation of the glucose metabolic rate takes into account other factors such as the arterial plasma glucose concentration (S.C. Huang, 2000). Therefore, the calculation of the glucose metabolic rate is theoretically more accurate. It is intuitively also highly likely that the metabolic rate is high in the first decade and then declines, as this may reflect rapid brain maturation and growth followed by more efficient signaling because of myelination and synaptic pruning.

Figure 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 3.

Normal brain metabolism from birth until adulthood derived from [18F]-FDG PET: conflicting results between older and more recent studies. The blue line represents the mean local cerebral metabolic rate of glucose in the whole brain, derived from studies published before 2000 (H.T. Chugani and Phelps, 1986; H.T. Chugani et al., 1987; Kinnala et al., 1996). The red line represents the mean maximum standard uptake value (SUV) in different brain regions, derived from studies published between 2014 and 2018 (London and Howman-Giles, 2014; Barber et al., 2018). The horizontal line with large and small dots represents the adult values of mean local cerebral metabolic rate of glucose and SUV, respectively.

Some studies used statistical parametric mapping to calculate the regional glucose metabolism adjusted for global activity (Van Bogaert et al., 1998; Kang et al., 2004; Trotta et al., 2016). Kang et al. (2004) included deaf children aged 1–15 years. The authors showed a linear increase in adjusted glucose metabolism with age in the frontal lobes (Kang et al., 2004). The other two studies included participants aged 6–38 years (Van Bogaert et al., 1998) and 6–50 years (Trotta et al., 2016). They showed that adjusted metabolic glucose metabolism followed a nonlinear inverted U-shaped pattern in the thalamus, anterior cingulate cortex, and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, with the highest increase mainly before the age of 30. This was followed by a linear increase in the hippocampus and regions of the cerebellum (Van Bogaert et al., 1998; Trotta et al., 2016). In conclusion, while the absolute glucose metabolism values are highest in the first years of life and then tend to decrease, the adjusted glucose metabolism values continue to increase in most brain regions, especially up to the age of 30. The latter shows that brain maturation continues well into adulthood.

One study has shown that cortical glucose metabolism also becomes increasingly asymmetric during adolescence (Pilli et al., 2019). However, other studies have shown little or no asymmetry between contralateral brain regions (London and Howman-Giles, 2014; Barber et al., 2018). Asymmetric [18F]-FDG uptake may also be sex-specific, as the rate of increase and absolute values of FDG uptake differ between females and males (Kang et al., 2004).

Cerebral blood flow

CBF rates can be used as a surrogate measure of local energy demand, as the two are closely related (Kumar and Chugani, 2008). Few studies have used PET to assess CBF in normal developing children using either the inhalation method with C15O2 or injection with H215O (the gold standard; Altman et al., 1988; Takahashi et al., 1999; Andersen et al., 2019). In the neonatal period, CBF values are low but variable. Andersen et al. (2019) measured whole brain CBF in four healthy children within the first 3 d of life. CBF rate in these children ranged from 15 to 22.2 ml/100 g/min (mean: 17.8 ml/100 g/min; Andersen et al., 2019). In another study, CBF values ranged from 13 to 55 ml/100 g/min (mean: 23.6 ml/100 g/min) in five term born healthy neonates aged 3–14 d (Altman et al., 1988). Takahashi et al. (1999) calculated the ratio of CBF to that in adults, and showed that CBF is low at birth, and increases during development until approximately eight years of age. More specifically, between three and eight years of age, CBF values peak at 140% to 175% of adult values. After eight years of age, CBF decreases and reaches adult levels during adolescence (Takahashi, 1999). Interestingly, this pattern follows the same trend as the developmental pattern of glucose metabolism determined by H.T. Chugani and Phelps (1986).

By analogy, arterial spin labeling MRI is able to quantify CBF. Unlike H215O PET, this technique can be used noninvasively and without the need for an ionizing tracer, as it uses magnetically labeled arterial blood water protons as an endogenous tracer (Ferré et al., 2013). This technique has also been used to demonstrate an increase in CBF during the first years of life (Z. Wang et al., 2008; Kim et al., 2018; Paniukov et al., 2020).

Overall, PET studies to assess CBF are scarce. The few studies that have been performed have shown highly variable CBF values during the neonatal period and an increase in CBF during the first decade of life. These findings have been confirmed by arterial spin labeling MRI.

Neurotransmitters

PET can also be used to visualize and measure different neurotransmitters using specific radiotracers (Sander and Hesse, 2017). GABA is a major inhibitory neurotransmitter, that plays a critical role in brain development and in physiological processes such as memory, attention, and stress reactivity (Andersson et al., 2019). Changes in GABAA neurotransmission in response to sensory stimuli are thought to lead to synaptic plasticity (Kumar and Chugani, 2008; Andersson et al., 2019). This hypothesis is supported by two [11C]-flumazenil (FMZ) PET studies performed in children with a history of epilepsy, which is not thought to interfere with normal development. They showed that GABAA receptor density increases rapidly during the first two years of life, eventually exceeding adult levels (D.C. Chugani et al., 2001; H.T. Chugani et al., 2013). In the following years, GABAA receptor density decreases by 25% to 50% to reach adult levels between 14 and 17.5 years in subcortical regions, and between 18 and 22 years in cortical regions (D.C. Chugani et al., 2001). Interestingly, during the first three postnatal months, GABAA receptor binding patterns resemble those of neonatal glucose metabolism pattern, with higher tracer binding in subcortical than in cortical regions (H.T. Chugani et al., 2013).

Glutamate is the major excitatory neurotransmitter that plays a role in brain development and function and binds to several receptors. One of these receptors is the metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 (mGluR5), a receptor involved in neuronal proliferation and differentiation (Jansson and Åkerman, 2014). The tracer [18F]−3-fluoro-5-[(pyridin-3-yl) ethynyl]benzonitrile (FPEB) binds to mGluR5. Two [18F]-FPEB PET studies have found a decreasing availability of mGluR5 from young adult to older age (Leurquin-Sterk et al., 2016; Mecca et al., 2021). So far, no [18F]-FPEB PET studies have been performed in a healthy population during early neurodevelopment.

Dopamine is involved in the motivational component of reward-motivated behavior, motor control, and control of hormone release, and is therefore thought to be a driving factor in adolescent behavior (Wahlstrom et al., 2010). The earliest dopamine PET study was conducted in children aged 10 years (Jucaite et al., 2010). In this study, the authors showed a decrease in brain D1 receptor binding from 10 to 30 years of age, most pronounced in the cerebral cortex (Jucaite et al., 2010). The decrease in brain dopamine D1 and D2 receptor binding with age from adulthood has also been demonstrated in PET studies using the tracers [11C]-SCH23390, 3-N-[11C]-methylspiperone ([11C]-NMSP), and [11C]-raclopride (Wong et al., 1984; Suhara et al., 1991; Y. Wang et al., 1998; Larsen et al., 2020). In conclusion, the availability of both mGluR5 and dopamine receptors decreases with advancing age. PET studies performed during the first decade of life would provide critical information on the importance of these receptors during brain maturation.

Serotonin plays an important role in neuronal proliferation, migration, and development (Kumar and Chugani, 2008). In utero serotonin depletion leads to microcephaly, delayed neurogenesis, and disruption of synaptic connectivity in sensory cortices (Kumar and Chugani, 2008). Serotonin has indeed been shown to be a driver of neurodevelopment (D.C. Chugani et al., 1999). Using of α[11C]methyl-L-tryptophan (AMT) PET, it has been shown that the capacity for serotonin synthesis of children between the ages of two and five years of age with normal neurodevelopment is twice that of adults. This is followed by a decline toward adult levels between the ages of 5 and 14 years. In addition, serotonin levels decline to adult levels earlier in girls than in boys, corresponding to an earlier onset of puberty (D.C. Chugani et al., 1999).

In conclusion, a few isolated PET studies have shown that cerebral glucose metabolism, CBF, GABAA receptor density and serotonin synthesis are higher during the first decade of life and exceed adult levels, after which they decline. This underlines the importance of the first years of life for brain development. In addition, both glucose metabolism and GABAA receptor density are higher in subcortical regions than in cortical regions during the neonatal period. Further PET studies using different radiotracers in the healthy population are warranted to provide additional molecular longitudinal in vivo information on normal neurodevelopment.

PET studies in normally developing rodents

To our knowledge, four longitudinal [18F]-FDG PET studies have been performed in rats from adolescence to adulthood (Choi et al., 2015; Jiang et al., 2018, 2020; Xue et al., 2022). Consistent with human studies (London and Howman-Giles, 2014; Barber et al., 2018), [18F]-FDG SUV increased in the striatum from two (juvenile) to four (adult) months of age (Jiang et al., 2018). Choi et al. (2015) showed that in awake male rats adjusted glucose metabolism increased in the frontal lobes from 5 (juvenile) to 10 (young adult) weeks of age, and then decreased in the left frontal cortex from 10 to 15 weeks of age. Interestingly, this nonlinear inverted U-shaped pattern resembles the adjusted glucose metabolism pattern detected in humans from 6 to 50 years of age (Trotta et al., 2016). However, not all findings in rats were similar to the human situation. While an increase in adjusted glucose metabolism activity in the thalamus and cerebellum was observed in human adolescents (Van Bogaert et al., 1998; Trotta et al., 2016), rats showed a decrease in both brain regions between 5 and 10 weeks of age (Choi et al., 2015).

Three of the four longitudinal studies examined metabolic correlations (connections) between brain regions (Choi et al., 2015; Jiang et al., 2020; Xue et al., 2022). The first found significantly increased metabolic connectivity between the retrosplenial cortex, medial prefrontal cortex, and motor cortices from 5 to 10/15 weeks of age. Additionally, increased energy efficiency, defined as the ratio of metabolic connectivity strength to normalized FDG uptake of each brain region, was found in the retrosplenial cortex and medial prefrontal cortex with increasing age (Choi et al., 2015). This increased energy efficiency was also demonstrated by Jiang et al. (2020).

A small-world topology was found in two-month-old (adolescent) rats (Jiang et al., 2020). Xue et al. (2022) found no change in normalized path length from adolescence (two months) to adulthood (18 months) in rats (Xue et al., 2022). Both of these findings are similar to the rs-fMRI findings in humans (Fair et al., 2009; Supekar et al., 2009). In contrast, Jiang et al. (2020) found a decrease in normalized path length (λ), and an increase in the small-world index from two to nine months of age in rats, indicating more efficient information transfer between long-distance nodes (Jiang et al., 2020). However, they only included six rats.

In summary, most rodent [18F]-FDG PET studies show increased adjusted glucose metabolism, increased metabolic connectivity, and increased energy efficiency from juvenile to adult age, and these findings are similar to the human situation. However, two studies also found results that were inconsistent with the human situation (Choi et al., 2015; Jiang et al., 2020). Small sample sizes and differences in methodology may explain these discrepancies. Further studies comparing the healthy human and rodent populations are warranted to determine the full translational validity of rodent neurodevelopmental PET studies.

rs-fMRI and PET as Tools to Study Abnormal Early Brain Development

In the next section, we discuss rs-fMRI and PET studies in people with specific NDDs, namely, ID (with or without epilepsy), ASD, and ADHD (Tables 1 and 2).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Overview of different PET tracers used to study glucose and neurotransmitters in neurodevelopmental disorders

Intellectual disability with or without epilepsy

Rs-fMRI and PET in humans with intellectual disability with or without epilepsy

ID is defined as deficits in intellectual and adaptive functioning with an onset during the developmental period (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). ID can be part of a syndrome, for example Down syndrome and Fragile X syndrome, and all ID syndromes have an increased susceptibility to developing epilepsy (Robertson et al., 2015). Here, we discuss how rs-fMRI and PET have been used to study ID. To our knowledge, no study has used both techniques simultaneously in the same patient population.

Angelman syndrome and Prader–Willi syndrome are both characterized by ID and result from a deletion of a maternal or paternal imprinted region on chromosome 15q11-q13, a region encoding the GABAA receptor subunit genes GABRB3, GABRA5, and GABRG3 (Hogart et al., 2007). In adults with Prader–Willi syndrome (19.9–29.6 years), a significantly lower [11C]-FMZ binding was observed in the frontal cortex, temporal cortex, cingulate, and insula compared with controls, demonstrating that the deleted GABR genes result in a reduced number of GABAA receptors (Lucignani et al., 2004). Indeed, in a 19-year-old patient with Angelman syndrome caused by a pathogenic variant in UBE3A, [11C]-FMZ binding was higher in the frontal, parietal, hippocampal, and cerebellar regions than in Angelman syndrome patients (two to six years) with a maternal 15q11-q13 deletion (Holopainen et al., 2001).

Fragile X syndrome is a genetic disorder associated with ID (Telias, 2019). Both GABA and glutamate are thought to play a role in the pathogenesis of Fragile X syndrome, as evidenced by several in vitro studies (Telias, 2019). Indeed, significant reductions in brain GABAA and mGluR5 receptors have been demonstrated in adults with Fragile X syndrome using PET imaging (D'Hulst et al., 2015; Mody et al., 2021; Brašić et al., 2022).

Down syndrome, also known as trisomy 21, is caused by a third copy of chromosome 21, and is characterized by ID and dysmorphic features (Gardiner et al., 2010). Down syndrome has been studied using rs-fMRI, and these studies have generally shown a mixed pattern of both hyperconnectivity and hypoconnectivity (Pujol et al., 2015; Wilson et al., 2019; Csumitta et al., 2022). Pujol et al. (2015) studied young adults (18–32 years) with Down syndrome and showed a pattern of increased FC of the ventral brain system (the amygdala/anterior temporal region, and the ventral aspect of both the anterior cingulate and frontal cortices) associated with emotional processes, motivation, and learning, and decreased FC of the dorsal brain system (dorsal prefrontal and anterior cingulate cortices, and posterior insula) associated with executive functions. Interestingly, both patterns were negatively correlated with communication skills scores, suggesting that the pattern of FC changes as a whole may serve as a biomarker of neurodevelopmental dysfunction (Pujol et al., 2015). Csumitta et al. (2022) argued that it is difficult to separate neurodevelopmental abnormalities from possible age-related neurodegeneration in adults with Down syndrome, and performed rs-fMRI in children, adolescents, and young adults (7–23 years) with Down syndrome. They found a widespread increase in FC. In addition to a younger study population, the authors suggest a different data analysis (e.g., no global signal regression) to be a possible reason for the discrepancy with the study by Pujol et al. (2015; Csumitta et al., 2022).

Some genetic syndromes, such as Dravet syndrome and Rett syndrome, are characterized by an initial normal neurodevelopment followed by a neurodevelopmental arrest or regression (Haginoya et al., 2018; Liao, 2019). This maturational arrest has also been observed using [18F]-FDG PET and may reflect a developmental regression of brain networks (Haginoya et al., 2018; Kumar et al., 2018; Villemagne et al., 2002). For example, while the glucose metabolism patterns were still normal in children with Dravet syndrome under the age of three years, a profound reduction in glucose uptake was observed in the cortex of older patients (Haginoya et al., 2018; Kumar et al., 2018). Next, an infantile glucose pattern, characterized by relatively increased glucose metabolism in the frontal cortex and cerebellum and decreased glucose metabolism in the occipital cortex, was observed in 3- to eight-year-old children with Rett syndrome (Villemagne et al., 2002). Yoshikawa et al. (1991), on the other hand, used C15O2 PET to demonstrate that the ratio of frontal to temporal CBF was lower than the normal age-matched ratio in children with Rett syndrome aged 3–18 years (Yoshikawa et al., 1991). Villemagne et al. (2002) propose that mitochondrial dysfunction is the underlying cause of the uncoupling between brain glucose utilization and CBF in Rett syndrome (Villemagne et al., 2002).

In >90% of cases, Rett syndrome is caused by pathogenic variants in the X-linked gene MECP2 (Liao, 2019). This disorder is known to lead to defects in the dopaminergic neurotransmitter system. Indeed, a significant reduction in dopamine 2 receptors in the striatum has been demonstrated in patients with Rett syndrome (15–32 years) using [11C]-NMSP PET (Wong et al., 2018).

People with ID often have epilepsy, and vice versa (Snoeijen-Schouwenaars et al., 2021). One subpopulation is developmental and epileptic encephalopathy (DEE), a severe condition in which cognitive function is affected by both the epilepsy and the underlying (mostly genetic) cause (Scheffer and Liao, 2020). While many studies have investigated FC changes in the context of epilepsy (Abela et al., 2014; Moody et al., 2021), a more limited number of studies have investigated the association between FC and cognitive impairment in this patient population (Paldino et al., 2017). In a case report of a five-year-old DEE patient with progressive loss of developmental milestones, suppressed spontaneous BOLD fluctuations and a pervasive lack of normal FC were observed. Remarkably, following corpus callosotomy surgery, recovery of FC was demonstrated in concordance with the development of new skills (Pizoli et al., 2011). Furthermore, in children with childhood epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes (7–13 years), abnormal FC organization within the DMN was shown to correlate with cognitive and socio-emotional development (Ofer et al., 2018). Similarly, in children with focal intractable epilepsy (8–17 years), increased FC within the DMN was associated with higher scores for working memory scores, whereas stronger anticorrelation between the DMN and the salience network was associated with higher IQ scores (Ibrahim et al., 2014). Finally, some studies have shown an association between FC patterns and intelligence in children, adolescents, and adults with focal epilepsy (Qin et al., 2020; Songjiang et al., 2021; Struck et al., 2021).

Children with epileptic spasms syndrome also often, but not always, have neurodevelopmental delay (Arai et al., 2023). In this population, [18F]-FDG PET has been shown to be a powerful predictive tool, when performed at the right time (Itomi et al., 2002). In a cohort of children with cryptogenic epileptic spasms syndrome, [18F]-FDG PET performed three months after initial therapy was more useful for prognostication than [18F]-FDG PET performed at the onset of spasms (Itomi et al., 2002). Children with cortical hypometabolism on PET three months after the start of therapy had a significantly higher rate of developmental delay at a later age (three to eight years). In addition, a favorable neurodevelopmental outcome was more likely if PET at the onset of epileptic spasms showed abnormalities that were not present on follow-up PET three months later (Itomi et al., 2002). Another study confirmed these results (Natsume et al., 2014).

In conclusion, neurotransmitter PET studies have demonstrated their utility in revealing the effects of the underlying genetic defect on neurotransmitters, which may be of interest in the development and evaluation of novel therapeutics. [18F]-FDG PET and rs-fMRI findings correlate strongly with cognitive development. The use of both imaging techniques to assess and especially predict neurodevelopmental outcomes in specific ID syndromes requires further investigation.

rs-fMRI and PET in rodent models of intellectual disability with or without epilepsy

To the best of our knowledge, no rs-fMRI study has been performed in a rodent model of ID. However, three PET imaging studies have been conducted in juvenile and adult rodent models of ID, namely in Dravet syndrome, Fragile X syndrome, and Rett syndrome (Wong et al., 2018; Ricobaraza et al., 2019; Afshar et al., 2022). Two showed results similar to those in humans (Wong, 2018; Afshar, 2022). In the first, longitudinal [18F]-FPEB PET imaging was performed in a mouse model of Fragile X syndrome [FMR1 knock-out (KO) mice] at juvenile and adult ages (Afshar et al., 2022). This study confirmed the reduced availability of mGluR5 throughout the brain. The second study used PET with [11C]-NMSP in humans (15–32 years) and [11C]-raclopride in mice with MECP2-related Rett syndrome (7–10 weeks) to assess and compare D2 dopamine receptor binding in both species. This combined human-rodent study demonstrated a significant reduction in striatal D2 dopamine receptors in the striatum in both species, suggesting that the MECP2-deficient mice are an appropriate and highly translational model to study dopaminergic deficits in Rett syndrome (Wong et al., 2018).

The third study showed results that appear to contradict those found in humans. An overall increase in glucose uptake was observed in a mouse model of Dravet syndrome (one to eight months; Ricobaraza et al., 2019), while children older than three years with Dravet syndrome have reduced cortical glucose uptake (Haginoya et al., 2018; Kumar et al., 2018). The authors suggested that the influence of anti-seizure medication in patients and different normalization methods could be a possible explanation for these conflicting results (Ricobaraza et al., 2019). We argue that the mismatch in neurodevelopmental stage between humans and mice may also contribute to the difference in results.

In summary, while there is some promising evidence for the translatability of PET imaging results from rodent models of ID to humans, further studies using rs-fMRI and PET in age-matched and genotype-matched monogenic rodent models and humans are warranted to support this hypothesis further.

Autism spectrum disorder

rs-fMRI and PET in humans with ASD

Individuals with ASD have persistent deficits in social communication and interaction combined with restricted, repetitive behaviors that are evident before the age of three years (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). A large number of studies have used rs-fMRI or PET to investigate changes in individuals with ASD (for rs-fMRI review, see Rane et al., 2015; Hull et al., 2016; Picci et al., 2016; for PET review, see Zürcher et al., 2015; Kowalewska et al., 2022; X. Li et al., 2021; Tan et al., 2022).

Many, but not all, rs-fMRI studies have shown long-range cortico-cortical hypoconnectivity, combined with cortico-subcortical hyperconnectivity (Delmonte et al., 2013; Di Martino et al., 2014; Cerliani et al., 2015; Oldehinkel et al., 2019). For example, FC is increased between sensorimotor and subcortical or cerebellar networks, while FC is decreased between visual association, somatosensory, and motor networks (Oldehinkel et al., 2019). These FC alternations are thought to reflect impaired visual-motor and multisensory integration (Oldehinkel et al., 2019).

FC abnormalities have also been reported within various primary and higher-order networks. In general, increased FC has been found within the motor, visual, DMN, and salience networks (Uddin et al., 2013; Washington et al., 2014). These findings have been associated with more severe autistic traits (Uddin et al., 2013; Washington et al., 2014; Oldehinkel et al., 2019). Uddin et al. (2013) showed that the FC pattern of the salience network was the most important discriminator of the presence/absence of ASD, and that this pattern could also predict restricted and repetitive behavior scores (Uddin et al., 2013).

[18F]-FDG PET studies in individuals with ASD show conflicting results. Glucose metabolism patterns of global increase (Rumsey et al., 1985), local decrease in temporal lobes (H.T. Chugani et al., 2007; Dilber et al., 2013), anterior cingulate cortex (Haznedar et al., 1997) or striatum and thalamus (Haznedar et al., 2006), and mixed patterns (Chivate et al., 2016; Anil Kumar et al., 2017; Mitelman et al., 2018) have all been demonstrated in children or adults with ASD. Next, multiple studies have shown a lower CBF in the temporal lobes of children with ASD compared with controls (Zilbovicius et al., 2000; Boddaert et al., 2002; Duchesnay et al., 2011). Duchesnay et al. (2011) found that the pattern of right superior temporal sulcus hypoperfusion combined with left postcentral area hyperperfusion predicted of ASD with 88% accuracy. In addition, CBF in the superior temporal sulcus is negatively correlated with more severe autistic traits (Gendry Meresse et al., 2005).

Few PET studies have investigated possible neurotransmitter disturbances in ASD, looking at GABAA, mGluR5, serotonin, and dopamine. Some studies have found no significant differences in GABAA (α5; Horder et al., 2018; Fung et al., 2021), 5-HT2 serotonin (Girgis et al., 2011), and D1 or D2/3 dopamine receptor availability (Kubota et al., 2020; Schalbroeck et al., 2021a, b) between individuals with ASD and controls. Others have shown decreased GABAA α5 receptor binding (Mendez et al., 2013), increased mGluR5 expression (Fatemi et al., 2018; Brašić et al., 2021), decreased serotonin synthesis (D.C. Chugani et al., 1997; Chandana et al., 2005) and 5-HT2 receptor binding (Nakamura et al., 2010; Beversdorf et al., 2012), increased striatal presynaptic dopamine synthesis (Nieminen-von Wendt, 2004), and increased dopamine transporter binding (Nakamura et al., 2010) in adults with ASD. These findings have been correlated with more severe autistic traits (Nakamura et al., 2010; Fatemi et al., 2018; Kubota et al., 2020). Interestingly, Murayama et al. (2022) performed both [11C]-FLB457 PET and rs-fMRI in individuals with ASD. They found reduced extrastriatal D2/D3 receptor availability in ASD compared with controls, and the reduction was most pronounced in the thalamus. These lower levels correlated with a lower FC between the thalamus and superior temporal sulcus, and between the cerebellum and medial occipital cortex (Murayama et al., 2022).

Fragile X syndrome is a NDD characterized by ID, but it is also the leading genetic cause of ASD. More than a third of the people with Fragile X syndrome also have ASD (Telias, 2019). Remarkably, the reduced GABAA and mGluR5 receptor binding detected in adults with Fragile X could not be replicated in more heterogeneous cohorts of adults with ASD (D'Hulst et al., 2015; Horder et al., 2018; Brašić et al., 2021, 2022; Mody et al., 2021). This finding suggests that the neurotransmitter dysfunctional is a gene-specific finding, rather than being a general pattern seen in all people with ASD.

In conclusion, the results of the rs-fMRI and PET studies in ASD are often inconsistent and inconclusive. Differences in the age of participants is one factor that could influence the results, as functional and molecular brain patterns change during development. First, FC abnormalities have been shown to already emerge before the onset of clinical symptoms, as early as six months of age, and may predict the diagnosis of ASD (Emerson et al., 2017). Second, some abnormalities emerge or progress after the onset of ASD symptoms (Washington et al., 2014). Finally, both PET and rs-fMRI studies have shown delayed maturation patterns in young children with ASD, which eventually develop into a normal pattern at a later age (Zilbovicius et al., 1995; D.C. Chugani et al., 1999; Nebel et al., 2014). We argue that other possible factors contributing to the inconsistencies include the often small number of participants, the clinical heterogeneity of ASD, and differences in study design and study population.

rs-fMRI and PET in rodent models of ASD

Rodent studies typically model specific monogenic forms of ASD (Hulbert and Jiang, 2016). This circumvents the problem of clinical and etiological heterogeneity that is present in many of the human cohort studies. Indeed, a comparison of 16 different transgenic mouse models of ASD showed that all individual models were characterized by distinct, spatially distributed FC changes, and that there was no abnormal FC pattern that was common to all etiologies (Zerbi et al., 2021). This finding argues against the existence of a specific resting-state FC-based biomarker for ASD (Zerbi et al., 2021). For example, longitudinal rs-fMRI assessment was performed at juvenile (≈P34), young-adult (≈P58), and adult (≈P112) ages in two different transgenic mouse models of ASD. They showed reduced FC between sensory-processing areas from juvenile to adult age in the fmr1 KO mice compared with controls, whereas reduced FC in the DMN, salience network, and hippocampal areas became apparent only between adolescence and adulthood in the contactin-associated protein 2 KO (Cntnap2 KO) mice. Interestingly, the timing of the abnormal FC coincides with the expression profile of both genes (Zerbi et al., 2018). In adult Cntnap2 KO mice, hypoconnectivity between DMN nodes was shown to be associated with reduced social behavior (Liska et al., 2018). Administration of oxytocin to Cntnap2 KO mice normalized FC patterns and rescued social deficits, illustrating the potential use of rs-fMRI-based biomarkers to assess treatment effects in the context of neurodevelopmental dysfunction (Choe et al., 2022).

Adult Shank3B KO mice are a widely used model of ASD. The mouse model showed reduced prefrontal FC, and this reduction was associated with impaired social communication (Pagani et al., 2019). Second, increased subcortical mGluR5 receptor availability was observed in this mouse model (Cai et al., 2019). Both findings were similar to those seen in studies of humans with ASD, although here the increased mGluR5 receptor availability was found in cortical brain regions (Fatemi et al., 2018; Brašić et al., 2021). To the best of our knowledge, neither imaging study has ever been performed in the specific subset of individuals with pathogenic variants in the SHANK3 gene, precluding a direct comparison with the human situation.

In another study, the availability of GABAA and GABAA α5 subunits was measured by autoradiography using the tracers [11C]-FMZ and [11C]-Ro15-4513 in three different adult ASD mouse models (Cntnap2 KO, Shank3B KO, 16p11.2 deletion; Horder et al., 2018). GABAA and GABAA α5 subunit availability did not differ from wild-type controls in any of the mouse models, similar to what has been shown with PET imaging in heterogeneous cohorts of adults with ASD using the same tracers (Horder et al., 2018).

Few studies have demonstrated the translational value of rodent rs-fMRI studies to the human ASD situation. Reduced prefrontal FC and reduced long-range FC synchronization between prefrontal and associative cortical areas were found in both children with 16p11.2 deletion and in adult 16p11.2+/− mice (Bertero et al., 2018). One study compared FC findings in awake children with neurofibromatosis type 1 because of a heterozygous pathogenic variant in the NF1 gene with awake, head-fixed Nf1+/− adult mice (Shofty et al., 2019). Although not performed at the same developmental stage, reduced FC in the cingulate cortex, and increased cortico-striatal FC were observed in both models (Shofty et al., 2019).

In summary, various transgenic mouse models of ASD have confirmed the presence of aberrant patterns of molecular and functional brain development. These patterns are conserved across species, although hypoconnectivity appears to be more prominent in mouse models, whereas within-network hyperconnectivity patterns are more commonly described in humans. Importantly, abnormalities in ASD detected by rs-fMRI and PET are etiology dependent, highlighting the importance of using homogeneous study populations in both rodent and human imaging studies.

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder

Rs-fMRI and PET in humans with ADHD

ADHD is an NDD characterized by hyperactivity-impulsivity and/or inattention (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). In rs-fMRI studies, a delay in the maturation of higher-order networks such as the DMN is a consistent finding (Castellanos et al., 2008; Uddin et al., 2008; Fair et al., 2010; Qiu et al., 2011). This delay in maturation is supported by several studies showing hypoconnectivity within the DMN, and a reduced anticorrelation between the DMN and the executive control network/DAN in children, adolescents, and adults with ADHD (Castellanos et al., 2008; Uddin et al., 2008; Fair et al., 2010; Qiu et al., 2011; Sun et al., 2012; Hoekzema et al., 2014; Marcos-Vidal et al., 2018). The reduced anticorrelation has been suggested to explain inattention, as activation of the DMN would interfere with sustained attention (Posner et al., 2014).

Hypoconnectivity has also been described in other higher-order networks of people with ADHD. Wang et al. (2018) investigated the effects of the single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs3746544 of the synaptosomal-associated protein 25 (SNAP25) gene, which confers a high risk for ADHD, on brain FC and on working memory capacity. They found hypoconnectivity in the anterior cingulate cortex (salience network) and in the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (executive control network) in children carrying the rs3746544 T allele in a homozygous state (C. Wang et al., 2018). These findings correlated with poor working memory performance (C. Wang et al., 2018). In addition to reduced prefrontal FC, reduced glucose metabolism in the prefrontal cortex has been shown in individuals with ADHD (Zametkin et al., 1990; Ernst et al., 1994). These findings, together with the fact that the prefrontal cortex encompasses both the DMN and the executive control network, suggest that the prefrontal cortex plays an important role in the pathogenesis of ADHD.

Changes in FC in other networks have shown more contradictory results. For example, FC in the cortico-striatal network has been shown to be both increased (Tian et al., 2008; Costa Dias et al., 2013; Sanefuji et al., 2017) and decreased (Cao et al., 2009; Mills et al., 2012; Posner et al., 2013; Hong et al., 2015) in people with ADHD. These inconsistent findings may be because of the subtype of ADHD included in the study. For example, Sanefuji et al. (2017) found hyperconnectivity within the cortico-striatal network only in individuals with the hyperactive/impulsive subtype. Furthermore, the nigro-striatal network is a dopaminergic circuit (del Campo et al., 2013). The presence or absence of prior exposure to methylphenidate (a norepinephrine–dopamine reuptake inhibitor) may therefore also influence imaging results. Indeed, treatment with methylphenidate has an impact on imaging findings, as it has been shown to decrease striatal dopamine receptor binding (Rosa-Neto et al., 2005; Volkow et al., 2007b; del Campo et al., 2013), decrease subcortical dopamine synthesis (Ludolph, 2008), and increase regional CBF in the cerebellar vermis (Schweitzer et al., 2003) in people with ADHD. It is therefore important to consider the treatment status of patients when interpreting the results of rs-fMRI and PET studies.

Because dopamine plays a critical role in the motivational component of reward-motivated behavior and in the control of mood and movement, dopamine dysfunction has been implicated in the pathogenesis of ADHD (Volkow et al., 2011). However, to date, there is no consensus on the dopamine metabolic pattern in ADHD. The tracers [18F]-DOPA/[18F]-FDOPA/L-[11C]-DOPA, [11C]-PE2I/[11C]-cocaine/[11C]-altropane, and [11C]-raclopride can be used to measure the integrity of the presynaptic dopamine system, dopamine transport (DAT), and dopamine D2/D3 receptor binding, respectively. Several studies suggest reduced presynaptic dopamine function, particularly in subcortical regions (Forssberg et al., 2006; Ludolph et al., 2008), midbrain (Ludolph et al., 2008), and prefrontal cortex (Ernst et al., 1998), regardless of treatment status. However, an older study failed to find presynaptic dopamine differences in the subcortex or prefrontal cortex, and found a nonsignificant increase in midbrain dopamine synthesis in adolescent ADHD patients, even when treated with a psychostimulant (Ernst et al., 1999). In addition, different studies have found inconsistent results regarding the availability of D2/D3 receptors in people with ADHD compared with controls. One study reported a decrease in D2/D3 receptor availability (Volkow et al., 2007b), whereas other studies showed no differences (Jucaite et al., 2005; del Campo et al., 2013) or even an increase (Rosa-Neto et al., 2005). Finally, different studies have shown conflicting results regarding DAT expression. In adults with ADHD, one study found higher DAT in the right caudate nucleus (Spencer et al., 2007) and another found lower DAT in the left caudate nucleus and nucleus accumbens (Volkow et al., 2007a) compared with healthy controls. These differences have been explained by differences in the 5'DAT (SLC6A3) haplotype (Drgon et al., 2006), the degree of methylation of the DAT1 promoter (Wiers et al., 2018), and medication status (Fusar-Poli et al., 2012).

Not only treatment status or ADHD subtype, but also sex seems to influence imaging results. For example, glucose metabolism has been shown to be lower in females with ADHD, whereas [18F]-DOPA uptake has been shown to be lower in males with ADHD (Zametkin et al., 1993; Ernst et al., 1994, 1998).

In summary, similar to ASD, ADHD is a very heterogeneous disorder, and variable imaging results may be because of differences in study design, treatment status, and clinical heterogeneity. However, several studies point toward common disease mechanisms, including delayed maturation of higher-order networks, prefrontal hypoconnectivity, and prefrontal glucose hypometabolism.

rs-fMRI and PET studies in rodent models of ADHD

ADHD is a complex but highly heritable NDD, influenced by multiple genetic, social, and environmental factors (Al-Mubarak et al., 2020). ADHD is thought to be a polygenic rather than a monogenic disorder, so transgenic rodent models of ADHD are limited. To date, three mouse models of ADHD have been used in rs-fMRI and/or PET studies (Brown et al., 2011; S.M. Huang et al., 2016; Poirier et al., 2017; Zoratto et al., 2017; Ha et al., 2020).

Zoratto et al. (2017) applied rs-fMRI to the Naples-High-Excitability (NHE) rat model, a model with phenotypic features similar to the inattentive ADHD subtype. This rat model showed reduced FC between the prefrontal cortex, dorsal striatum, and hippocampus at adult age (Zoratto et al., 2017). In contrast, the six-week-old spontaneously hypertensive (SHR) rat model, a model with phenotypic features similar to the hyperactive/impulsive ADHD subtype, showed stronger cortico-striato-thalamo-cortical connections compared with controls (S.M. Huang et al., 2016). Poirier et al. (2017) also found evidence for a stronger cortico-stratal network in awake six-week-old SHR rats. Using individual component analysis (ICA), they showed a component consisting of the medial striatum and ventromedial prefrontal cortex in the SHR rats, a component that was not found in the control strains (Poirier et al., 2017). The inconsistent findings between the two rat models (NHE vs SHR) are similar to what has been demonstrated in humans and may be because of the different subtypes of ADHD (Sanefuji et al., 2017).

Next, and in contrast to what has been described in humans with ADHD (Castellanos et al., 2008; Uddin et al., 2008; Fair et al., 2010; Qiu et al., 2011), the SHR rat model showed hyperconnectivity within the DMN (S.M. Huang et al., 2016).

Ha et al. (2020) used the same SHR rat model to investigate the metabolic connections using [18F]-FDG PET at four and six weeks of age. The authors showed delayed maturation of limbic and (sub)cortical connections together with reduced right fronto-striatal connections at six weeks of age. The latter is inconsistent with the study by S.M. Huang et al. (2016), which may be because of a different imaging technique (awake [18F]-FDG PET vs rs-fMRI under anesthesia) or selection of animals [only phenotypically positive rats were selected in the study by Ha et al. (2020)].

Another rodent model of ADHD is the neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) mouse model, which has been shown to have attentional deficits. Using [11C]-raclopride PET imaging, this mouse model showed higher striatal dopamine D2 receptor binding at adult age compared with wild-type controls (Brown et al., 2011). Upon initiation of methylphenidate, striatal [11C]-raclopride binding was restored to wild-type levels (Brown et al., 2011). Although there are still discrepancies between studies regarding D2 receptor availability in people with ADHD, all studies have shown that methylphenidate reduces the D2 receptor binding (Rosa-Neto et al., 2005; Volkow et al., 2007b; del Campo et al., 2013).

In conclusion, rodent models of ADHD have demonstrated their usefulness in investigating the pathomechanisms of ADHD. Very careful phenotyping is however required as findings need to be correlated with the correct subtype of ADHD in humans.

Future challenges and opportunities

Rodent models as standardized models for heterogeneous human study populations

rs-fMRI and PET studies have been shown to be useful for noninvasively and longitudinally studying neurodevelopment, predicting neurodevelopmental outcomes, and evaluating the effects of therapy in both human and rodent models. To date, there is a paucity of functional and molecular imaging studies performed in humans before the age of two years, the critical period of neurodevelopment. This may be because of ethical considerations such as the need for sedation, and, in the case of PET imaging, the use of radioactive tracers. In addition, small sample sizes, heterogeneous study populations (e.g., variability in age, treatment, phenotype, and etiology), and differences in imaging protocols and data analysis techniques have led to variable and sometimes conflicting results.

Transgenic rodent models could be used to circumvent these difficulties. They have comparable stages of brain development to humans, and they have a high translational potential when applied to the corresponding human monogenic disorder, rather than to the general NDD population. Careful etiological stratification of study populations is therefore warranted. In this way, rodent models offer an opportunity to study disease mechanisms and therapeutic response to (novel) treatments in a more standardized manner, and to select the most relevant imaging modalities that could later be applied in humans. Since PET and rs-fMRI may provide complementary information about neurodevelopment or neurodevelopmental abnormalities, studies using both techniques simultaneously would be beneficial. To cover the critical period of neurodevelopment, this would imply that the imaging techniques should be applied to rodents of less than three weeks old. To our knowledge, only three rs-fMRI and PET studies have been performed in rodents during this period, possibly because of technical and practical considerations (Radonjic et al., 2013; Guadagno et al., 2018; López-Picón et al., 2019). These studies have shown that the developing brain is vulnerable to harmful environmental factors during the perinatal period and that the subsequent neurodevelopmental abnormalities can be detected at an early age using rs-fMRI and PET (Radonjic et al., 2013; Guadagno et al., 2018).

Challenges of small-animal rs-fMRI during the first three postnatal weeks: difficulties related to small size and influences on BOLD signals.

There are several challenges to performing rs-fMRI in infant rodents. First, the small rodent must be able to be fixed in the MRI scanner, but the standard equipment available is typically designed for adult rodents. One solution is to use a mouse bed for rat pups, or to adapt the mouse bed for mouse pups so that the mouse is stabilized in the scanner.

Second, there is uncertainty about the effects of the anesthesia on infant rodents, which may differ from those in older animals. It is well known that the depth of anesthesia and the pharmacological effects of different anesthetics influence BOLD signals, and hence FC patterns (Grandjean et al., 2014). While the combination of vasodilating low-dose isoflurane and intravenous medetomidine is currently the standard approach, Guadagno et al. (2018) chose to use <2% isoflurane in P18 rat pups and adjusted the dose based on oxygenation and respiratory rate (±42 breaths/min for P18 rats). This anesthesia protocol would result in suppressed FC, but the authors argued that it was sufficient to perform a seed-based analysis (Guadagno et al., 2018). To avoid the confounding factor of anesthesia, methods to perform rs-fMRI in awake (young) adult rodents have been explored (Becerra et al., 2011). However, preschool children would also need to be sedated to perform rs-fMRI, and the translational potential of imaging results from infant rodents to infants may be higher if the depth of anesthesia is similar.

Finally, hemodynamic responses may differ at different ages, which would result in different BOLD signals affecting the FC quantification (Colonnese et al., 2008; Kozberg et al., 2013). Colonnese et al. (2008) investigated differences in BOLD responses after forepaw stimulation in rats of different ages (P10–P12, P13–P15, P20–P30, and adult; Colonnese et al., 2008). The earliest BOLD response was observed in P13 rats. Subsequently, the BOLD signal amplitude increased and the time to peak decreased with age. The authors stated that the BOLD changes were caused by growth and acceleration of the hemodynamic response, mainly because of the developmental up-regulation of carbonic anhydrase activity, and by the maturation of FC patterns from P13 to adulthood. In addition, both the presence of adult-like vascular density from P10–P17, and the gap-junction coupling of astrocytes (critical for neurovascular coupling) around P11 may contribute to the appearance of the BOLD response around P13. Despite the differences in the BOLD response, the authors demonstrated the effectiveness of fMRI in defining patterns of FC in developing rodents from P13 onwards (Colonnese et al., 2008). When performing rs-fMRI in infants and young children, the same factors that may influence the hemodynamic response should be considered.

Challenges of small-animal PET imaging during the first three postnatal weeks: the effects, mode of administration, and uptake of the radiotracer.

There are also some technical and practical considerations when using PET imaging in the first three postnatal weeks. First, the procedure involves exposure to ionizing radiation (∼25 mSv per regular PET/CT scan). Low-dose radiation exposure (<100 mSv) has been shown to induce (epi)genetic changes as well as abnormal neurogenesis in the brain, but the extent to which this is harmful depends on many variables such as genetic background, age, sex, dose, and the type of exposure (Shi et al., 2009). Prenatal exposure and chronic exposure have been shown to be the most harmful (Tang et al., 2017). Few studies have investigated the effects of low-dose radiation exposure in mice within the first three postnatal weeks (Buratovic et al., 2014, 2016; Eriksson et al., 2016). They showed that a single dose of γ radiation of 350 mGy or more at P10 leads to altered behavior at two and four months of age (Buratovic et al., 2014; Eriksson et al., 2016). The period before P10 has been shown to be the most vulnerable, because disrupted spontaneous behavior at two months of age was only seen when a single dose of 500 mGy was given at P3 or P10, but not at P19 (Eriksson et al., 2016). Next, repeated low-dose exposures of 200 mGy over 3 consecutive days (P10, P11, and P12) were shown to cause disrupted behavior at two months of age (Buratovic et al., 2016).

Second, the radioactive tracer used in PET imaging must be administered intravenously through a tail vein catheter. The small tail size of infant rodents, especially mice, can make it difficult to perform PET imaging within the first few weeks of life. Third, since the rodents need to be scanned at a preweaning age, it is preferable to allow the rodents to recover in their mother's cage after the procedure. This could potentially result in radioactive contamination of the mother because of urine loss from the scanned pup. In addition, rejection by the mother after the pups return to the cage has been described (Hickman and Swan, 2011).

Finally, anesthetics are used to ensure immobilization and to avoid motion artefacts during the scanning procedure. However, they could potentially affect PET results when studying neurodevelopment between different age groups. Anesthetics are known to affect the cerebral vasculature, heart rate and body temperature, and these effects may alter radiotracer uptake (Miranda et al., 2019). Some studies have shown differential effects of isoflurane, the most commonly used anesthetic, on physiological parameters in rodents from infancy to adulthood (Loepke et al., 2006; Stokes et al., 2021). However, it is currently unknown whether these age-dependent differential effects of anesthetics also affect radiotracer uptake. If so, this would make it difficult to compare different stages of neurodevelopment. Second, inhaled anesthetics, such as isoflurane and sevoflurane, could also induce cognitive impairment in rodents, but only when exposed for several hours per day (Shen et al., 2013). To circumvent the anesthetic challenges, efforts are being made to perform awake PET in freely moving rodents (Miranda et al., 2019). However, sedation would also be required in preschool children.

SV2A PET: a novel and promising tool to study neurodevelopment

In recent years, several PET radiotracers have been developed to visualize synaptic vesicle glycoprotein 2A (SV2A) in vivo (Carson et al., 2022). A number of radiotracers, including [11C]-UCB-J and [18F]-SynVesT-1, have also been shown to bind with optimal kinetics in mice (Bertoglio et al., 2020, 2022b). SV2A is expressed in virtually all synapses and plays an important role in the Ca2+-dependent regulation of presynaptic neurotransmitter release during repetitive stimulation in all vertebrates (Janz et al., 1999). Therefore, SV2A quantification has been proposed as a surrogate marker for synaptic density. SV2A PET has been used to detect pathologic changes in synaptic density in humans and animal models of neurodegenerative disorders and spinal cord injury (Delva et al., 2020; Bertoglio et al., 2021, 2022a; Chen et al., 2021). Because synapse formation and subsequent synaptic pruning are essential during neurodevelopment, and because synaptic function underlies cognition, SV2A PET may be a promising tool to study neurodevelopment. Indeed, one study showed that SV2A measurements increase during the third trimester in the fetal brain of pregnant rhesus monkeys (Rossano et al., 2022). In addition, individual component analysis (ICA) on SV2A PET can be used to identify presynaptic density networks (Akkermans et al., 2022). These networks are proposed to be neurophysiologically linked to functional RSNs, and may provide providing complementary information in disorders with both functional and molecular alterations (Fang et al., 2023). To our knowledge, no SV2A PET studies have been performed to study (abnormal) neurodevelopment in humans or rodent models.

Conclusion

Several studies have demonstrated how rs-fMRI and PET studies have contributed to our knowledge of neurodevelopment and neurodevelopmental abnormalities in specific NDDs, mainly in humans but also in specific rodent models. Further work to explore the feasibility of performing functional and molecular imaging studies in small infant animals is essential. Ultimately, if these challenges can be overcome, transgenic rodent models of NDDs are ideal for gaining further insight into disease pathogenesis, developing noninvasive preclinical imaging biomarkers of neurodevelopmental dysfunction, and assessing treatment response.

Footnotes

  • C.M. received support from the University of Antwerp Grant BOF DOCPRO4 (project ID 42329). S.W. received support from Research Foundation–Flanders (FWO) Grants 1861419N, G041821N, and G056122N; the Queen Elisabeth Medical Foundation; the European Joint Programme on Rare Disease JTC 2020 (TreatKCNQ); and Fondation Lejeune.

  • S.W. received consultancy fees from UCB, Biocodex, Xenon Pharmaceuticals, Lundbeck, Knopp Biosciences, Encoded Therapeutics, Angelini Pharma, and Roche. All other authors declare no competing financial interests.

  • Correspondence should be addressed to Sarah Weckhuysen at sarah.weckhuysen{at}uantwerpen.vib.be

SfN exclusive license.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Abela E,
    2. Rummel C,
    3. Hauf M,
    4. Weisstanner C,
    5. Schindler K,
    6. Wiest R
    (2014) Neuroimaging of epilepsy: lesions, networks, oscillations. Clin Neuroradiol 24:5–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00062-014-0284-8 pmid:24424576
    OpenUrlPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Afshar S,
    2. Lule S,
    3. Yuan G,
    4. Qu X,
    5. Pan C,
    6. Whalen M,
    7. Brownell AL,
    8. Mody M
    (2022) Longitudinal PET studies of mGluR5 in FXS using an FMR1 knockout mouse model. Transl Neurosci 13:80–92. https://doi.org/10.1515/tnsci-2022-0217 pmid:35582646
    OpenUrlPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Akkermans J,
    2. Zajicek F,
    3. Miranda A,
    4. Adhikari MH,
    5. Bertoglio D
    (2022) Identification of pre-synaptic density networks using [11C]UCB-J PET imaging and ICA in mice. Neuroimage 264:119771. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.119771 pmid:36436710
    OpenUrlPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Alcauter S,
    2. Lin W,
    3. Smith JK,
    4. Short SJ,
    5. Goldman BD,
    6. Reznick JS,
    7. Gilmore JH,
    8. Gao W
    (2014) Development of thalamocortical connectivity during infancy and its cognitive correlations. J Neurosci 34:9067–9075. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0796-14.2014 pmid:24990927
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. Alcauter S,
    2. Lin W,
    3. Keith Smith J,
    4. Gilmore JH,
    5. Gao W
    (2015) Consistent anterior-posterior segregation of the insula during the first 2 years of life. Cereb Cortex 25:1176–1187. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bht312 pmid:24248433
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Al-Mubarak BR,
    2. Omar A,
    3. Baz B,
    4. Al-Abdulaziz B,
    5. Magrashi AI,
    6. Al-Yemni E,
    7. Jabaan A,
    8. Monies D,
    9. Abouelhoda M,
    10. Abebe D,
    11. Ghaziuddin M,
    12. Al-Tassan NA
    (2020) Whole exome sequencing in ADHD trios from single and multi-incident families implicates new candidate genes and highlights polygenic transmission. Eur J Hum Genet 28:1098–1110. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-020-0619-7 pmid:32238911
    OpenUrlPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Altman DI,
    2. Powers WJ,
    3. Perlman JM,
    4. Herscovitch P,
    5. Volpe SL,
    6. Volpe JJ
    (1988) Cerebral blood flow requirement for brain viability in newborn infants is lower than in adults. Ann Neurol 24:218–226. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.410240208 pmid:3263081
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    American Psychiatric Association (2013) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, Ed 5. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.
  9. ↵
    1. Andersen JB,
    2. Lindberg U,
    3. Olesen OV,
    4. Benoit D,
    5. Ladefoged CN,
    6. Larsson HB,
    7. Højgaard L,
    8. Greisen G,
    9. Law I
    (2019) Hybrid PET/MRI imaging in healthy unsedated newborn infants with quantitative rCBF measurements using (15)O-water PET. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 39:782–793. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271678X17751835 pmid:29333914
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Andersson JD,
    2. Matuskey D,
    3. Finnema SJ
    (2019) Positron emission tomography imaging of the γ-aminobutyric acid system. Neurosci Lett 691:35–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2018.08.010 pmid:30102960
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Anil Kumar BN,
    2. Malhotra S,
    3. Bhattacharya A,
    4. Grover S,
    5. Batra YK
    (2017) Regional cerebral glucose metabolism and its association with phenotype and cognitive functioning in patients with autism. Indian J Psychol Med 39:262–270. https://doi.org/10.4103/0253-7176.207344 pmid:28615758
    OpenUrlPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Arai Y,
    2. Okanishi T,
    3. Kanai S,
    4. Nakamura Y,
    5. Sunada H,
    6. Murakami H,
    7. Yamauchi K,
    8. Noma H,
    9. Maegaki Y
    (2023) Prediction model for long-term seizure and developmental outcomes among children with infantile epileptic spasms syndrome. Front Neurol 14:1195252. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2023.1195252 pmid:37521298
    OpenUrlPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Barber TW,
    2. Veysey D,
    3. Billah B,
    4. Francis P
    (2018) Normal brain metabolism on FDG PET/MRI during childhood and adolescence. Nucl Med Commun 39:1022–1032. https://doi.org/10.1097/MNM.0000000000000912 pmid:30198972
    OpenUrlPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Becerra L,
    2. Pendse G,
    3. Chang PC,
    4. Bishop J,
    5. Borsook D
    (2011) Robust reproducible resting state networks in the awake rodent brain. PLoS One 6:e25701. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0025701 pmid:22028788
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Bertero A,
    2. Liska A,
    3. Pagani M,
    4. Parolisi R,
    5. Masferrer ME,
    6. Gritti M,
    7. Pedrazzoli M,
    8. Galbusera A,
    9. Sarica A,
    10. Cerasa A,
    11. Buffelli M,
    12. Tonini R,
    13. Buffo A,
    14. Gross C,
    15. Pasqualetti M,
    16. Gozzi A
    (2018) Autism-associated 16p11.2 microdeletion impairs prefrontal functional connectivity in mouse and human. Brain 141:2055–2065. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awy111 pmid:29722793
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Bertoglio D,
    2. Verhaeghe J,
    3. Miranda A,
    4. Kertesz I,
    5. Cybulska K,
    6. Korat Š,
    7. Wyffels L,
    8. Stroobants S,
    9. Mrzljak L,
    10. Dominguez C,
    11. Liu L,
    12. Skinbjerg M,
    13. Munoz-Sanjuan I,
    14. Staelens S
    (2020) Validation and noninvasive kinetic modeling of [11C]UCB-J PET imaging in mice. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 40:1351–1362. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271678X19864081 pmid:31307287
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Bertoglio D,
    2. Verhaeghe J,
    3. Wyffels L,
    4. Miranda A,
    5. Stroobants S,
    6. Mrzljak L,
    7. Dominguez C,
    8. Skinbjerg M,
    9. Bard J,
    10. Liu L,
    11. Munoz-Sanjuan I,
    12. Staelens S
    (2021) Synaptic vesicle glycoprotein 2A is affected in the CNS of Huntington's disease mice and post-mortem human HD brain. J Nucl Med 63:942–947.
    OpenUrl
  18. ↵
    1. Bertoglio D,
    2. Halloin N,
    3. Lombaerde S,
    4. Jankovski A,
    5. Verhaeghe J,
    6. Nicaise C,
    7. Staelens S
    (2022a) SV2A PET imaging is a noninvasive marker for the detection of spinal damage in experimental models of spinal cord injury. J Nucl Med 63:1245–1251. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.121.263222 pmid:35027368
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. ↵
    1. Bertoglio D,
    2. Zajicek F,
    3. Lombaerde S,
    4. Miranda A,
    5. Stroobants S,
    6. Wang Y,
    7. Dominguez C,
    8. Munoz-Sanjuan I,
    9. Bard J,
    10. Liu L,
    11. Verhaeghe J,
    12. Staelens S
    (2022b) Validation, kinetic modeling, and test-retest reproducibility of [18F]SynVesT-1 for PET imaging of synaptic vesicle glycoprotein 2A in mice. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 42:1867–1878. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271678X221101648 pmid:35570828
    OpenUrlPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Beversdorf DQ,
    2. Nordgren RE,
    3. Bonab AA,
    4. Fischman AJ,
    5. Weise SB,
    6. Dougherty DD,
    7. Felopulos GJ,
    8. Zhou FC,
    9. Bauman ML
    (2012) 5-HT2 receptor distribution shown by [18F] setoperone PET in high-functioning autistic adults. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 24:191–197. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.neuropsych.11080202 pmid:22772667
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Biswal B,
    2. Yetkin FZ,
    3. Haughton VM,
    4. Hyde JS
    (1995) Functional connectivity in the motor cortex of resting human brain using echo-planar MRI. Magn Reson Med 34:537–541. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.1910340409 pmid:8524021
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. ↵
    1. Boddaert N,
    2. Chabane N,
    3. Barthélemy C,
    4. Bourgeois M,
    5. Poline JB,
    6. Brunelle F,
    7. Samson Y,
    8. Zilbovicius M
    (2002) [Bitemporal lobe dysfonction in infantile autism: positron emission tomography study]. J Radiol 83:1829–1833. pmid:12511838
    OpenUrlPubMed
  23. ↵
    1. Boksa P
    (2010) Effects of prenatal infection on brain development and behavior: a review of findings from animal models. Brain Behav Immun 24:881–897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbi.2010.03.005 pmid:20230889
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Brašić JR,
    2. Nandi A,
    3. Russell DS,
    4. Jennings D,
    5. Barret O,
    6. Martin SD,
    7. Slifer K,
    8. Sedlak T,
    9. Seibyl JP,
    10. Wong DF,
    11. Budimirovic DB
    (2021) Cerebral expression of metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 5 in idiopathic autism spectrum disorder and fragile X syndrome: a pilot study. Int J Mol Sci 22:2863.
    OpenUrl
  25. ↵
    1. Brašić JR,
    2. Goodman JA,
    3. Nandi A,
    4. Russell DS,
    5. Jennings D,
    6. Barret O,
    7. Martin SD,
    8. Slifer K,
    9. Sedlak T,
    10. Mathur AK,
    11. Seibyl JP,
    12. Berry-Kravis EM,
    13. Wong DF,
    14. Budimirovic DB
    (2022) Fragile X mental retardation protein and cerebral expression of metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 5 in men with fragile X syndrome: a pilot study. Brain Sci 12:314.
    OpenUrl
  26. ↵
    1. Brown JA,
    2. Xu J,
    3. Diggs-Andrews KA,
    4. Wozniak DF,
    5. Mach RH,
    6. Gutmann DH
    (2011) PET imaging for attention deficit preclinical drug testing in neurofibromatosis-1 mice. Exp Neurol 232:333–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.expneurol.2011.09.005 pmid:21963652
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. ↵
    1. Buratovic S,
    2. Stenerlöw B,
    3. Fredriksson A,
    4. Sundell-Bergman S,
    5. Viberg H,
    6. Eriksson P
    (2014) Neonatal exposure to a moderate dose of ionizing radiation causes behavioural defects and altered levels of tau protein in mice. Neurotoxicology 45:48–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuro.2014.09.002 pmid:25265567
    OpenUrlPubMed
  28. ↵
    1. Buratovic S,
    2. Stenerlöw B,
    3. Fredriksson A,
    4. Sundell-Bergman S,
    5. Eriksson P
    (2016) Developmental effects of fractionated low-dose exposure to gamma radiation on behaviour and susceptibility of the cholinergic system in mice. Int J Radiat Biol 92:371–379. https://doi.org/10.3109/09553002.2016.1164911 pmid:27043364
    OpenUrlPubMed
  29. ↵
    1. Cai G,
    2. Wang M,
    3. Wang S,
    4. Liu Y,
    5. Zhao Y,
    6. Zhu Y,
    7. Zhao S,
    8. Zhang M,
    9. Guo B,
    10. Yao H,
    11. Wang W,
    12. Wang J,
    13. Wu S
    (2019) Brain mGluR5 in Shank3B(-/-) mice studied with in vivo [18F]FPEB PET imaging and ex vivo immunoblotting. Front Psychiatry 10:38. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00038 pmid:30809159
    OpenUrlPubMed
  30. ↵
    1. Cao X,
    2. Cao Q,
    3. Long X,
    4. Sun L,
    5. Sui M,
    6. Zhu C,
    7. Zuo X,
    8. Zang Y,
    9. Wang Y
    (2009) Abnormal resting-state functional connectivity patterns of the putamen in medication-naïve children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Brain Res 1303:195–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2009.08.029 pmid:19699190
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. ↵
    1. Carson RE,
    2. Naganawa M,
    3. Toyonaga T,
    4. Koohsari S,
    5. Yang Y,
    6. Chen MK,
    7. Matuskey D,
    8. Finnema SJ
    (2022) Imaging of synaptic density in neurodegenerative disorders. J Nucl Med 63:60s–67s. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.121.263201 pmid:35649655
    OpenUrlPubMed
  32. ↵
    1. Castellanos FX,
    2. Margulies DS,
    3. Kelly C,
    4. Uddin LQ,
    5. Ghaffari M,
    6. Kirsch A,
    7. Shaw D,
    8. Shehzad Z,
    9. Di Martino A,
    10. Biswal B,
    11. Sonuga-Barke EJ,
    12. Rotrosen J,
    13. Adler LA,
    14. Milham MP
    (2008) Cingulate-precuneus interactions: a new locus of dysfunction in adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Biol Psychiatry 63:332–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2007.06.025 pmid:17888409
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. ↵
    1. Cerliani L,
    2. Mennes M,
    3. Thomas RM,
    4. Di Martino A,
    5. Thioux M,
    6. Keysers C
    (2015) Increased functional connectivity between subcortical and cortical resting-state networks in autism spectrum disorder. JAMA Psychiatry 72:767–777. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2015.0101 pmid:26061743
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. ↵
    1. Chandana SR,
    2. Behen ME,
    3. Juhász C,
    4. Muzik O,
    5. Rothermel RD,
    6. Mangner TJ,
    7. Chakraborty PK,
    8. Chugani HT,
    9. Chugani DC
    (2005) Significance of abnormalities in developmental trajectory and asymmetry of cortical serotonin synthesis in autism. Int J Dev Neurosci 23:171–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdevneu.2004.08.002 pmid:15749243
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. ↵
    1. Chen MK,
    2. Mecca AP,
    3. Naganawa M,
    4. Gallezot JD,
    5. Toyonaga T,
    6. Mondal J,
    7. Finnema SJ,
    8. Lin SF,
    9. O'Dell RS,
    10. McDonald JW,
    11. Michalak HR,
    12. Vander Wyk B,
    13. Nabulsi NB,
    14. Huang Y,
    15. Arnsten AF,
    16. van Dyck CH,
    17. Carson RE
    (2021) Comparison of [11C]UCB-J and [18F]FDG PET in Alzheimer's disease: a tracer kinetic modeling study. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 41:2395–2409. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271678X211004312 pmid:33757318
    OpenUrlPubMed
  36. ↵
    1. Chivate R,
    2. Thakrar P,
    3. Narang J,
    4. Kumar S,
    5. Verma M,
    6. Patkar DP
    (2016) PET/CT in autism. A diagnostic tool? Int J Health Scie Res 6:99–106.
    OpenUrl
  37. ↵
    1. Choe KY,
    2. Bethlehem RAI,
    3. Safrin M,
    4. Dong H,
    5. Salman E,
    6. Li Y,
    7. Grinevich V,
    8. Golshani P,
    9. DeNardo LA,
    10. Peñagarikano O,
    11. Harris NG,
    12. Geschwind DH
    (2022) Oxytocin normalizes altered circuit connectivity for social rescue of the Cntnap2 knockout mouse. Neuron 110:795–808.e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2021.11.031 pmid:34932941
    OpenUrlPubMed
  38. ↵
    1. Choi H,
    2. Choi Y,
    3. Kim KW,
    4. Kang H,
    5. Hwang DW,
    6. Kim EE,
    7. Chung JK,
    8. Lee DS
    (2015) Maturation of metabolic connectivity of the adolescent rat brain. Elife 4:e11571. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.11571
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  39. ↵
    1. Chugani DC,
    2. Muzik O,
    3. Rothermel R,
    4. Behen M,
    5. Chakraborty P,
    6. Mangner T,
    7. da Silva EA,
    8. Chugani HT
    (1997) Altered serotonin synthesis in the dentatothalamocortical pathway in autistic boys. Ann Neurol 42:666–669. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.410420420 pmid:9382481
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. ↵
    1. Chugani DC,
    2. Muzik O,
    3. Behen M,
    4. Rothermel R,
    5. Janisse JJ,
    6. Lee J,
    7. Chugani HT
    (1999) Developmental changes in brain serotonin synthesis capacity in autistic and nonautistic children. Ann Neurol 45:287–295. https://doi.org/10.1002/1531-8249(199903)45:3<287::AID-ANA3>3.0.CO;2-9
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. ↵
    1. Chugani DC,
    2. Muzik O,
    3. Juhász C,
    4. Janisse JJ,
    5. Ager J,
    6. Chugani HT
    (2001) Postnatal maturation of human GABAA receptors measured with positron emission tomography. Ann Neurol 49:618–626. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.1003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. ↵
    1. Chugani HT,
    2. Phelps ME
    (1986) Maturational changes in cerebral function in infants determined by 18FDG positron emission tomography. Science 231:840–843. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3945811 pmid:3945811
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  43. ↵
    1. Chugani HT,
    2. Phelps ME,
    3. Mazziotta JC
    (1987) Positron emission tomography study of human brain functional development. Ann Neurol 22:487–497. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.410220408 pmid:3501693
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  44. ↵
    1. Chugani HT,
    2. Juhász C,
    3. Behen ME,
    4. Ondersma R,
    5. Muzik O
    (2007) Autism with facial port-wine stain: a new syndrome? Pediatr Neurol 37:192–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2007.05.005 pmid:17765807
    OpenUrlPubMed
  45. ↵
    1. Chugani HT,
    2. Kumar A,
    3. Muzik O
    (2013) GABA(A) receptor imaging with positron emission tomography in the human newborn: a unique binding pattern. Pediatr Neurol 48:459–462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2013.04.008 pmid:23668871
    OpenUrlPubMed
  46. ↵
    1. Clancy B,
    2. Darlington RB,
    3. Finlay BL
    (2001) Translating developmental time across mammalian species. Neuroscience 105:7–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0306-4522(01)00171-3 pmid:11483296
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  47. ↵
    1. Clancy B,
    2. Finlay BL,
    3. Darlington RB,
    4. Anand KJ
    (2007a) Extrapolating brain development from experimental species to humans. Neurotoxicology 28:931–937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuro.2007.01.014 pmid:17368774
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  48. ↵
    1. Clancy B,
    2. Kersh B,
    3. Hyde J,
    4. Darlington RB,
    5. Anand KJ,
    6. Finlay BL
    (2007b) Web-based method for translating neurodevelopment from laboratory species to humans. Neuroinformatics 5:79–94. https://doi.org/10.1385/ni:5:1:79 pmid:17426354
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  49. ↵
    1. Colonnese MT,
    2. Phillips MA,
    3. Constantine-Paton M,
    4. Kaila K,
    5. Jasanoff A
    (2008) Development of hemodynamic responses and functional connectivity in rat somatosensory cortex. Nat Neurosci 11:72–79. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn2017 pmid:18037883
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  50. ↵
    1. Costa Dias TG,
    2. Wilson VB,
    3. Bathula DR,
    4. Iyer SP,
    5. Mills KL,
    6. Thurlow BL,
    7. Stevens CA,
    8. Musser ED,
    9. Carpenter SD,
    10. Grayson DS,
    11. Mitchell SH,
    12. Nigg JT,
    13. Fair DA
    (2013) Reward circuit connectivity relates to delay discounting in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol 23:33–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroneuro.2012.10.015 pmid:23206930
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  51. ↵
    1. Csumitta KD,
    2. Gotts SJ,
    3. Clasen LS,
    4. Martin A,
    5. Raitano Lee N
    (2022) Youth with Down syndrome display widespread increased functional connectivity during rest. Sci Rep 12:9836. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-13437-1 pmid:35701489
    OpenUrlPubMed
  52. ↵
    1. del Campo N,
    2. Fryer TD,
    3. Hong YT,
    4. Smith R,
    5. Brichard L,
    6. Acosta-Cabronero J,
    7. Chamberlain SR,
    8. Tait R,
    9. Izquierdo D,
    10. Regenthal R,
    11. Dowson J,
    12. Suckling J,
    13. Baron JC,
    14. Aigbirhio FI,
    15. Robbins TW,
    16. Sahakian BJ,
    17. Müller U
    (2013) A positron emission tomography study of nigro-striatal dopaminergic mechanisms underlying attention: implications for ADHD and its treatment. Brain 136:3252–3270. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awt263 pmid:24163364
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  53. ↵
    1. Del Casale A,
    2. Ferracuti S,
    3. Alcibiade A,
    4. Simone S,
    5. Modesti MN,
    6. Pompili M
    (2022) Neuroanatomical correlates of autism spectrum disorders: a meta-analysis of structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies. Psychiatry Res Neuroimaging 325:111516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pscychresns.2022.111516 pmid:35882091
    OpenUrlPubMed
  54. ↵
    1. Della Rosa PA,
    2. Canini M,
    3. Marchetta E,
    4. Cirillo S,
    5. Pontesilli S,
    6. Scotti R,
    7. Natali Sora MG,
    8. Poloniato A,
    9. Barera G,
    10. Falini A,
    11. Scifo P,
    12. Baldoli C
    (2021) The effects of the functional interplay between the default mode and executive control resting state networks on cognitive outcome in preterm born infants at 6 months of age. Brain Cogn 147:105669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2020.105669 pmid:33341657
    OpenUrlPubMed
  55. ↵
    1. Delmonte S,
    2. Gallagher L,
    3. O'Hanlon E,
    4. McGrath J,
    5. Balsters JH
    (2013) Functional and structural connectivity of frontostriatal circuitry in autism spectrum disorder. Front Hum Neurosci 7:430. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00430 pmid:23964221
    OpenUrlPubMed
  56. ↵
    1. Delva A,
    2. Van Weehaeghe D,
    3. Koole M,
    4. Van Laere K,
    5. Vandenberghe W
    (2020) Loss of presynaptic terminal integrity in the substantia nigra in early Parkinson's disease. Mov Disord 35:1977–1986. https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.28216 pmid:32767618
    OpenUrlPubMed
  57. ↵
    1. D'Hulst C,
    2. Heulens I,
    3. Van der Aa N,
    4. Goffin K,
    5. Koole M,
    6. Porke K,
    7. Van De Velde M,
    8. Rooms L,
    9. Van Paesschen W,
    10. Van Esch H,
    11. Van Laere K,
    12. Kooy RF
    (2015) Positron emission tomography (PET) quantification of GABAA receptors in the brain of fragile X patients. PLoS One 10:e0131486. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0131486 pmid:26222316
    OpenUrlPubMed
  58. ↵
    1. Dilber C,
    2. Calışkan M,
    3. Sönmezoğlu K,
    4. Nişli S,
    5. Mukaddes NM,
    6. Tatlı B,
    7. Aydınlı N,
    8. Ekici B,
    9. Özmen M
    (2013) Positron emission tomography findings in children with infantile spasms and autism. J Clin Neurosci 20:373–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2012.03.034 pmid:23219829
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  59. ↵
    1. Di Martino A, et al
    . (2014) The autism brain imaging data exchange: towards a large-scale evaluation of the intrinsic brain architecture in autism. Mol Psychiatry 19:659–667. https://doi.org/10.1038/mp.2013.78 pmid:23774715
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  60. ↵
    1. Doria V,
    2. Beckmann CF,
    3. Arichi T,
    4. Merchant N,
    5. Groppo M,
    6. Turkheimer FE,
    7. Counsell SJ,
    8. Murgasova M,
    9. Aljabar P,
    10. Nunes RG,
    11. Larkman DJ,
    12. Rees G,
    13. Edwards AD
    (2010) Emergence of resting state networks in the preterm human brain. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 107:20015–20020. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1007921107 pmid:21041625
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  61. ↵
    1. Dosenbach NU,
    2. Nardos B,
    3. Cohen AL,
    4. Fair DA,
    5. Power JD,
    6. Church JA,
    7. Nelson SM,
    8. Wig GS,
    9. Vogel AC,
    10. Lessov-Schlaggar CN,
    11. Barnes KA,
    12. Dubis JW,
    13. Feczko E,
    14. Coalson RS,
    15. Pruett JR Jr.,
    16. Barch DM,
    17. Petersen SE,
    18. Schlaggar BL
    (2010) Prediction of individual brain maturity using fMRI. Science 329:1358–1361. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1194144 pmid:20829489
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  62. ↵
    1. Drgon T,
    2. Lin Z,
    3. Wang G-J,
    4. Fowler J,
    5. Pablo J,
    6. Mash DC,
    7. Volkow N,
    8. Uhl GR
    (2006) Common human 5′ dopamine transporter (SLC6A3) haplotypes yield varying expression levels in vivo. Cell Mol Neurobiol 26:875–889. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10571-006-9014-3 pmid:16710758
    OpenUrlPubMed
  63. ↵
    1. Duchesnay E,
    2. Cachia A,
    3. Boddaert N,
    4. Chabane N,
    5. Mangin JF,
    6. Martinot JL,
    7. Brunelle F,
    8. Zilbovicius M
    (2011) Feature selection and classification of imbalanced datasets: application to PET images of children with autistic spectrum disorders. Neuroimage 57:1003–1014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.05.011 pmid:21600290
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  64. ↵
    1. Emerson RW,
    2. Gao W,
    3. Lin W
    (2016) Longitudinal study of the emerging functional connectivity asymmetry of primary language regions during infancy. J Neurosci 36:10883–10892. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3980-15.2016 pmid:27798142
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  65. ↵
    1. Emerson RW, et al
    . (2017) Functional neuroimaging of high-risk 6-month-old infants predicts a diagnosis of autism at 24 months of age. Sci Transl Med 9:eaag2882. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.aag2882 pmid:28592562
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  66. ↵
    1. Eriksson P,
    2. Buratovic S,
    3. Fredriksson A,
    4. Stenerlöw B,
    5. Sundell-Bergman S
    (2016) Neonatal exposure to whole body ionizing radiation induces adult neurobehavioural defects: critical period, dose–response effects and strain and sex comparison. Behav Brain Res 304:11–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2016.02.008 pmid:26876140
    OpenUrlPubMed
  67. ↵
    1. Ernst M,
    2. Liebenauer LL,
    3. King AC,
    4. Fitzgerald GA,
    5. Cohen RM,
    6. Zametkin AJ
    (1994) Reduced brain metabolism in hyperactive girls. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 33:858–868. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-199407000-00012 pmid:8083143
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  68. ↵
    1. Ernst M,
    2. Zametkin AJ,
    3. Matochik JA,
    4. Jons PH,
    5. Cohen RM
    (1998) DOPA decarboxylase activity in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder adults. A [fluorine-18]fluorodopa positron emission tomographic study. J Neurosci 18:5901–5907. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.18-15-05901.1998 pmid:9671677
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  69. ↵
    1. Ernst M,
    2. Zametkin AJ,
    3. Matochik JA,
    4. Pascualvaca D,
    5. Jons PH,
    6. Cohen RM
    (1999) High midbrain [18F]DOPA accumulation in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Am J Psychiatry 156:1209–1215. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.156.8.1209 pmid:10450262
    OpenUrlPubMed
  70. ↵
    1. Fair DA,
    2. Dosenbach NU,
    3. Church JA,
    4. Cohen AL,
    5. Brahmbhatt S,
    6. Miezin FM,
    7. Barch DM,
    8. Raichle ME,
    9. Petersen SE,
    10. Schlaggar BL
    (2007) Development of distinct control networks through segregation and integration. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104:13507–13512. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0705843104 pmid:17679691
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  71. ↵
    1. Fair DA,
    2. Cohen AL,
    3. Dosenbach NU,
    4. Church JA,
    5. Miezin FM,
    6. Barch DM,
    7. Raichle ME,
    8. Petersen SE,
    9. Schlaggar BL
    (2008) The maturing architecture of the brain's default network. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105:4028–4032. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0800376105 pmid:18322013
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  72. ↵
    1. Fair DA,
    2. Cohen AL,
    3. Power JD,
    4. Dosenbach NU,
    5. Church JA,
    6. Miezin FM,
    7. Schlaggar BL,
    8. Petersen SE
    (2009) Functional brain networks develop from a “local to distributed” organization. PLoS Comput Biol 5:e1000381. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000381 pmid:19412534
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  73. ↵
    1. Fair DA,
    2. Posner J,
    3. Nagel BJ,
    4. Bathula D,
    5. Dias TG,
    6. Mills KL,
    7. Blythe MS,
    8. Giwa A,
    9. Schmitt CF,
    10. Nigg JT
    (2010) Atypical default network connectivity in youth with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Biol Psychiatry 68:1084–1091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2010.07.003 pmid:20728873
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  74. ↵
    1. Fan F,
    2. Liao X,
    3. Lei T,
    4. Zhao T,
    5. Xia M,
    6. Men W,
    7. Wang Y,
    8. Hu M,
    9. Liu J,
    10. Qin S,
    11. Tan S,
    12. Gao JH,
    13. Dong Q,
    14. Tao S,
    15. He Y
    (2021) Development of the default-mode network during childhood and adolescence: a longitudinal resting-state fMRI study. Neuroimage 226:117581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117581 pmid:33221440
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  75. ↵
    1. Fang XT,
    2. Volpi T,
    3. Holmes SE,
    4. Esterlis I,
    5. Carson RE,
    6. Worhunsky PD
    (2023) Linking resting-state network fluctuations with systems of coherent synaptic density: a multimodal fMRI and (11)C-UCB-J PET study. Front Hum Neurosci 17:1124254. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2023.1124254 pmid:36908710
    OpenUrlPubMed
  76. ↵
    1. Fatemi SH,
    2. Wong DF,
    3. Brašić JR,
    4. Kuwabara H,
    5. Mathur A,
    6. Folsom TD,
    7. Jacob S,
    8. Realmuto GM,
    9. Pardo JV,
    10. Lee S
    (2018) Metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 tracer [18F]-FPEB displays increased binding potential in postcentral gyrus and cerebellum of male individuals with autism: a pilot PET study. Cerebellum Ataxias 5:3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40673-018-0082-1 pmid:29449954
    OpenUrlPubMed
  77. ↵
    1. Ferré JC,
    2. Bannier E,
    3. Raoult H,
    4. Mineur G,
    5. Carsin-Nicol B,
    6. Gauvrit JY
    (2013) Arterial spin labeling (ASL) perfusion: techniques and clinical use. Diagn Interv Imaging 94:1211–1223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2013.06.010 pmid:23850321
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  78. ↵
    1. Firouzabadi FD,
    2. Ramezanpour S,
    3. Firouzabadi MD,
    4. Yousem IJ,
    5. Puts NAJ,
    6. Yousem DM
    (2022) Neuroimaging in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: recent advances. AJR Am J Roentgenol 218:321–332. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.21.26316 pmid:34406053
    OpenUrlPubMed
  79. ↵
    1. Flurkey K,
    2. Currer J,
    3. Harrison D
    (2007) The mouse in aging research. In: The mouse in biomedical Research, vol 3. New York: Elsevier.
  80. ↵
    1. Forssberg H,
    2. Fernell E,
    3. Waters S,
    4. Waters N,
    5. Tedroff J
    (2006) Altered pattern of brain dopamine synthesis in male adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Behav Brain Funct 2:40. https://doi.org/10.1186/1744-9081-2-40 pmid:17144907
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  81. ↵
    1. Francés L,
    2. Quintero J,
    3. Fernández A,
    4. Ruiz A,
    5. Caules J,
    6. Fillon G,
    7. Hervás A,
    8. Soler CV
    (2022) Current state of knowledge on the prevalence of neurodevelopmental disorders in childhood according to the DSM-5: a systematic review in accordance with the PRISMA criteria. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health 16:27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13034-022-00462-1 pmid:35361232
    OpenUrlPubMed
  82. ↵
    1. Fransson P,
    2. Skiöld B,
    3. Horsch S,
    4. Nordell A,
    5. Blennow M,
    6. Lagercrantz H,
    7. Aden U
    (2007) Resting-state networks in the infant brain. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104:15531–15536. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0704380104 pmid:17878310
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  83. ↵
    1. Fröhlich F
    (2016) Imaging functional networks with MRI. In Network neuroscience (Fröhlich F, Ed), pp 177–185. San Diego: Academic Press.
  84. ↵
    1. Fung LK,
    2. Flores RE,
    3. Gu M,
    4. Sun KL,
    5. James D,
    6. Schuck RK,
    7. Jo B,
    8. Park JH,
    9. Lee BC,
    10. Jung JH,
    11. Kim SE,
    12. Saggar M,
    13. Sacchet MD,
    14. Warnock G,
    15. Khalighi MM,
    16. Spielman D,
    17. Chin FT,
    18. Hardan AY
    (2021) Thalamic and prefrontal GABA concentrations but not GABAA receptor densities are altered in high-functioning adults with autism spectrum disorder. Mol Psychiatry 26:1634–1646. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-020-0756-y pmid:32376999
    OpenUrlPubMed
  85. ↵
    1. Fusar-Poli P,
    2. Rubia K,
    3. Rossi G,
    4. Sartori G,
    5. Balottin U
    (2012) Striatal dopamine transporter alterations in ADHD: pathophysiology or adaptation to psychostimulants? A meta-analysis. Am J Psychiatry 169:264–272. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2011.11060940 pmid:22294258
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  86. ↵
    1. Gao W,
    2. Zhu H,
    3. Giovanello KS,
    4. Smith JK,
    5. Shen D,
    6. Gilmore JH,
    7. Lin W
    (2009) Evidence on the emergence of the brain's default network from 2-week-old to 2-year-old healthy pediatric subjects. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106:6790–6795. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0811221106 pmid:19351894
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  87. ↵
    1. Gao W,
    2. Gilmore JH,
    3. Giovanello KS,
    4. Smith JK,
    5. Shen D,
    6. Zhu H,
    7. Lin W
    (2011) Temporal and spatial evolution of brain network topology during the first two years of life. PLoS One 6:e25278. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0025278 pmid:21966479
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  88. ↵
    1. Gao W,
    2. Gilmore JH,
    3. Shen D,
    4. Smith JK,
    5. Zhu H,
    6. Lin W
    (2013) The synchronization within and interaction between the default and dorsal attention networks in early infancy. Cereb Cortex 23:594–603. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhs043 pmid:22368080
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  89. ↵
    1. Gao W,
    2. Alcauter S,
    3. Elton A,
    4. Hernandez-Castillo CR,
    5. Smith JK,
    6. Ramirez J,
    7. Lin W
    (2015) Functional network development during the first year: relative sequence and socioeconomic correlations. Cereb Cortex 25:2919–2928. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhu088 pmid:24812084
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  90. ↵
    1. Gao W,
    2. Lin W,
    3. Grewen K,
    4. Gilmore JH
    (2017) Functional connectivity of the infant human brain: plastic and modifiable. Neuroscientist 23:169–184. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073858416635986 pmid:26929236
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  91. ↵
    1. Gardiner K,
    2. Herault Y,
    3. Lott IT,
    4. Antonarakis SE,
    5. Reeves RH,
    6. Dierssen M
    (2010) Down syndrome: from understanding the neurobiology to therapy. J Neurosci 30:14943–14945. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3728-10.2010 pmid:21068296
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  92. ↵
    1. Gendry Meresse I,
    2. Zilbovicius M,
    3. Boddaert N,
    4. Robel L,
    5. Philippe A,
    6. Sfaello I,
    7. Laurier L,
    8. Brunelle F,
    9. Samson Y,
    10. Mouren MC,
    11. Chabane N
    (2005) Autism severity and temporal lobe functional abnormalities. Ann Neurol 58:466–469. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.20597 pmid:16130096
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  93. ↵
    1. Gilmore JH,
    2. Knickmeyer RC,
    3. Gao W
    (2018) Imaging structural and functional brain development in early childhood. Nat Rev Neurosci 19:123–137. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2018.1 pmid:29449712
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  94. ↵
    1. Girgis RR,
    2. Slifstein M,
    3. Xu X,
    4. Frankle WG,
    5. Anagnostou E,
    6. Wasserman S,
    7. Pepa L,
    8. Kolevzon A,
    9. Abi-Dargham A,
    10. Laruelle M,
    11. Hollander E
    (2011) The 5-HT(2A) receptor and serotonin transporter in Asperger's disorder: a PET study with [11C]MDL 100907 and [11C]DASB. Psychiatry Res 194:230–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pscychresns.2011.04.007 pmid:22079057
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  95. ↵
    1. Graham AM,
    2. Marr M,
    3. Buss C,
    4. Sullivan EL,
    5. Fair DA
    (2021) Understanding vulnerability and adaptation in early brain development using network neuroscience. Trends Neurosci 44:276–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2021.01.008 pmid:33663814
    OpenUrlPubMed
  96. ↵
    1. Graham AM,
    2. Buss C,
    3. Rasmussen JM,
    4. Rudolph MD,
    5. Demeter DV,
    6. Gilmore JH,
    7. Styner M,
    8. Entringer S,
    9. Wadhwa PD,
    10. Fair DA
    (2016) Implications of newborn amygdala connectivity for fear and cognitive development at 6-months-of-age. Dev Cogn Neurosci 18:12–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2015.09.006 pmid:26499255
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  97. ↵
    1. Grandjean J,
    2. Schroeter A,
    3. Batata I,
    4. Rudin M
    (2014) Optimization of anesthesia protocol for resting-state fMRI in mice based on differential effects of anesthetics on functional connectivity patterns. Neuroimage 102:838–847. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.08.043 pmid:25175535
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  98. ↵
    1. Green RR,
    2. Bigler ED,
    3. Froehlich A,
    4. Prigge MBD,
    5. Zielinski BA,
    6. Travers BG,
    7. Anderson JS,
    8. Alexander A,
    9. Lange N,
    10. Lainhart JE
    (2019) Beery VMI and brain volumetric relations in autism spectrum disorder. J Pediatr Neuropsychol 5:77–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40817-019-00069-z pmid:32953403
    OpenUrlPubMed
  99. ↵
    1. Guadagno A,
    2. Kang MS,
    3. Devenyi GA,
    4. Mathieu AP,
    5. Rosa-Neto P,
    6. Chakravarty M,
    7. Walker CD
    (2018) Reduced resting-state functional connectivity of the basolateral amygdala to the medial prefrontal cortex in preweaning rats exposed to chronic early-life stress. Brain Struct Funct 223:3711–3729. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00429-018-1720-3 pmid:30032360
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  100. ↵
    1. Ha S,
    2. Lee H,
    3. Choi Y,
    4. Kang H,
    5. Jeon SJ,
    6. Ryu JH,
    7. Kim HJ,
    8. Cheong JH,
    9. Lim S,
    10. Kim BN,
    11. Lee DS
    (2020) Maturational delay and asymmetric information flow of brain connectivity in SHR model of ADHD revealed by topological analysis of metabolic networks. Sci Rep 10:3197. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-59921-4 pmid:32081992
    OpenUrlPubMed
  101. ↵
    1. Haginoya K,
    2. Togashi N,
    3. Kaneta T,
    4. Hino-Fukuyo N,
    5. Ishitobi M,
    6. Kakisaka Y,
    7. Uematsu M,
    8. Inui T,
    9. Okubo Y,
    10. Sato R,
    11. Miyabayashi T,
    12. Arai A,
    13. Ogiwara I,
    14. Mazaki E,
    15. Yamakawa K,
    16. Iinuma K,
    17. Kure S
    (2018) [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography study of genetically confirmed patients with Dravet syndrome. Epilepsy Res 147:9–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2018.08.008 pmid:30176532
    OpenUrlPubMed
  102. ↵
    1. Haznedar MM,
    2. Buchsbaum MS,
    3. Metzger M,
    4. Solimando A,
    5. Spiegel-Cohen J,
    6. Hollander E
    (1997) Anterior cingulate gyrus volume and glucose metabolism in autistic disorder. Am J Psychiatry 154:1047–1050. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.154.8.1047
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  103. ↵
    1. Haznedar MM,
    2. Buchsbaum MS,
    3. Hazlett EA,
    4. LiCalzi EM,
    5. Cartwright C,
    6. Hollander E
    (2006) Volumetric analysis and three-dimensional glucose metabolic mapping of the striatum and thalamus in patients with autism spectrum disorders. Am J Psychiatry 163:1252–1263. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.2006.163.7.1252 pmid:16816232
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  104. ↵
    1. Hickman DL,
    2. Swan MP
    (2011) Effects of age of pups and removal of existing litter on pup survival during cross-fostering between multiparous outbred mice. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci 50:641–646.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  105. ↵
    1. Hoekzema E,
    2. Carmona S,
    3. Ramos-Quiroga JA,
    4. Richarte Fernández V,
    5. Bosch R,
    6. Soliva JC,
    7. Rovira M,
    8. Bulbena A,
    9. Tobeña A,
    10. Casas M,
    11. Vilarroya O
    (2014) An independent components and functional connectivity analysis of resting state fMRI data points to neural network dysregulation in adult ADHD. Hum Brain Mapp 35:1261–1272. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.22250 pmid:23417778
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  106. ↵
    1. Hogart A,
    2. Nagarajan RP,
    3. Patzel KA,
    4. Yasui DH,
    5. Lasalle JM
    (2007) 15q11-13 GABAA receptor genes are normally biallelically expressed in brain yet are subject to epigenetic dysregulation in autism-spectrum disorders. Hum Mol Genet 16:691–703. https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddm014 pmid:17339270
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  107. ↵
    1. Holopainen IE,
    2. Metsähonkala EL,
    3. Kokkonen H,
    4. Parkkola RK,
    5. Manner TE,
    6. Någren K,
    7. Korpi ER
    (2001) Decreased binding of [11C]flumazenil in Angelman syndrome patients with GABA(A) receptor beta3 subunit deletions. Ann Neurol 49:110–113. https://doi.org/10.1002/1531-8249(200101)49:1<110::AID-ANA17>3.0.CO;2-T
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  108. ↵
    1. Hong SB,
    2. Harrison BJ,
    3. Fornito A,
    4. Sohn CH,
    5. Song IC,
    6. Kim JW
    (2015) Functional dysconnectivity of corticostriatal circuitry and differential response to methylphenidate in youth with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. J Psychiatry Neurosci 40:46–57. https://doi.org/10.1503/jpn.130290 pmid:25266402
    OpenUrlPubMed
  109. ↵
    1. Horder J, et al
    . (2018) GABAA receptor availability is not altered in adults with autism spectrum disorder or in mouse models. Sci Transl Med 10:eaam8434. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.aam8434
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  110. ↵
    1. Huang SC
    (2000) Anatomy of SUV. Nucl Med Biol 27:643–646. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0969-8051(00)00155-4 pmid:11091106
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  111. ↵
    1. Huang SM,
    2. Wu YL,
    3. Peng SL,
    4. Peng HH,
    5. Huang TY,
    6. Ho KC,
    7. Wang FN
    (2016) Inter-strain differences in default mode network: a resting state fMRI study on spontaneously hypertensive rat and Wistar Kyoto rat. Sci Rep 6:21697. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep21697 pmid:26898170
    OpenUrlPubMed
  112. ↵
    1. Hulbert SW,
    2. Jiang YH
    (2016) Monogenic mouse models of autism spectrum disorders: common mechanisms and missing links. Neuroscience 321:3–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2015.12.040 pmid:26733386
    OpenUrlPubMed
  113. ↵
    1. Hull JV,
    2. Dokovna LB,
    3. Jacokes ZJ,
    4. Torgerson CM,
    5. Irimia A,
    6. Van Horn JD
    (2016) Resting-state functional connectivity in autism spectrum disorders: a review. Front Psychiatry 7:205. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00205 pmid:28101064
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  114. ↵
    1. Ibrahim GM,
    2. Morgan BR,
    3. Lee W,
    4. Smith ML,
    5. Donner EJ,
    6. Wang F,
    7. Beers CA,
    8. Federico P,
    9. Taylor MJ,
    10. Doesburg SM,
    11. Rutka JT,
    12. Snead OC 3rd.
    (2014) Impaired development of intrinsic connectivity networks in children with medically intractable localization-related epilepsy. Hum Brain Mapp 35:5686–5700. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.22580 pmid:24976288
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  115. ↵
    1. Ismail FY,
    2. Shapiro BK
    (2019) What are neurodevelopmental disorders? Curr Opin Neurol 32:611–616. https://doi.org/10.1097/WCO.0000000000000710 pmid:31116115
    OpenUrlPubMed
  116. ↵
    1. Itomi K,
    2. Okumura A,
    3. Negoro T,
    4. Watanabe K,
    5. Natsume J,
    6. Takada H,
    7. Tadokoro M,
    8. Ishigaki T
    (2002) Prognostic value of positron emission tomography in cryptogenic West syndrome. Dev Med Child Neurol 44:107–111. https://doi.org/10.1017/s001216220100175x pmid:11848106
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  117. ↵
    1. Jakab A,
    2. Schwartz E,
    3. Kasprian G,
    4. Gruber GM,
    5. Prayer D,
    6. Schöpf V,
    7. Langs G
    (2014) Fetal functional imaging portrays heterogeneous development of emerging human brain networks. Front Hum Neurosci 8:852. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00852 pmid:25374531
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  118. ↵
    1. Jansson LC,
    2. Åkerman KE
    (2014) The role of glutamate and its receptors in the proliferation, migration, differentiation and survival of neural progenitor cells. J Neural Transm (Vienna) 121:819–836. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00702-014-1174-6 pmid:24562403
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  119. ↵
    1. Janz R,
    2. Goda Y,
    3. Geppert M,
    4. Missler M,
    5. Südhof TC
    (1999) SV2A and SV2B function as redundant Ca2+ regulators in neurotransmitter release. Neuron 24:1003–1016. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0896-6273(00)81046-6 pmid:10624962
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  120. ↵
    1. Jiang D,
    2. Lu X,
    3. Li Z,
    4. Rydberg N,
    5. Zuo C,
    6. Peng F,
    7. Hua F,
    8. Guan Y,
    9. Xie F
    (2018) Increased vesicular monoamine transporter 2 (VMAT2) and dopamine transporter (DAT) expression in adolescent brain development: a longitudinal micro-PET/CT study in rodent. Front Neurosci 12:1052. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2018.01052 pmid:30697146
    OpenUrlPubMed
  121. ↵
    1. Jiang D,
    2. Qiu X,
    3. Ren S,
    4. Hua F,
    5. Kong Y,
    6. Guan Y,
    7. Xie F
    (2020) Maturation of topological organization of brain networks in male adolescent rats: a longitudinal FDG-PET study. Neurosci Lett 723:134864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2020.134864 pmid:32109556
    OpenUrlPubMed
  122. ↵
    1. Jucaite A,
    2. Fernell E,
    3. Halldin C,
    4. Forssberg H,
    5. Farde L
    (2005) Reduced midbrain dopamine transporter binding in male adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: association between striatal dopamine markers and motor hyperactivity. Biol Psychiatry 57:229–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2004.11.009 pmid:15691523
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  123. ↵
    1. Jucaite A,
    2. Forssberg H,
    3. Karlsson P,
    4. Halldin C,
    5. Farde L
    (2010) Age-related reduction in dopamine D1 receptors in the human brain: from late childhood to adulthood, a positron emission tomography study. Neuroscience 167:104–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2010.01.034 pmid:20109534
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  124. ↵
    1. Kang E,
    2. Lee DS,
    3. Kang H,
    4. Lee JS,
    5. Oh SH,
    6. Lee MC,
    7. Kim CS
    (2004) Age-associated changes of cerebral glucose metabolic activity in both male and female deaf children: parametric analysis using objective volume of interest and voxel-based mapping. Neuroimage 22:1543–1553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.04.010 pmid:15275911
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  125. ↵
    1. Kelly AM,
    2. Di Martino A,
    3. Uddin LQ,
    4. Shehzad Z,
    5. Gee DG,
    6. Reiss PT,
    7. Margulies DS,
    8. Castellanos FX,
    9. Milham MP
    (2009) Development of anterior cingulate functional connectivity from late childhood to early adulthood. Cereb Cortex 19:640–657. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhn117 pmid:18653667
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  126. ↵
    1. Kim HG,
    2. Lee JH,
    3. Choi JW,
    4. Han M,
    5. Gho SM,
    6. Moon Y
    (2018) Multidelay arterial spin-labeling MRI in neonates and infants: cerebral perfusion changes during brain maturation. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 39:1912–1918. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A5774 pmid:30213808
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  127. ↵
    1. Kinnala A,
    2. Suhonen-Polvi H,
    3. Aärimaa T,
    4. Kero P,
    5. Korvenranta H,
    6. Ruotsalainen U,
    7. Bergman J,
    8. Haaparanta M,
    9. Solin O,
    10. Nuutila P,
    11. Wegelius U
    (1996) Cerebral metabolic rate for glucose during the first six months of life: an FDG positron emission tomography study. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 74:F153–157. https://doi.org/10.1136/fn.74.3.f153 pmid:8777676
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  128. ↵
    1. Kowalewska B,
    2. Drozdz W,
    3. Kowalewski L
    (2022) Positron emission tomography (PET) and single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) in autism research: literature review. Ir J Psychol Med 39:272–286. https://doi.org/10.1017/ipm.2021.15 pmid:33818321
    OpenUrlPubMed
  129. ↵
    1. Kozberg MG,
    2. Chen BR,
    3. DeLeo SE,
    4. Bouchard MB,
    5. Hillman EM
    (2013) Resolving the transition from negative to positive blood oxygen level-dependent responses in the developing brain. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110:4380–4385. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1212785110 pmid:23426630
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  130. ↵
    1. Kubota M, et al
    . (2020) Binding of dopamine D1 receptor and noradrenaline transporter in individuals with autism spectrum disorder: a PET study. Cereb Cortex 30:6458–6468. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhaa211 pmid:32770189
    OpenUrlPubMed
  131. ↵
    1. Kumar A,
    2. Chugani HT
    (2008) PET in the assessment of pediatric brain development and developmental disorders. PET Clin 3:487–515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpet.2009.04.006 pmid:27156816
    OpenUrlPubMed
  132. ↵
    1. Kumar A,
    2. Juhász C,
    3. Luat A,
    4. Govil-Dalela T,
    5. Behen ME,
    6. Hicks MA,
    7. Chugani HT
    (2018) Evolution of brain glucose metabolic abnormalities in children with epilepsy and SCN1A gene variants. J Child Neurol 33:832–836. https://doi.org/10.1177/0883073818796373 pmid:30182801
    OpenUrlPubMed
  133. ↵
    1. Larsen B,
    2. Olafsson V,
    3. Calabro F,
    4. Laymon C,
    5. Tervo-Clemmens B,
    6. Campbell E,
    7. Minhas D,
    8. Montez D,
    9. Price J,
    10. Luna B
    (2020) Maturation of the human striatal dopamine system revealed by PET and quantitative MRI. Nat Commun 11:846. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-14693-3 pmid:32051403
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  134. ↵
    1. Leurquin-Sterk G,
    2. Van den Stock J,
    3. Crunelle CL,
    4. de Laat B,
    5. Weerasekera A,
    6. Himmelreich U,
    7. Bormans G,
    8. Van Laere K
    (2016) Positive association between limbic metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 availability and novelty-seeking temperament in humans: an 18F-FPEB PET study. J Nucl Med 57:1746–1752. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.116.176032 pmid:27283933
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  135. ↵
    1. Li CL,
    2. Deng YJ,
    3. He YH,
    4. Zhai HC,
    5. Jia FC
    (2019) The development of brain functional connectivity networks revealed by resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging. Neural Regen Res 14:1419–1429. https://doi.org/10.4103/1673-5374.253526 pmid:30964068
    OpenUrlPubMed
  136. ↵
    1. Li X,
    2. Zhang K,
    3. He X,
    4. Zhou J,
    5. Jin C,
    6. Shen L,
    7. Gao Y,
    8. Tian M,
    9. Zhang H
    (2021) Structural, functional, and molecular imaging of autism spectrum disorder. Neurosci Bull 37:1051–1071. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12264-021-00673-0 pmid:33779890
    OpenUrlPubMed
  137. ↵
    1. Liao W
    (2019) Psychomotor dysfunction in Rett syndrome: insights into the neurochemical and circuit roots. Dev Neurobiol 79:51–59. https://doi.org/10.1002/dneu.22651 pmid:30430747
    OpenUrlPubMed
  138. ↵
    1. Lin W,
    2. Zhu Q,
    3. Gao W,
    4. Chen Y,
    5. Toh CH,
    6. Styner M,
    7. Gerig G,
    8. Smith JK,
    9. Biswal B,
    10. Gilmore JH
    (2008) Functional connectivity MR imaging reveals cortical functional connectivity in the developing brain. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 29:1883–1889. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A1256 pmid:18784212
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  139. ↵
    1. Liska A,
    2. Bertero A,
    3. Gomolka R,
    4. Sabbioni M,
    5. Galbusera A,
    6. Barsotti N,
    7. Panzeri S,
    8. Scattoni ML,
    9. Pasqualetti M,
    10. Gozzi A
    (2018) Homozygous loss of autism-risk gene CNTNAP2 results in reduced local and long-range prefrontal functional connectivity. Cereb Cortex 28:1141–1153. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhx022 pmid:28184409
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  140. ↵
    1. Loepke AW,
    2. McCann JC,
    3. Kurth CD,
    4. McAuliffe JJ
    (2006) The physiologic effects of isoflurane anesthesia in neonatal mice. Anesth Analg 102:75–80. https://doi.org/10.1213/01.ANE.0000181102.92729.B8 pmid:16368807
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  141. ↵
    1. London K,
    2. Howman-Giles R
    (2014) Normal cerebral FDG uptake during childhood. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 41:723–735. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-013-2639-9 pmid:24323306
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  142. ↵
    1. London K,
    2. Howman-Giles R
    (2015) Voxel-based analysis of normal cerebral [18F]FDG uptake during childhood using statistical parametric mapping. Neuroimage 106:264–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.11.047 pmid:25481795
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  143. ↵
    1. López-Picón FR,
    2. Kirjavainen AK,
    3. Forsback S,
    4. Takkinen JS,
    5. Peters D,
    6. Haaparanta-Solin M,
    7. Solin O
    (2019) In vivo characterization of a novel norepinephrine transporter PET tracer [18F]NS12137 in adult and immature Sprague-Dawley rats. Theranostics 9:11–19. https://doi.org/10.7150/thno.29740 pmid:30662550
    OpenUrlPubMed
  144. ↵
    1. Lu H,
    2. Rea W,
    3. Stein EA,
    4. Yang Y
    (2006) Resting-state functional connectivity in rat brain. Proc Int Soc Magn Reson Med Vol.532.
  145. ↵
    1. Lu H,
    2. Zuo Y,
    3. Gu H,
    4. Waltz JA,
    5. Zhan W,
    6. Scholl CA,
    7. Rea W,
    8. Yang Y,
    9. Stein EA
    (2007) Synchronized delta oscillations correlate with the resting-state functional MRI signal. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104:18265–18269. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0705791104 pmid:17991778
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  146. ↵
    1. Lucignani G,
    2. Panzacchi A,
    3. Bosio L,
    4. Moresco RM,
    5. Ravasi L,
    6. Coppa I,
    7. Chiumello G,
    8. Frey K,
    9. Koeppe R,
    10. Fazio F
    (2004) GABA A receptor abnormalities in Prader-Willi syndrome assessed with positron emission tomography and [11C]flumazenil. Neuroimage 22:22–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.10.050 pmid:15109994
    OpenUrlPubMed
  147. ↵
    1. Ludolph AG,
    2. Kassubek J,
    3. Schmeck K,
    4. Glaser C,
    5. Wunderlich A,
    6. Buck AK,
    7. Reske SN,
    8. Fegert JM,
    9. Mottaghy FM
    (2008) Dopaminergic dysfunction in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), differences between pharmacologically treated and never treated young adults: a 3,4-dihdroxy-6-[18F]fluorophenyl-l-alanine PET study. Neuroimage 41:718–727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.02.025 pmid:18424180
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  148. ↵
    1. Ma Z,
    2. Ma Y,
    3. Zhang N
    (2018) Development of brain-wide connectivity architecture in awake rats. Neuroimage 176:380–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.05.009 pmid:29738909
    OpenUrlPubMed
  149. ↵
    1. Marcos-Vidal L,
    2. Martínez-García M,
    3. Pretus C,
    4. Garcia-Garcia D,
    5. Martínez K,
    6. Janssen J,
    7. Vilarroya O,
    8. Castellanos FX,
    9. Desco M,
    10. Sepulcre J,
    11. Carmona S
    (2018) Local functional connectivity suggests functional immaturity in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Hum Brain Mapp 39:2442–2454. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.24013 pmid:29473262
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  150. ↵
    1. Mecca AP,
    2. Rogers K,
    3. Jacobs Z,
    4. McDonald JW,
    5. Michalak HR,
    6. DellaGioia N,
    7. Zhao W,
    8. Hillmer AT,
    9. Nabulsi N,
    10. Lim K,
    11. Ropchan J,
    12. Huang Y,
    13. Matuskey D,
    14. Esterlis I,
    15. Carson RE,
    16. van Dyck CH
    (2021) Effect of age on brain metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 5 measured with [18F]FPEB PET. Neuroimage 238:118217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.118217 pmid:34052464
    OpenUrlPubMed
  151. ↵
    1. Mechling AE,
    2. Hübner NS,
    3. Lee HL,
    4. Hennig J,
    5. von Elverfeldt D,
    6. Harsan LA
    (2014) Fine-grained mapping of mouse brain functional connectivity with resting-state fMRI. Neuroimage 96:203–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.03.078 pmid:24718287
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  152. ↵
    1. Mendez MA,
    2. Horder J,
    3. Myers J,
    4. Coghlan S,
    5. Stokes P,
    6. Erritzoe D,
    7. Howes O,
    8. Lingford-Hughes A,
    9. Murphy D,
    10. Nutt D
    (2013) The brain GABA-benzodiazepine receptor alpha-5 subtype in autism spectrum disorder: a pilot [11C]Ro15-4513 positron emission tomography study. Neuropharmacology 68:195–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropharm.2012.04.008 pmid:22546616
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  153. ↵
    1. Mills KL,
    2. Bathula D,
    3. Dias TG,
    4. Iyer SP,
    5. Fenesy MC,
    6. Musser ED,
    7. Stevens CA,
    8. Thurlow BL,
    9. Carpenter SD,
    10. Nagel BJ,
    11. Nigg JT,
    12. Fair DA
    (2012) Altered cortico-striatal-thalamic connectivity in relation to spatial working memory capacity in children with ADHD. Front Psychiatry 3:2. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2012.00002 pmid:22291667
    OpenUrlPubMed
  154. ↵
    1. Miranda A,
    2. Glorie D,
    3. Bertoglio D,
    4. Vleugels J,
    5. De Bruyne G,
    6. Stroobants S,
    7. Staelens S,
    8. Verhaeghe J
    (2019) Awake 18F-FDG PET imaging of memantine-induced brain activation and test-retest in freely running mice. J Nucl Med 60:844–850. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.118.218669 pmid:30442754
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  155. ↵
    1. Mitelman SA,
    2. Bralet MC,
    3. Mehmet Haznedar M,
    4. Hollander E,
    5. Shihabuddin L,
    6. Hazlett EA,
    7. Buchsbaum MS
    (2018) Positron emission tomography assessment of cerebral glucose metabolic rates in autism spectrum disorder and schizophrenia. Brain Imaging Behav 12:532–546. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11682-017-9721-z pmid:28425060
    OpenUrlPubMed
  156. ↵
    1. Mody M,
    2. Petibon Y,
    3. Han P,
    4. Kuruppu D,
    5. Ma C,
    6. Yokell D,
    7. Neelamegam R,
    8. Normandin MD,
    9. Fakhri GE,
    10. Brownell AL
    (2021) In vivo imaging of mGlu5 receptor expression in humans with fragile X syndrome towards development of a potential biomarker. Sci Rep 11:15897. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-94967-y pmid:34354107
    OpenUrlPubMed
  157. ↵
    1. Mohammadi-Nejad AR,
    2. Mahmoudzadeh M,
    3. Hassanpour MS,
    4. Wallois F,
    5. Muzik O,
    6. Papadelis C,
    7. Hansen A,
    8. Soltanian-Zadeh H,
    9. Gelovani J,
    10. Nasiriavanaki M
    (2018) Neonatal brain resting-state functional connectivity imaging modalities. Photoacoustics 10:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pacs.2018.01.003 pmid:29511627
    OpenUrlPubMed
  158. ↵
    1. Moody JF,
    2. Adluru N,
    3. Alexander AL,
    4. Field AS
    (2021) The connectomes: methods of white matter tractography and contributions of resting state fMRI. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 42:507–522. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sult.2021.07.007 pmid:34537118
    OpenUrlPubMed
  159. ↵
    1. Murayama C,
    2. Iwabuchi T,
    3. Kato Y,
    4. Yokokura M,
    5. Harada T,
    6. Goto T,
    7. Tamayama T,
    8. Kameno Y,
    9. Wakuda T,
    10. Kuwabara H,
    11. Senju A,
    12. Nishizawa S,
    13. Ouchi Y,
    14. Yamasue H
    (2022) Extrastriatal dopamine D2/3 receptor binding, functional connectivity, and autism socio-communicational deficits: a PET and fMRI study. Mol Psychiatry 27:2106–2113. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-022-01464-3 pmid:35181754
    OpenUrlPubMed
  160. ↵
    1. Nakamura K,
    2. Sekine Y,
    3. Ouchi Y,
    4. Tsujii M,
    5. Yoshikawa E,
    6. Futatsubashi M,
    7. Tsuchiya KJ,
    8. Sugihara G,
    9. Iwata Y,
    10. Suzuki K,
    11. Matsuzaki H,
    12. Suda S,
    13. Sugiyama T,
    14. Takei N,
    15. Mori N
    (2010) Brain serotonin and dopamine transporter bindings in adults with high-functioning autism. Arch Gen Psychiatry 67:59–68. https://doi.org/10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2009.137 pmid:20048223
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  161. ↵
    1. Natsume J,
    2. Maeda N,
    3. Itomi K,
    4. Kidokoro H,
    5. Ishihara N,
    6. Takada H,
    7. Okumura A,
    8. Kubota T,
    9. Miura K,
    10. Aso K,
    11. Morikawa T,
    12. Kato K,
    13. Negoro T,
    14. Watanabe K
    (2014) PET in infancy predicts long-term outcome during adolescence in cryptogenic West syndrome. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 35:1580–1585. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A3899 pmid:24676006
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  162. ↵
    1. Nebel MB,
    2. Joel SE,
    3. Muschelli J,
    4. Barber AD,
    5. Caffo BS,
    6. Pekar JJ,
    7. Mostofsky SH
    (2014) Disruption of functional organization within the primary motor cortex in children with autism. Hum Brain Mapp 35:567–580. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.22188 pmid:23118015
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  163. ↵
    1. Nieminen-von Wendt TS,
    2. Metsähonkala L,
    3. Kulomäki TA,
    4. Aalto S,
    5. Autti TH,
    6. Vanhala R,
    7. Eskola O,
    8. Bergman J,
    9. Hietala JA,
    10. von Wendt LO
    (2004) Increased presynaptic dopamine function in Asperger syndrome. Neuroreport 15:757–760. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001756-200404090-00003 pmid:15073509
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  164. ↵
    1. Nishiyama A,
    2. Shimizu T,
    3. Sherafat A,
    4. Richardson WD
    (2021) Life-long oligodendrocyte development and plasticity. Semin Cell Dev Biol 116:25–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semcdb.2021.02.004 pmid:33741250
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  165. ↵
    1. Ofer I,
    2. Jacobs J,
    3. Jaiser N,
    4. Akin B,
    5. Hennig J,
    6. Schulze-Bonhage A,
    7. LeVan P
    (2018) Cognitive and behavioral comorbidities in Rolandic epilepsy and their relation with default mode network's functional connectivity and organization. Epilepsy Behav 78:179–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yebeh.2017.10.013 pmid:29103838
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  166. ↵
    1. Oldehinkel M, et al
    . (2019) Altered connectivity between cerebellum, visual, and sensory-motor networks in autism spectrum disorder: results from the EU-AIMS longitudinal European autism project. Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging 4:260–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpsc.2018.11.010 pmid:30711508
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  167. ↵
    1. Pagani M,
    2. Bertero A,
    3. Liska A,
    4. Galbusera A,
    5. Sabbioni M,
    6. Barsotti N,
    7. Colenbier N,
    8. Marinazzo D,
    9. Scattoni ML,
    10. Pasqualetti M,
    11. Gozzi A
    (2019) Deletion of autism risk gene Shank3 disrupts prefrontal connectivity. J Neurosci 39:5299–5310. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2529-18.2019 pmid:31061091
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  168. ↵
    1. Paldino MJ,
    2. Golriz F,
    3. Chapieski ML,
    4. Zhang W,
    5. Chu ZD
    (2017) Brain network architecture and global intelligence in children with focal epilepsy. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 38:349–356. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A4975 pmid:27737853
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  169. ↵
    1. Paniukov D,
    2. Lebel RM,
    3. Giesbrecht G,
    4. Lebel C
    (2020) Cerebral blood flow increases across early childhood. Neuroimage 204:116224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116224 pmid:31561017
    OpenUrlPubMed
  170. ↵
    1. Pasqual E,
    2. Bosch de Basea M,
    3. López-Vicente M,
    4. Thierry-Chef I,
    5. Cardis E
    (2020) Neurodevelopmental effects of low dose ionizing radiation exposure: a systematic review of the epidemiological evidence. Environ Int 136:105371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2019.105371 pmid:32007921
    OpenUrlPubMed
  171. ↵
    1. Pawela CP,
    2. Biswal BB,
    3. Cho YR,
    4. Kao DS,
    5. Li R,
    6. Jones SR,
    7. Schulte ML,
    8. Matloub HS,
    9. Hudetz AG,
    10. Hyde JS
    (2008) Resting-state functional connectivity of the rat brain. Magn Reson Med 59:1021–1029. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.21524 pmid:18429028
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  172. ↵
    1. Picci G,
    2. Gotts SJ,
    3. Scherf KS
    (2016) A theoretical rut: revisiting and critically evaluating the generalized under/over-connectivity hypothesis of autism. Dev Sci 19:524–549. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12467 pmid:27412228
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  173. ↵
    1. Pilli VK,
    2. Jeong JW,
    3. Konka P,
    4. Kumar A,
    5. Chugani HT,
    6. Juhász C
    (2019) Objective PET study of glucose metabolism asymmetries in children with epilepsy: implications for normal brain development. Hum Brain Mapp 40:53–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.24354 pmid:30136325
    OpenUrlPubMed
  174. ↵
    1. Pizoli CE,
    2. Shah MN,
    3. Snyder AZ,
    4. Shimony JS,
    5. Limbrick DD,
    6. Raichle ME,
    7. Schlaggar BL,
    8. Smyth MD
    (2011) Resting-state activity in development and maintenance of normal brain function. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 108:11638–11643. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1109144108 pmid:21709227
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  175. ↵
    1. Poirier GL,
    2. Huang W,
    3. Tam K,
    4. DiFranza JR,
    5. King JA
    (2017) Awake whole-brain functional connectivity alterations in the adolescent spontaneously hypertensive rat feature visual streams and striatal networks. Brain Struct Funct 222:1673–1683. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00429-016-1301-2 pmid:27680743
    OpenUrlPubMed
  176. ↵
    1. Posner J,
    2. Rauh V,
    3. Gruber A,
    4. Gat I,
    5. Wang Z,
    6. Peterson BS
    (2013) Dissociable attentional and affective circuits in medication-naïve children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Psychiatry Res 213:24–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pscychresns.2013.01.004 pmid:23664625
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  177. ↵
    1. Posner J,
    2. Park C,
    3. Wang Z
    (2014) Connecting the dots: a review of resting connectivity MRI studies in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Neuropsychol Rev 24:3–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-014-9251-z pmid:24496902
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  178. ↵
    1. Pujol J,
    2. del Hoyo L,
    3. Blanco-Hinojo L,
    4. de Sola S,
    5. Macià D,
    6. Martínez-Vilavella G,
    7. Amor M,
    8. Deus J,
    9. Rodríguez J,
    10. Farré M,
    11. Dierssen M,
    12. de la Torre R
    (2015) Anomalous brain functional connectivity contributing to poor adaptive behavior in Down syndrome. Cortex 64:148–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2014.10.012 pmid:25461715
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  179. ↵
    1. Qin L,
    2. Jiang W,
    3. Zheng J,
    4. Zhou X,
    5. Zhang Z,
    6. Liu J
    (2020) Alterations functional connectivity in temporal lobe epilepsy and their relationships with cognitive function: a longitudinal resting-state fMRI study. Front Neurol 11:625. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2020.00625 pmid:32793090
    OpenUrlPubMed
  180. ↵
    1. Qiu MG,
    2. Ye Z,
    3. Li QY,
    4. Liu GJ,
    5. Xie B,
    6. Wang J
    (2011) Changes of brain structure and function in ADHD children. Brain Topogr 24:243–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10548-010-0168-4 pmid:21191807
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  181. ↵
    1. Radonjic M,
    2. Cappaert NL,
    3. de Vries EF,
    4. de Esch CE,
    5. Kuper FC,
    6. van Waarde A,
    7. Dierckx RA,
    8. Wadman WJ,
    9. Wolterbeek AP,
    10. Stierum RH,
    11. de Groot DM
    (2013) Delay and impairment in brain development and function in rat offspring after maternal exposure to methylmercury. Toxicol Sci 133:112–124. https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kft024 pmid:23457123
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  182. ↵
    1. Rane P,
    2. Cochran D,
    3. Hodge SM,
    4. Haselgrove C,
    5. Kennedy DN,
    6. Frazier JA
    (2015) Connectivity in autism: a review of MRI connectivity studies. Harv Rev Psychiatry 23:223–244. https://doi.org/10.1097/HRP.0000000000000072 pmid:26146755
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  183. ↵
    1. Ricobaraza A,
    2. Mora-Jimenez L,
    3. Puerta E,
    4. Sanchez-Carpintero R,
    5. Mingorance A,
    6. Artieda J,
    7. Nicolas MJ,
    8. Besne G,
    9. Bunuales M,
    10. Gonzalez-Aparicio M,
    11. Sola-Sevilla N,
    12. Valencia M,
    13. Hernandez-Alcoceba R
    (2019) Epilepsy and neuropsychiatric comorbidities in mice carrying a recurrent Dravet syndrome SCN1A missense mutation. Sci Rep 9:14172. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-50627-w pmid:31578435
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  184. ↵
    1. Robertson J,
    2. Hatton C,
    3. Emerson E,
    4. Baines S
    (2015) Prevalence of epilepsy among people with intellectual disabilities: a systematic review. Seizure 29:46–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seizure.2015.03.016 pmid:26076844
    OpenUrlPubMed
  185. ↵
    1. Rosa-Neto P,
    2. Lou HC,
    3. Cumming P,
    4. Pryds O,
    5. Karrebaek H,
    6. Lunding J,
    7. Gjedde A
    (2005) Methylphenidate-evoked changes in striatal dopamine correlate with inattention and impulsivity in adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Neuroimage 25:868–876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.11.031 pmid:15808987
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  186. ↵
    1. Rossano S,
    2. Toyonaga T,
    3. Berg E,
    4. Lorence I,
    5. Fowles K,
    6. Nabulsi N,
    7. Ropchan J,
    8. Li S,
    9. Ye Y,
    10. Felchner Z,
    11. Kukis D,
    12. Huang Y,
    13. Benveniste H,
    14. Tarantal AF,
    15. Groman S,
    16. Carson RE
    (2022) Imaging the fetal nonhuman primate brain with SV2A positron emission tomography (PET). Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 49:3679–3691. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-022-05825-6 pmid:35633376
    OpenUrlPubMed
  187. ↵
    1. Rumsey JM,
    2. Duara R,
    3. Grady C,
    4. Rapoport JL,
    5. Margolin RA,
    6. Rapoport SI,
    7. Cutler NR
    (1985) Brain metabolism in autism: resting cerebral glucose utilization rates as measured with positron emission tomography. Arch Gen Psychiatry 42:448–455. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.1985.01790280026003 pmid:3872650
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  188. ↵
    1. Sander CY,
    2. Hesse S
    (2017) News and views on in-vivo imaging of neurotransmission using PET and MRI. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 61:414–428. https://doi.org/10.23736/S1824-4785.17.03019-9
    OpenUrl
  189. ↵
    1. Sanefuji M,
    2. Craig M,
    3. Parlatini V,
    4. Mehta MA,
    5. Murphy DG,
    6. Catani M,
    7. Cerliani L,
    8. Thiebaut de Schotten M
    (2017) Double-dissociation between the mechanism leading to impulsivity and inattention in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a resting-state functional connectivity study. Cortex 86:290–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2016.06.005 pmid:27394716
    OpenUrlPubMed
  190. ↵
    1. Schalbroeck R,
    2. de Geus-Oei LF,
    3. Selten JP,
    4. Yaqub M,
    5. Schrantee A,
    6. van Amelsvoort T,
    7. Booij J,
    8. van Velden FHP
    (2021a) Cerebral [18F]-FDOPA uptake in autism spectrum disorder and its association with autistic traits. Diagnostics (Basel) 11:2404. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11122404
    OpenUrl
  191. ↵
    1. Schalbroeck R,
    2. van Velden FHP,
    3. de Geus-Oei LF,
    4. Yaqub M,
    5. van Amelsvoort T,
    6. Booij J,
    7. Selten JP
    (2021b) Striatal dopamine synthesis capacity in autism spectrum disorder and its relation with social defeat: an [18F]-FDOPA PET/CT study. Transl Psychiatry 11:47. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-020-01174-w pmid:33441546
    OpenUrlPubMed
  192. ↵
    1. Scheffer IE,
    2. Liao J
    (2020) Deciphering the concepts behind “epileptic encephalopathy” and “developmental and epileptic encephalopathy.” Eur J Paediatr Neurol 24:11–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpn.2019.12.023 pmid:31926847
    OpenUrlPubMed
  193. ↵
    1. Schöpf V,
    2. Kasprian G,
    3. Brugger PC,
    4. Prayer D
    (2012) Watching the fetal brain at 'rest.' Int J Dev Neurosci 30:11–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdevneu.2011.10.006 pmid:22044604
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  194. ↵
    1. Schweitzer JB,
    2. Lee DO,
    3. Hanford RB,
    4. Tagamets MA,
    5. Hoffman JM,
    6. Grafton ST,
    7. Kilts CD
    (2003) A positron emission tomography study of methylphenidate in adults with ADHD: alterations in resting blood flow and predicting treatment response. Neuropsychopharmacology 28:967–973. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.npp.1300110 pmid:12700698
    OpenUrlPubMed
  195. ↵
    1. Semple BD,
    2. Blomgren K,
    3. Gimlin K,
    4. Ferriero DM,
    5. Noble-Haeusslein LJ
    (2013) Brain development in rodents and humans: identifying benchmarks of maturation and vulnerability to injury across species. Prog Neurobiol 106–107:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pneurobio.2013.04.001 pmid:23583307
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  196. ↵
    1. Shen X,
    2. Dong Y,
    3. Xu Z,
    4. Wang H,
    5. Miao C,
    6. Soriano SG,
    7. Sun D,
    8. Baxter MG,
    9. Zhang Y,
    10. Xie Z
    (2013) Selective anesthesia-induced neuroinflammation in developing mouse brain and cognitive impairment. Anesthesiology 118:502–515. https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0b013e3182834d77 pmid:23314110
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  197. ↵
    1. Shi Y,
    2. Jin RB,
    3. Zhao JN,
    4. Tang SF,
    5. Li HQ,
    6. Li TY
    (2009) Brain positron emission tomography in preterm and term newborn infants. Early Hum Dev 85:429–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2009.02.002 pmid:19269116
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  198. ↵
    1. Shofty B,
    2. Bergmann E,
    3. Zur G,
    4. Asleh J,
    5. Bosak N,
    6. Kavushansky A,
    7. Castellanos FX,
    8. Ben-Sira L,
    9. Packer RJ,
    10. Vezina GL,
    11. Constantini S,
    12. Acosta MT,
    13. Kahn I
    (2019) Autism-associated Nf1 deficiency disrupts corticocortical and corticostriatal functional connectivity in human and mouse. Neurobiol Dis 130:104479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbd.2019.104479 pmid:31128207
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  199. ↵
    1. Smyser CD,
    2. Inder TE,
    3. Shimony JS,
    4. Hill JE,
    5. Degnan AJ,
    6. Snyder AZ,
    7. Neil JJ
    (2010) Longitudinal analysis of neural network development in preterm infants. Cereb Cortex 20:2852–2862. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhq035 pmid:20237243
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  200. ↵
    1. Snoeijen-Schouwenaars FM,
    2. Young C,
    3. Rowe C,
    4. van Ool JS,
    5. Schelhaas HJ,
    6. Shankar R
    (2021) People with epilepsy and intellectual disability: more than a sum of two conditions. Epilepsy Behav 124:108355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yebeh.2021.108355 pmid:34624802
    OpenUrlPubMed
  201. ↵
    1. Songjiang L,
    2. Tijiang Z,
    3. Heng L,
    4. Wenjing Z,
    5. Bo T,
    6. Ganjun S,
    7. Maoqiang T,
    8. Su L
    (2021) Impact of brain functional network properties on intelligence in children and adolescents with focal epilepsy: a resting-state MRI study. Acad Radiol 28:225–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2020.01.004 pmid:32037257
    OpenUrlPubMed
  202. ↵
    1. Spencer TJ,
    2. Biederman J,
    3. Madras BK,
    4. Dougherty DD,
    5. Bonab AA,
    6. Livni E,
    7. Meltzer PC,
    8. Martin J,
    9. Rauch S,
    10. Fischman AJ
    (2007) Further evidence of dopamine transporter dysregulation in ADHD: a controlled PET imaging study using altropane. Biol Psychiatry 62:1059–1061. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2006.12.008 pmid:17511972
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  203. ↵
    1. Stafford JM,
    2. Jarrett BR,
    3. Miranda-Dominguez O,
    4. Mills BD,
    5. Cain N,
    6. Mihalas S,
    7. Lahvis GP,
    8. Lattal KM,
    9. Mitchell SH,
    10. David SV,
    11. Fryer JD,
    12. Nigg JT,
    13. Fair DA
    (2014) Large-scale topology and the default mode network in the mouse connectome. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111:18745–18750. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1404346111 pmid:25512496
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  204. ↵
    1. Stokes J,
    2. Freed A,
    3. Bornstein R,
    4. Su KN,
    5. Snell J,
    6. Pan A,
    7. Sun GX,
    8. Park KY,
    9. Jung S,
    10. Worstman H,
    11. Johnson BM,
    12. Morgan PG,
    13. Sedensky MM,
    14. Johnson SC
    (2021) Mechanisms underlying neonate-specific metabolic effects of volatile anesthetics. Elife 10:e65400. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.65400
    OpenUrl
  205. ↵
    1. Struck AF,
    2. Boly M,
    3. Hwang G,
    4. Nair V,
    5. Mathis J,
    6. Nencka A,
    7. Conant LL,
    8. DeYoe EA,
    9. Raghavan M,
    10. Prabhakaran V,
    11. Binder JR,
    12. Meyerand ME,
    13. Hermann BP
    (2021) Regional and global resting-state functional MR connectivity in temporal lobe epilepsy: results from the epilepsy connectome project. Epilepsy Behav 117:107841. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yebeh.2021.107841 pmid:33611101
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  206. ↵
    1. Suhara T,
    2. Fukuda H,
    3. Inoue O,
    4. Itoh T,
    5. Suzuki K,
    6. Yamasaki T,
    7. Tateno Y
    (1991) Age-related changes in human D1 dopamine receptors measured by positron emission tomography. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 103:41–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02244071 pmid:1826059
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  207. ↵
    1. Sun L,
    2. Cao Q,
    3. Long X,
    4. Sui M,
    5. Cao X,
    6. Zhu C,
    7. Zuo X,
    8. An L,
    9. Song Y,
    10. Zang Y,
    11. Wang Y
    (2012) Abnormal functional connectivity between the anterior cingulate and the default mode network in drug-naïve boys with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Psychiatry Res 201:120–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pscychresns.2011.07.001 pmid:22424873
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  208. ↵
    1. Supekar K,
    2. Musen M,
    3. Menon V
    (2009) Development of large-scale functional brain networks in children. PLoS Biol 7:e1000157. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000157 pmid:19621066
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  209. ↵
    1. Supekar K,
    2. Uddin LQ,
    3. Prater K,
    4. Amin H,
    5. Greicius MD,
    6. Menon V
    (2010) Development of functional and structural connectivity within the default mode network in young children. Neuroimage 52:290–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.04.009 pmid:20385244
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  210. ↵
    1. Takahashi T,
    2. Shirane R,
    3. Sato S,
    4. Yoshimoto T
    (1999) Developmental changes of cerebral blood flow and oxygen metabolism in children. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 20:917–922. pmid:10369366
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  211. ↵
    1. Tan Z,
    2. Wei H,
    3. Song X,
    4. Mai W,
    5. Yan J,
    6. Ye W,
    7. Ling X,
    8. Hou L,
    9. Zhang S,
    10. Yan S,
    11. Xu H,
    12. Wang L
    (2022) Positron emission tomography in the neuroimaging of autism spectrum disorder: a review. Front Neurosci 16:806876. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2022.806876 pmid:35495051
    OpenUrlPubMed
  212. ↵
    1. Tang FR,
    2. Loke WK,
    3. Khoo BC
    (2017) Low-dose or low-dose-rate ionizing radiation-induced bioeffects in animal models. J Radiat Res 58:165–182. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrr/rrw120 pmid:28077626
    OpenUrlPubMed
  213. ↵
    1. Telias M
    (2019) Molecular mechanisms of synaptic dysregulation in fragile X syndrome and autism spectrum disorders. Front Mol Neurosci 12:51. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnmol.2019.00051 pmid:30899214
    OpenUrlPubMed
  214. ↵
    1. Thapar A,
    2. Cooper M,
    3. Rutter M
    (2017) Neurodevelopmental disorders. Lancet Psychiatry 4:339–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(16)30376-5 pmid:27979720
    OpenUrlPubMed
  215. ↵
    1. Thomason ME,
    2. Dassanayake MT,
    3. Shen S,
    4. Katkuri Y,
    5. Alexis M,
    6. Anderson AL,
    7. Yeo L,
    8. Mody S,
    9. Hernandez-Andrade E,
    10. Hassan SS,
    11. Studholme C,
    12. Jeong JW,
    13. Romero R
    (2013) Cross-hemispheric functional connectivity in the human fetal brain. Sci Transl Med 5:173ra24. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.3004978 pmid:23427244
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  216. ↵
    1. Thomason ME,
    2. Hect J,
    3. Waller R,
    4. Manning JH,
    5. Stacks AM,
    6. Beeghly M,
    7. Boeve JL,
    8. Wong K,
    9. van den Heuvel MI,
    10. Hernandez-Andrade E,
    11. Hassan SS,
    12. Romero R
    (2018) Prenatal neural origins of infant motor development: associations between fetal brain and infant motor development. Dev Psychopathol 30:763–772. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095457941800072X pmid:30068433
    OpenUrlPubMed
  217. ↵
    1. Tian L,
    2. Jiang T,
    3. Liang M,
    4. Zang Y,
    5. He Y,
    6. Sui M,
    7. Wang Y
    (2008) Enhanced resting-state brain activities in ADHD patients: a fMRI study. Brain Dev 30:342–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.braindev.2007.10.005 pmid:18060712
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  218. ↵
    1. Toulmin H,
    2. Beckmann CF,
    3. O'Muircheartaigh J,
    4. Ball G,
    5. Nongena P,
    6. Makropoulos A,
    7. Ederies A,
    8. Counsell SJ,
    9. Kennea N,
    10. Arichi T,
    11. Tusor N,
    12. Rutherford MA,
    13. Azzopardi D,
    14. Gonzalez-Cinca N,
    15. Hajnal JV,
    16. Edwards AD
    (2015) Specialization and integration of functional thalamocortical connectivity in the human infant. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 112:6485–6490. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1422638112 pmid:25941391
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  219. ↵
    1. Trotta N,
    2. Archambaud F,
    3. Goldman S,
    4. Baete K,
    5. Van Laere K,
    6. Wens V,
    7. Van Bogaert P,
    8. Chiron C,
    9. De Tiège X
    (2016) Functional integration changes in regional brain glucose metabolism from childhood to adulthood. Hum Brain Mapp 37:3017–3030. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.23223 pmid:27133021
    OpenUrlPubMed
  220. ↵
    1. Uddin LQ,
    2. Kelly AM,
    3. Biswal BB,
    4. Margulies DS,
    5. Shehzad Z,
    6. Shaw D,
    7. Ghaffari M,
    8. Rotrosen J,
    9. Adler LA,
    10. Castellanos FX,
    11. Milham MP
    (2008) Network homogeneity reveals decreased integrity of default-mode network in ADHD. J Neurosci Methods 169:249–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2007.11.031 pmid:18190970
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  221. ↵
    1. Uddin LQ,
    2. Supekar K,
    3. Lynch CJ,
    4. Khouzam A,
    5. Phillips J,
    6. Feinstein C,
    7. Ryali S,
    8. Menon V
    (2013) Salience network-based classification and prediction of symptom severity in children with autism. JAMA Psychiatry 70:869–879. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2013.104 pmid:23803651
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  222. ↵
    1. Van Bogaert P,
    2. Wikler D,
    3. Damhaut P,
    4. Szliwowski HB,
    5. Goldman S
    (1998) Regional changes in glucose metabolism during brain development from the age of 6 years. Neuroimage 8:62–68. https://doi.org/10.1006/nimg.1998.0346 pmid:9698576
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  223. ↵
    1. van den Heuvel MI,
    2. Turk E,
    3. Manning JH,
    4. Hect J,
    5. Hernandez-Andrade E,
    6. Hassan SS,
    7. Romero R,
    8. van den Heuvel MP,
    9. Thomason ME
    (2018) Hubs in the human fetal brain network. Dev Cogn Neurosci 30:108–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2018.02.001 pmid:29448128
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  224. ↵
    1. Verreet T,
    2. Quintens R,
    3. Van Dam D,
    4. Verslegers M,
    5. Tanori M,
    6. Casciati A,
    7. Neefs M,
    8. Leysen L,
    9. Michaux A,
    10. Janssen A,
    11. D'Agostino E,
    12. Vande Velde G,
    13. Baatout S,
    14. Moons L,
    15. Pazzaglia S,
    16. Saran A,
    17. Himmelreich U,
    18. De Deyn PP,
    19. Benotmane MA
    (2015) A multidisciplinary approach unravels early and persistent effects of X-ray exposure at the onset of prenatal neurogenesis. J Neurodev Disord 7:3. https://doi.org/10.1186/1866-1955-7-3
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  225. ↵
    1. Villemagne PM,
    2. Naidu S,
    3. Villemagne VL,
    4. Yaster M,
    5. Wagner HN Jr.,
    6. Harris JC,
    7. Moser HW,
    8. Johnston MV,
    9. Dannals RF,
    10. Wong DF
    (2002) Brain glucose metabolism in Rett syndrome. Pediatr Neurol 27:117–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0887-8994(02)00399-5 pmid:12213612
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  226. ↵
    1. Volkow ND,
    2. Wang GJ,
    3. Newcorn J,
    4. Fowler JS,
    5. Telang F,
    6. Solanto MV,
    7. Logan J,
    8. Wong C,
    9. Ma Y,
    10. Swanson JM,
    11. Schulz K,
    12. Pradhan K
    (2007a) Brain dopamine transporter levels in treatment and drug naïve adults with ADHD. Neuroimage 34:1182–1190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.10.014 pmid:17126039
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  227. ↵
    1. Volkow ND,
    2. Wang GJ,
    3. Newcorn J,
    4. Telang F,
    5. Solanto MV,
    6. Fowler JS,
    7. Logan J,
    8. Ma Y,
    9. Schulz K,
    10. Pradhan K,
    11. Wong C,
    12. Swanson JM
    (2007b) Depressed dopamine activity in caudate and preliminary evidence of limbic involvement in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry 64:932–940. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.64.8.932 pmid:17679638
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  228. ↵
    1. Volkow ND,
    2. Wang GJ,
    3. Newcorn JH,
    4. Kollins SH,
    5. Wigal TL,
    6. Telang F,
    7. Fowler JS,
    8. Goldstein RZ,
    9. Klein N,
    10. Logan J,
    11. Wong C,
    12. Swanson JM
    (2011) Motivation deficit in ADHD is associated with dysfunction of the dopamine reward pathway. Mol Psychiatry 16:1147–1154. https://doi.org/10.1038/mp.2010.97 pmid:20856250
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  229. ↵
    1. Wahlstrom D,
    2. Collins P,
    3. White T,
    4. Luciana M
    (2010) Developmental changes in dopamine neurotransmission in adolescence: behavioral implications and issues in assessment. Brain Cogn 72:146–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2009.10.013 pmid:19944514
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  230. ↵
    1. Wang C,
    2. Yang B,
    3. Fang D,
    4. Zeng H,
    5. Chen X,
    6. Peng G,
    7. Cheng Q,
    8. Liang G
    (2018) The impact of SNAP25 on brain functional connectivity density and working memory in ADHD. Biol Psychol 138:35–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2018.08.005 pmid:30092259
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  231. ↵
    1. Wang Y,
    2. Chan GL,
    3. Holden JE,
    4. Dobko T,
    5. Mak E,
    6. Schulzer M,
    7. Huser JM,
    8. Snow BJ,
    9. Ruth TJ,
    10. Calne DB,
    11. Stoessl AJ
    (1998) Age-dependent decline of dopamine D1 receptors in human brain: a PET study. Synapse 30:56–61. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2396(199809)30:1<56::AID-SYN7>3.0.CO;2-J
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  232. ↵
    1. Wang Z,
    2. Fernández-Seara M,
    3. Alsop DC,
    4. Liu W-C,
    5. Flax JF,
    6. Benasich AA,
    7. Detre JA
    (2008) Assessment of functional development in normal infant brain using arterial spin labeled perfusion MRI. Neuroimage 39:973–978. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.09.045 pmid:17988892
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  233. ↵
    1. Washington SD,
    2. Gordon EM,
    3. Brar J,
    4. Warburton S,
    5. Sawyer AT,
    6. Wolfe A,
    7. Mease-Ference ER,
    8. Girton L,
    9. Hailu A,
    10. Mbwana J,
    11. Gaillard WD,
    12. Kalbfleisch ML,
    13. VanMeter JW
    (2014) Dysmaturation of the default mode network in autism. Hum Brain Mapp 35:1284–1296. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.22252 pmid:23334984
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  234. ↵
    1. Wiers CE,
    2. Lohoff FW,
    3. Lee J,
    4. Muench C,
    5. Freeman C,
    6. Zehra A,
    7. Marenco S,
    8. Lipska BK,
    9. Auluck PK,
    10. Feng N,
    11. Sun H,
    12. Goldman D,
    13. Swanson JM,
    14. Wang GJ,
    15. Volkow ND
    (2018) Methylation of the dopamine transporter gene in blood is associated with striatal dopamine transporter availability in ADHD: a preliminary study. Eur J Neurosci 48:1884–1895. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejn.14067 pmid:30033547
    OpenUrlPubMed
  235. ↵
    1. Williams KA,
    2. Peltier S,
    3. LaConte S,
    4. Keilholz SD
    (2006) MRI evidence of resting state connectivity in rodent brain. Proceedings 14th Scientific Meeting, International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine Vol. 2119.
  236. ↵
    1. Wilson LR,
    2. Vatansever D,
    3. Annus T,
    4. Williams GB,
    5. Hong YT,
    6. Fryer TD,
    7. Nestor PJ,
    8. Holland AJ,
    9. Zaman SH
    (2019) Differential effects of Down's syndrome and Alzheimer's neuropathology on default mode connectivity. Hum Brain Mapp 40:4551–4563. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.24720 pmid:31350817
    OpenUrlPubMed
  237. ↵
    1. Wong DF,
    2. Wagner HN Jr.,
    3. Dannals RF,
    4. Links JM,
    5. Frost JJ,
    6. Ravert HT,
    7. Wilson AA,
    8. Rosenbaum AE,
    9. Gjedde A,
    10. Douglass KH
    (1984) Effects of age on dopamine and serotonin receptors measured by positron tomography in the living human brain. Science 226:1393–1396. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.6334363 pmid:6334363
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  238. ↵
    1. Wong DF,
    2. Blue ME,
    3. Brašić JR,
    4. Nandi A,
    5. Valentine H,
    6. Stansfield KH,
    7. Rousset O,
    8. Bibat G,
    9. Yablonski ME,
    10. Johnston MV,
    11. Gjedde A,
    12. Naidu S
    (2018) Are dopamine receptor and transporter changes in Rett syndrome reflected in Mecp2-deficient mice? Exp Neurol 307:74–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.expneurol.2018.05.019 pmid:29782864
    OpenUrlPubMed
  239. ↵
    1. Xue X,
    2. Wu JJ,
    3. Huo BB,
    4. Xing XX,
    5. Ma J,
    6. Li YL,
    7. Zheng MX,
    8. Hua XY,
    9. Xu JG
    (2022) Age-related alterations of brain metabolic network based on [18F]FDG-PET of rats. Aging (Albany NY) 14:923–942. https://doi.org/10.18632/aging.203851 pmid:35077393
    OpenUrlPubMed
  240. ↵
    1. Yang Y,
    2. Zhao S,
    3. Zhang M,
    4. Xiang M,
    5. Zhao J,
    6. Chen S,
    7. Wang H,
    8. Han L,
    9. Ran J
    (2022) Prevalence of neurodevelopmental disorders among US children and adolescents in 2019 and 2020. Front Psychol 13:997648. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.997648 pmid:36507037
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  241. ↵
    1. Yoshikawa H,
    2. Fueki N,
    3. Suzuki H,
    4. Sakuragawa N,
    5. Masaaki I
    (1991) Cerebral blood flow and oxygen metabolism in Rett syndrome. J Child Neurol 6:237–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/088307389100600306 pmid:1875025
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  242. ↵
    1. Zametkin AJ,
    2. Nordahl TE,
    3. Gross M,
    4. King AC,
    5. Semple WE,
    6. Rumsey J,
    7. Hamburger S,
    8. Cohen RM
    (1990) Cerebral glucose metabolism in adults with hyperactivity of childhood onset. N Engl J Med 323:1361–1366. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199011153232001 pmid:2233902
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  243. ↵
    1. Zametkin AJ,
    2. Liebenauer LL,
    3. Fitzgerald GA,
    4. King AC,
    5. Minkunas DV,
    6. Herscovitch P,
    7. Yamada EM,
    8. Cohen RM
    (1993) Brain metabolism in teenagers with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry 50:333–340. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.1993.01820170011002 pmid:8489322
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  244. ↵
    1. Zerbi V,
    2. Ielacqua GD,
    3. Markicevic M,
    4. Haberl MG,
    5. Ellisman MH,
    6. A-Bhaskaran A,
    7. Frick A,
    8. Rudin M,
    9. Wenderoth N
    (2018) Dysfunctional autism risk genes cause circuit-specific connectivity deficits with distinct developmental trajectories. Cereb Cortex 28:2495–2506. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhy046 pmid:29901787
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  245. ↵
    1. Zerbi V,
    2. Pagani M,
    3. Markicevic M,
    4. Matteoli M,
    5. Pozzi D,
    6. Fagiolini M,
    7. Bozzi Y,
    8. Galbusera A,
    9. Scattoni ML,
    10. Provenzano G,
    11. Banerjee A,
    12. Helmchen F,
    13. Basson MA,
    14. Ellegood J,
    15. Lerch JP,
    16. Rudin M,
    17. Gozzi A,
    18. Wenderoth N
    (2021) Brain mapping across 16 autism mouse models reveals a spectrum of functional connectivity subtypes. Mol Psychiatry 26:7610–7620. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-021-01245-4 pmid:34381171
    OpenUrlPubMed
  246. ↵
    1. Zhao F,
    2. Zhao T,
    3. Zhou L,
    4. Wu Q,
    5. Hu X
    (2008) BOLD study of stimulation-induced neural activity and resting-state connectivity in medetomidine-sedated rat. Neuroimage 39:248–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.07.063 pmid:17904868
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  247. ↵
    1. Zilbovicius M,
    2. Garreau B,
    3. Samson Y,
    4. Remy P,
    5. Barthélémy C,
    6. Syrota A,
    7. Lelord G
    (1995) Delayed maturation of the frontal cortex in childhood autism. Am J Psychiatry 152:248–252. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.152.2.248 pmid:7840359
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  248. ↵
    1. Zilbovicius M,
    2. Boddaert N,
    3. Belin P,
    4. Poline JB,
    5. Remy P,
    6. Mangin JF,
    7. Thivard L,
    8. Barthélémy C,
    9. Samson Y
    (2000) Temporal lobe dysfunction in childhood autism: a PET study. Positron emission tomography. Am J Psychiatry 157:1988–1993. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.157.12.1988 pmid:11097965
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  249. ↵
    1. Zoratto F,
    2. Palombelli GM,
    3. Ruocco LA,
    4. Carboni E,
    5. Laviola G,
    6. Sadile AG,
    7. Adriani W,
    8. Canese R
    (2017) Enhanced limbic/impaired cortical-loop connection onto the hippocampus of NHE rats: application of resting-state functional connectivity in a preclinical ADHD model. Behav Brain Res 333:171–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2017.06.026 pmid:28655564
    OpenUrlPubMed
  250. ↵
    1. Zoratto F,
    2. Altabella L,
    3. Tistarelli N,
    4. Laviola G,
    5. Adriani W,
    6. Canese R
    (2018) Inside the developing brain to understand teen behavior from rat models: metabolic, structural, and functional-connectivity alterations among limbic structures across three pre-adolescent stages. Front Behav Neurosci 12:208. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2018.00208 pmid:30319367
    OpenUrlPubMed
  251. ↵
    1. Zürcher NR,
    2. Bhanot A,
    3. McDougle CJ,
    4. Hooker JM
    (2015) A systematic review of molecular imaging (PET and SPECT) in autism spectrum disorder: current state and future research opportunities. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 52:56–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2015.02.002 pmid:25684726
    OpenUrlPubMed
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Neuroscience: 43 (49)
Journal of Neuroscience
Vol. 43, Issue 49
6 Dec 2023
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Masthead (PDF)
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Neuroscience article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Resting-State Functional MRI and PET Imaging as Noninvasive Tools to Study (Ab)Normal Neurodevelopment in Humans and Rodents
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Neuroscience
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Neuroscience.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
View Full Page PDF
Citation Tools
Resting-State Functional MRI and PET Imaging as Noninvasive Tools to Study (Ab)Normal Neurodevelopment in Humans and Rodents
Charissa Millevert, Nicholas Vidas-Guscic, Liesbeth Vanherp, Elisabeth Jonckers, Marleen Verhoye, Steven Staelens, Daniele Bertoglio, Sarah Weckhuysen
Journal of Neuroscience 6 December 2023, 43 (49) 8275-8293; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1043-23.2023

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Respond to this article
Request Permissions
Share
Resting-State Functional MRI and PET Imaging as Noninvasive Tools to Study (Ab)Normal Neurodevelopment in Humans and Rodents
Charissa Millevert, Nicholas Vidas-Guscic, Liesbeth Vanherp, Elisabeth Jonckers, Marleen Verhoye, Steven Staelens, Daniele Bertoglio, Sarah Weckhuysen
Journal of Neuroscience 6 December 2023, 43 (49) 8275-8293; DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1043-23.2023
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Extrapolating Timing of Brain Development from Rodent Models to Humans
    • Functional Connectivity Networks Using Resting-State Functional MRI Provide Insight into Normal Brain Development
    • Three Molecular Imaging with PET Provides Insight into Normal Brain Development
    • rs-fMRI and PET as Tools to Study Abnormal Early Brain Development
    • Conclusion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • neurodevelopment
  • neurodevelopmental disorders
  • resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging
  • positron emission tomography
  • rodent models

Responses to this article

Respond to this article

Jump to comment:

No eLetters have been published for this article.

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Sensorimotor Transformations for Postural Control in the Vermis of the Cerebellum
  • Shared Pathophysiological Mechanisms and Genetic Factors in Early Menarche and Polycystic Ovary Syndrome
  • Recalibrating Olfactory Neuroscience to the Range of Naturally Occurring Odor Concentrations
Show more Review
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Follow SFN on BlueSky
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Facebook
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on Twitter
  • Follow Society for Neuroscience on LinkedIn
  • Visit Society for Neuroscience on Youtube
  • Follow our RSS feeds

Content

  • Early Release
  • Current Issue
  • Issue Archive
  • Collections

Information

  • For Authors
  • For Advertisers
  • For the Media
  • For Subscribers

About

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Privacy Notice
  • Contact
  • Accessibility
(JNeurosci logo)
(SfN logo)

Copyright © 2025 by the Society for Neuroscience.
JNeurosci Online ISSN: 1529-2401

The ideas and opinions expressed in JNeurosci do not necessarily reflect those of SfN or the JNeurosci Editorial Board. Publication of an advertisement or other product mention in JNeurosci should not be construed as an endorsement of the manufacturer’s claims. SfN does not assume any responsibility for any injury and/or damage to persons or property arising from or related to any use of any material contained in JNeurosci.