rs2268498/rs53576 and ToM assessments
Permutation analysis of Happé's Strange Stories task revealed a significant association between the "rs2268498 × grouping" interaction and ToM stories, but not with human or unlinked stories (p ToM = 0.003, p human = 0.056, p unlinked = 0.883). The analysis of within group data indicated that this finding can be attributed to both TD and ASD individuals (p ToM−ASD = 0.018, p ToM−TD = 0.010). As a result of further analysis, the rs2268498 AA genotype was associated significantly with higher scores in Happé's Strange Stories task ToM block in both groups (p ToM−ASD = 0.019, p ToM−TD = 0.005). In addition, carriers of the AA genotype in TD group, have significantly higher scores in human blocks as compared to G-carriers (p human = 0.027). As for rs53576, there is a significant association between rs53576 and ToM stories block in the total sample population (p ToM ≤ 0.001, p human = 0.192, p unlinked = 0.527). The following results indicated that rs53576 does not appear to have a significant association with ToM stories performance, neither in ASD group nor the TD one (p ToM−ASD = 0.081, p ToM−TD = 0.094). It is therefore likely that the association of rs53576 with ToM stories performance arises from differences in ToM stories residual scores between individuals with ASD and TD individuals. Table 1 and Fig. 1.a & 1.b provide detailed information regarding the results.
Accordingly, in terms of the moving shapes paradigm, rs2268498 was significantly associated with ToM and goal-directed GR, but not with GR of random animations (p
ToM ≤ 0.001, P
goal-directed = 0.002, p
random = 0.339). A subsequent analysis within each group indicated that no significant association between GR variables and rs2268498 was found in the ASD or TD groups (p
ToM-ASD = 0.647, P
goal-directed-ASD = 0.175, p
random-ASD = 0.109, p
ToM-TD = 0.215, P
goal-directed-TD = 0.289, p
random-TD = 0.437). Thus, ToM and goal-directed GR are significantly associated with rs2268498 in total samples based upon the differences between the ASD and TD groups. Among other moving shapes paradigm variables (IN and AP), only IN was significantly associated with rs2268498 (p
IN ≤ 0.001, p
AP = 0.070) in total samples which was not replicated in within group analysis (p
IN-ASD = 0.444, p
IN-TD = 0.627). Nevertheless, rs2268498 showed a marginally significant association with AP in the TD group (p = 0.047). According to the subsequent analysis, rs2268498 G-carriers scored significantly lower in the AP variable than AA carriers in the TD group (p = 0.032). On the other hand, the total sample permutation test demonstrated that the interaction of “rs53576 × grouping" was significantly associated with GR of goal-directed and ToM animations but not random animations (p
ToM = 0.002, P
goal-directed = 0.004, p
random = 0.370). The results of the within group analysis indicated that there exists a significant association between the GR of the goal-directed animations and the ToM animations with rs53576 in the ASD group, whereas the permutation test failed to replicate this finding in the TD group (p
ToM-ASD = 0.039, P
goal-directed-ASD = 0.006, p
random-ASD = 0.279, p
ToM-TD = 0.356, P
goal-directed-TD = 0.695, p
random-TD = 0.402). Additional investigations in the ASD group revealed that individuals with AA genotype scored significantly higher in both goal-directed and ToM animations (p
ToM = 0.039, P
goal-directed = 0.027, p
random = 0.636). Our results also indicated a significant association between rs53576 and AP and IN variables in total samples (p
AP ≤ 0.001, p
IN = 0.031), similar to what was observed in the ASD group, but not in the TD group (p
AP-ASD = 0.698, p
IN-ASD = 0.013, p
AP-TD = 0.571, p
IN-TD = 0.265). Upon further analysis in ASD group, it was revealed that the GG genotype of rs53576 was significantly associated with better intentionality scores in individuals with ASD (p
AP = 0.310, p
IN = 0.014). Figure 1.c, 2.a, 2.b, 2.c and Table 2 provide additional statistics.
Hierarchical Clustering Results
Using hierarchical clustering of dissimilarity matrix distances and for both ASD and TD groups, four clusters of cognitive parameters were found. According to the dendrograms, the cognitive variables were classified into four clusters based on the distance matrix: 1. General non-verbal characteristics regardless of ToM sophistication (random, goal-directed, and ToM GR), 2. The ability to consume verbally regardless of ToM sophistication (unlinked, human, and ToM stories), 3. The capability of acquiring non-linguistic ToM (IN), and 4. The ability to acquire verbal ToM (AP). ASD and TD clustering results are presented in figures 3.a and 3.b, respectively. As a result of visualizing 2-dimensional K-means clustering, it was revealed that in the TD group, the parameters representing similar ToM features (verbal/non-verbal) have a relatively smaller distance from one another than other variables. While such a distance ratio was observed in the patient group as well, the parameters illustrating verbal and non-verbal characteristics were significantly lower in the ASD group than in the TD group. The figures 3.c and 3.d illustrate the 2-dimensional clustering in more detail.
General Linear Model and Logistic Regression
None of the ToM parameters in the ASD group was predicted by the rs2268498 AA genotype. However, in the TD group, the rs2268498 AA genotype was significantly associated with AP, human, and ToM stories, which are partially associated with verbal ToM and verbal skills (β human = 1.423, p human = 0.019, β ToM = 2.286, p ToM = 1.440 × 10-4, β AP = 2.333, p AP = 0.023). Using GLM results for rs53576 in both groups, it was found that rs53576 AA genotype significantly predicted GR of goal-directed and ToM animations, and GG genotype significantly predicted IN responses (β goal-directed = 1.583, p goal-directed = 0.047, β ToM = 1.532, p ToM = 7.270 × 10-3, β IN = -7.324, p IN = 0.016). The rs53576 AA genotype was also found to be a significant predictor of ToM animations GR in individuals who were TD (β ToM = 1.699, p ToM = 0.035). There is a detailed presentation of GLM results in Table 3.