Fluorine Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy Measurement of Brain Fluvoxamine and Fluoxetine in Pediatric Patients Treated for Pervasive Developmental Disorders Wayne L. Strauss, M.D., Ph.D. Objective: Pediatric populations, includ- Results: A significant relationship be-
ing those with autistic disorder or other
Alan S. Unis, M.D.
creasingly are being prescribed selective
age range studied. Brain fluvoxamine con-centration in the children was lower, con-
Charles Cowan, M.D.
serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Littleis known about the age-related brain
sistent with a lower dose/body mass drugprescription; when brain concentration
Geraldine Dawson, Ph.D.
pharmacokinetics of SSRIs; there is a lackof data regarding optimal dosing of medi-
cations for children. The authors used flu-
were no longer significant. Brain fluoxe-
Stephen R. Dager, M.D.
tine concentration was similar betweenage groups; no significant age effects on
(19F MRS) to evaluate age effects on whole-
brain fluoxetine drug levels remained af-
fluoxetine in children taking SSRIs.
tions of brain fluoxetine bioavailability
Method: Twenty-one pediatric subjects
and elimination half-life also were similar
Conclusions: These findings suggest that
6–15 years old and stabilized with a con-
sistent dose of fluvoxamine or fluoxetine,
were recruited for the study; 16 success-
fully completed the imaging protocol.
dren with autistic disorder or other perva-
generalized to other pediatric populations. (Am J Psychiatry 2002; 159:755–760)
Autistic disorder and other pervasive developmental voxamine under double-blind conditions in adults with
disorders are characterized by symptoms that can include
autistic disorder, found that eight of 15 patients in the flu-
repetitive or compulsive behavior, impaired social inter-
voxamine-treated group (in comparison to none of 15 in
action, and abnormal language development. These dis-
the placebo group) responded to active drug treatment.
orders typically manifest in early childhood and result in
Fluvoxamine was superior to placebo in reducing repeti-
life-long disability. Serotonin-related brain abnormalities,
tive behaviors, maladaptive behavior, and aggression, as
particularly in autistic disorder, are suggested by reports of
well as in enhancing social relatedness and use of lan-
low central serotonergic responsivity in this population,
guage. Treatment response was not predicted by subjects’
altered brain synthesis of serotonin in autistic boys, and
gender, age, severity of autistic behavior, or intellectual
more whole-blood serotonin in approximately one-third
There has been a substantial increase in the use of SSRIs
Evidence of serotonergic abnormalities provides a ratio-
in pediatric populations, including those with autistic dis-
nale for treatment of autistic disorder or other pervasivedevelopmental disorders with serotonin reuptake inhibi-
order or other pervasive developmental disorders (17, 18).
tors or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).
However, dose-ranging studies of SSRIs and their corre-
Symptomatic improvement during serotonin reuptake in-
sponding pharmacokinetics have not been extensively in-
hibitor or SSRI treatment has been reported in both open-
vestigated in this age range. Indeed, current pediatric dos-
label and controlled studies for most dimensions of clini-
ing guidelines for all psychotropic drugs are based on
cal impairment associated with autism (6–16). One care-
limited blood pharmacokinetics data and are primarily
fully designed treatment study (7), which evaluated flu-
extrapolated from adult dosing studies. SSRI LEVELS IN PEDIATRIC PATIENTS
The developing field of magnetic resonance spectros-
oral diphenhydramine, 25–50 mg, for light sedation 1–2 hours be-
copy (MRS) allows noninvasive, in vivo brain pharmacoki-
fore the study if their child had previously demonstrated a seda-
netic studies of drugs, such as fluvoxamine and fluoxetine,
Of the 21 pediatric subjects, 16 successfully completed the
that contain fluorine (19F) in their native structure (19). 19F
brain drug concentration measurement protocol, while five of the
MRS provides an ideal modality for studying brain phar-
subjects were not cooperative with the study. Eight of the subjects
macokinetics in pediatric patients because it involves no
(mean age=11.8 years, SD=3.2, range=7–15) were taking fluvox-
ionizing radiation or special labeling of the compound to
amine at a mean dose of 77.5 mg/day (SD=42.8, range=25–150) at
be measured. Moreover, it is less motion sensitive than
a dose-per-body-mass ratio of 1.43 mg/kg (SD=0.62). One subjectwas studied on three separate occasions while taking progres-
other magnetic resonance imaging techniques, making it
sively higher doses of fluvoxamine (50 mg/day, 100 mg/day, and
clinically feasible for studying individuals who may be un-
150 mg/day, each at a consistent dose for more than 1 month);
able to remain completely still during examinations. 19F
each measurement was treated as an independent data point.
MRS work by our group (20–22) has extended the frame-
Eight of the subjects (mean age=8.8 years, SD=3.7, range=6–15)
work of classical pharmacokinetics by applying a multi-
were taking fluoxetine at a mean dose of 10.63 mg/day (SD=8.5,range=1–20), at a dose-per-body-mass ratio of 0.36 mg/kg (SD=
compartmental model to calculate the steady-state con-
0.36). Two subjects who were studied while taking fluoxetine were
centration, volume of distribution, and elimination half-
then restudied after cessation of drug therapy.
life of selected SSRIs in the adult human brain. An emerg-
With use of identical 19F MRS methods, brain concentrations
ing 19F MRS technique, magnetization transfer spectros-
from outpatients under treatment at the University of Washington
copy (MTS), has been also used to characterize the inter-
Center for Anxiety and Depression for a DSM-IV diagnosis of panic
action between bound and free molecules in vivo as a
disorder, major depression, or OCD were determined for 13 adults(mean age=44.8 years, SD=17.5, range=18–66) who were taking
measure of brain fluoxetine bioavailability in adults (23).
fluvoxamine at a mean stable dose of 231 mg/day (SD=69, range=
Magnetization transfer effects, generated by the selective
100–300) for an average treatment duration of 7.5 months (SD=4.2,
preexcitation of the bound fraction of a compound with
range=2–24) and 15 adults (mean age=51.9 years, SD=11.3, range=
subsequent transfer of magnetization to the free fraction,
24–62) who were taking fluoxetine at a mean stable dose of 24.0
cause the partial saturation of the free, or unbound, com-
mg/day (SD=7.4, range=20–40) for an average treatment durationof 11.3 months (SD=6.9, range=3–24). Steady-state brain fluvox-
ponent. This partial saturation is detected as reduced sig-
amine and fluoxetine concentrations for these adults have, in part,
nal intensity in the MRS pulse sequence. The 19F MTS
been previously published (20–23). Data from one adult subject
technique, to our knowledge, has not been used to mea-
previously identified as having a metabolic abnormality on the ba-
sure drug bioavailability in children.
sis of consistent abnormally high (∼fivefold) brain levels of fluvox-amine (20) were not included in these analyses.
The purpose of this study was to use 19F MRS to mea-
Determination of whole-brain drug concentrations were per-
sure whole-brain SSRI concentrations and demonstrate
formed by using previously published methods (20, 21). In brief,
the feasibility of using 19F MTS to characterize the bound
all data were acquired by using a GE Signa 1.5-T magnetic reso-
portion of SSRIs prescribed to pediatric patients undergo-
nance scanner (General Electric Medical Systems, Milwaukee)
ing treatment for a diagnosis of autistic disorder or other
with version 5.8 software and equipped with a broad-band poweramplifier (General Electric Medical Systems, Milwaukee) and a
pervasive developmental disorders. Data acquired from
fluorine quadrature birdcage head coil built in our laboratory
this pediatric study group were compared to similarly ac-
(23). A T1-weighted proton image was acquired with the fluorine
quired data from adults prescribed fluvoxamine or fluoxe-
coil to ensure proper positioning of the subject’s head in the mag-
tine for a diagnosis of major depression, obsessive-com-
net. Whole-brain shimming of the magnetic field, to ensure con-
pulsive disorder (OCD), or panic disorder.
sistent magnetic field homogeneity, was performed through theproton channel, since the fluorine signal is too weak to allow ade-quate shimming. The 19F MRS pulse sequence was set at 90°, with
a pulse width of 500 µsec, a phase cycling of 2, and TR of 1 secondto obtain a fully relaxed spectrum measurement with about 1,000
Twenty-one pediatric patients were referred from the Center
averages. Power for the 90° pulse was determined by using a so-
on Human Development and Disability or the Department of Pe-
dium fluoride phantom and a resistive device designed to load
diatrics at the University of Washington for participation in the
the coil similarly to a human head. Drug concentration was deter-
study. Parents or guardians gave informed written consent, and
mined relative to the phantom. Total scanning time was generally
older subjects were given the opportunity to provide informed
less than 40 minutes. Signal quantification was performed by us-
written assent to participate; both procedures were approved by
ing a VARPRO-based time-domain fitting program (MRUI, Delft,
the institutional review board of the University of Washington.
the Netherlands). Aged-adjusted literature values for brain vol-
The pediatric group met DSM-IV criteria for autistic disorder or
ume were used as a correction factor for calculating brain con-
other pervasive developmental disorders through diagnostic
centrations, since it was not feasible to measure individual brain
evaluation by an experienced, university-based clinician (A.S.U.,
volumes because of technical limitations using the fluorine coil to
C.C., or G.D.). All subjects were being treated with either fluvox-
acquire high-resolution proton images (24, 25).
amine or fluoxetine and had been taking a consistent daily dose
MTS was performed to characterize brain drug binding for a
for a minimum of 6 weeks before the study. Exclusion criteria in-
subgroup of four pediatric subjects taking fluoxetine. Data are in-
cluded treatment with other medications, identified genetic con-
cluded for one subject studied in the steady state and 2 weeks af-
ditions in which autistic behavior is symptomatic (e.g., fragile X
ter drug discontinuation. The MTS methods were identical to
syndrome), uncontrolled seizures, or contraindications to mag-
those used in a previously published study of adults (23). In brief,
netic resonance scanning, such as metal implants or claustropho-
the MTS pulse sequence consisted of a 90° hard pulse of 500-µsec
bia. Parents or guardians were given the option of administering
duration and 0.5-second TR, with and without a train of three sat-
STRAUSS, UNIS, COWAN, ET AL. TABLE 1. Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Pediatric Patients With Autistic Disorder or Other Pervasive Develop- mental Disorders Who Took Fluvoxamine or Fluoxetine
a Subject was studied on separate occasions while taking different doses.
uration pulses centered at –3000 Hz and 0.2 msec before the 90°
The dose-per-mass relationship between the pediatric
pulse. The magnitude of MTS contrast was calculated as a signal
and adult subjects did not differ significantly for fluoxe-
depression with the preparation pulses.
tine prescriptions (mean=0.36 mg/kg, SD=0.36, versus
Statistical handling of the data employed independent t tests to
compare pediatric and adult data for each medication separately;
mean=0.31 mg/kg, SD=0.14) (t=0.40, df=21, p=0.69). Cor-
assumptions of equal variance were met. Additional analyses
respondingly, the average brain concentration of fluoxe-
were performed by using Pearson’s r to evaluate the relationship
tine was similar between the two age groups (mean=4.54
between age and brain measurements for each medication across
µM, SD=3.33, versus mean=5.04 µM, SD=2.54) (t=0.41, df=
the age range studied. All data are presented as means and stan-
21, p=0.69). When corrected for dose per mass, the brain
ratios for concentration per dose per mass remained sim-
ilar between the groups (mean=15.66 µM/mg per kg, SD=6.89, versus mean=17.49 µM/mg per kg, SD=9.56) (t=0.48,
A whole-brain fluorine signal could be quantified for all
subjects, with the exception of three pediatric patients
A significant correlation between brain concentration
who were taking fluvoxamine at doses between 25 and 50
and dose of medication was found both for fluvoxamine
mg/day and who had 19F MRS signals below the level of
(r=0.71, df=20, p=0.001) and fluoxetine (r=0.46, df=23, p=
quantifiable detection (<0.75 µM). Individual pediatric
0.03). For fluvoxamine, a positive correlation observed be-
subjects’ brain concentrations of fluoxetine and fluvoxa-
tween age and brain concentration (r=0.52, df=20, p=0.02)
mine, also calculated in relationship to dose per body
no longer reached significance when brain fluvoxamine
concentration was adjusted for the effects of dose per
The dose-per-mass relationship for the fluvoxamine
mass (r=0.41, df=20, p=0.08). For the combined pediatric
prescriptions was lower in the pediatric group than in the
and adult groups, this relationship between brain fluvox-
adult group (mean=1.43 mg/kg, SD=0.62, versus mean=
amine concentration per dose per mass and age is shown
2.94 mg/kg, SD=0.78) (t=5.02, df=21, p=0.001). Consistent
in Figure 1. No relationship was found between age and
with this, the average brain fluvoxamine concentration in
brain fluoxetine concentration (r=0.12, df=23, p=0.55), nor
the pediatric subjects was lower than that observed for
was there a relationship between age and the ratio for
adults (mean=2.74 µM, SD=0.83, versus mean=7.22 µM,
brain concentration per dose per mass (r=0.15, df=23, p=
SD=2.66) (t=4.29, df=18, p=0.001). When brain concentra-
tion was corrected for the effects of dose per mass, the ra-
Fluoxetine data were acquired after discontinuation of
tio of the concentration per dose per mass in the pediatric
the medication by two pediatric subjects. Brain fluoxetine
group was not significantly different from that for the
concentration had fallen by 93% at 5 weeks after discon-
adults (mean=1.91 µM/mg per kg, SD=1.03, versus mean=
tinuation of medication for one subject (subject 4), and
2.56 µM/mg per kg, SD=0.71) (t=1.68, df=18, p=0.11).
there was an 85% decrease in brain fluoxetine concentra-
SSRI LEVELS IN PEDIATRIC PATIENTS FIGURE 1. Relation of Age to Brain Fluvoxamine Concen- FIGURE 2. Relation of Age to Brain Fluoxetine Concentra- trationa in Six Pediatric Patientsb and 13 Adults Who Took tiona in Eight Pediatric Patients and 15 Adults Who Took Fluvoxamine Fluoxetine
µM/mg per kg)(
µM/mg per kg)( Brain Fluvoxamine Concentration Brain Fluoxetine Concentration Age (years) Age (years)
a Adjusted for daily dose per body mass for the combined pediatric
a Adjusted for daily dose per body mass for the combined pediatric
b Two additional pediatric patients did not have detectable brain lev-
els of fluoxamine. One pediatric subject had undetectable brainlevels of fluvoxamine when taking 50 mg/day, but data collected
tine are not significantly different from typical adult levels
when the subject was taking 100 mg/day and 150 mg/day are in-
when corrected for the effects of dose per mass. Overall,
in a direct comparison of the two age groups, and in acombination of the age groups for evaluation across an
TABLE 2. Drug Concentration Data From Magnetization
extended age range, from childhood to later adulthood,
Transfer Spectroscopy (MTS) for Four Pediatric Patients
no clear relationship was observed between age and brain
With Autistic Disorder or Other Pervasive Developmental Disorders Who Took Fluoxetine
SSRI concentrations after adjustment for the effects of
dose per body mass. These findings suggest that thera-
peutic dosing of fluvoxamine and fluoxetine can be ex-
trapolated in relationship to dose per body mass from
adult treatment practices and can provide an acceptable
treatment approach for the medication management of
There was found a significant effect of age on brain con-
centration for fluvoxamine, but not fluoxetine; lower brainlevels of fluvoxamine were observed in the pediatric pa-
tion for the second subject (subject 8) 4 weeks after dis-
tients. However, differences between age groups in brain
fluvoxamine concentration on a dose-per-body mass ba-
F MTS demonstrated a quantifiable contrast for the
sis were not significant, although a weak, nonsignificant
fluoxetine signal (mean=9.4%, SD=3.4%, range=5%–14%)
correlation with age remained. It is likely that any age rela-
(Table 2). There was a significant negative correlation ob-
tionship to brain concentration of fluvoxamine primarily
served between brain fluoxetine concentration and the
reflects the lower dose-per-mass equivalent prescribed for
magnitude of MTS contrast (r=–0.92, df=5, p<0.03). In a
the pediatric patients than for adults, a difference not ob-
comparison of MTS contrast for fluoxetine between data
served for fluoxetine. Age-related differences in dosing
from the pediatric age group and the previously deter-
patterns between the two drugs probably reflect their re-
mined adult values (mean=12.5%, SD=5.0%) (23), no sig-
spective side effect profiles in pediatric populations.
nificant difference was observed (t=1.2, df=9, p=0.27).
The elimination half-life of fluoxetine and its metabo-
Discussion
lites from the adult brain has been estimated, based onlimited observations, to be approximately 16 days or
To our knowledge, this is the first study to systemati-
longer (26, 27). The rate of brain clearance of fluoxetine
cally evaluate the effects of age on brain steady-state con-
and its metabolites that was observed for the two pediatric
centrations of SSRIs in humans. Our findings, from a
subjects in this study suggests that the brain elimination
group of pediatric patients with a diagnosis of autistic dis-
half-life of fluoxetine is not prolonged in this age group.
order or other pervasive developmental disorders, sug-
Our preliminary findings of a similar brain elimination
gest that pediatric brain levels of fluvoxamine and fluoxe-
time course for pediatric subjects as has been observed for
STRAUSS, UNIS, COWAN, ET AL.
adults after fluoxetine discontinuation are consistent with
children with these disorders (30, 31; unpublished data of
the similar brain concentrations achieved between age
Dager et al.), it is uncertain how generalizable our findings
groups on a dose-per-body mass basis. However, from the
are to other pediatric populations undergoing treatment
small number of subjects studied, we cannot exclude the
with SSRIs. An additional consideration is that individual
possibility that the kinetics of drug uptake or clearance in
brain volume measurements were unavailable for the sub-
the brain may vary as a function of age until additional in-
jects in this study. If the pediatric group had greater brain
vestigations are carried out to systematically address these
volumes, reported to be approximately 10% larger among
a group of 3–4-year-old children with autistic disorder or
Age-related effects on the plasma pharmacokinetics of
other pervasive developmental disorders (31), then we
antidepressants, which typically are metabolized more
would have overestimated brain drug concentrations by
rapidly by children and more slowly by older adults, have
using typical age-adjusted values for brain volumes. How-
provided a clinical rationale for upward dose adjustments
ever, this is an unsettled issue, since recent findings sug-
for children that may sometimes far exceed adult daily
gest that early brain enlargement may occur from acceler-
doses prescribed on a dose-per-mass basis (28). Hepatic
ated brain growth among very young children with
clearance of medications is more efficient in children be-
autism, which plateaus at about 5 years of age (30) and be-fore the minimum age of entry into this study.
cause of the disproportionate size of their livers relative tobody size. However, fluvoxamine and fluoxetine are pref-
Findings from this study may help to provide a brain
erentially distributed from plasma into brain tissue be-
pharmacokinetic basis for current dosing strategies in pre-
cause of their high lipophilicity, which results in approxi-
scribing SSRIs to pediatric patients. We found that chil-dren and adolescents with autistic disorder or other per-
mately 20-fold higher brain concentrations that would
vasive developmental disorders attained similar brain
substantially lessen the impact of hepatic clearance on
levels of fluvoxamine and fluoxetine on a dose-per-body
steady-state brain levels (22). The substantial concentra-
mass basis, as did adults treated for anxiety disorders or
tion gradient between brain and plasma may also account
major depression. Thus, a reasonable target dose range for
for observations that combined plasma fluoxetine and
prescribing fluvoxamine and fluoxetine in pediatric popu-
norfluoxetine concentrations, when adjusted for dose-
lations may be determined by scaling adult doses in rela-
per-mass relationships, are similar between pediatric and
adult populations (unpublished data from Eli Lilly andCompany).
Received July 19, 2001; revision received Jan. 4, 2002; accepted
Prior work making use of MTS in conjunction with 19F
Jan. 14, 2002. From the Center on Human Development and Disabil-
MRS quantification of fluoxetine in the adult brain (23) has
ity, the Center for Anxiety and Depression, and the Departments ofBioengineering, Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Pediatrics, Psy-
demonstrated the use of this technique to better under-
chology, and Radiology, University of Washington; and the Children’s
stand brain bioavailability of psychotropic drugs. These
Hospital and Medical Center, Seattle. Address reprint requests to Dr.
preliminary 19F MTS findings in pediatric patients are con-
Dager, Center for Anxiety and Depression, University of WashingtonSchool of Medicine, 4225 Roosevelt Way, N.E., Suite 306-C, Seattle,
sistent with work in adults (23) that found an inverse rela-
WA 98105-6099; srd@u.washington.edu (e-mail).
tionship between brain drug concentration and MTS con-
Supported by a Bristol-Myers Squibb Neuropharmacology Post-
trast. This inverse relationship implies saturable binding of
doctoral Fellowship from the National Alliance for Autism Research(to Dr. Strauss), an unrestricted grant from Solvay Pharmaceuticals,
fluoxetine in both pediatric and adult brains; the bioavail-
and a project grant (HD-34565) from the Neurobiology and Genetics
ability of the drug is proportional to brain concentration.
of Autism program at the National Institute of Child Health andDevelopment.
Several potential limitations of the study design may
have influenced our results. For example, the time to reachbrain steady state in pediatric patients has not been estab-
References
lished for either fluvoxamine or fluoxetine; inclusion crite-
1. Schain RJ, Freedman DX: Studies on 5-hydoxyindole metabo-
ria for minimum duration of treatment were extrapolated
lism in autism and other mentally retarded children. J Pediatr
from the available adult literature. While the time course
for brain steady state of fluvoxamine has been determined
2. Todd RD, Ciaranello RD: Demonstration of inter- and intraspe-
to be less than 30 days in adults (20), a substantially longer
cies differences in serotonin binding sites by antibodies from
duration of treatment may be required to achieve brain
an autistic child. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1985; 82:612–616
3. McBride PA, Anderson GM, Hertzig ME, Sweeney JA, Kream J,
steady state for fluoxetine (29) and longer than the mini-
Cohen DJ, Mann J: Serotonergic responsivity in male young
mum criteria of 6 weeks at consistent medication doses
adults with autistic disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1989; 46:
that was met by two of the children studied. Furthermore,
this study investigated brain concentrations of fluvoxam-
4. Chugani DC, Muzik O, Rothermel R, Behen M, Chakraborty P,
ine and fluoxetine only in pediatric patients diagnosed as
Mangner T, Dasilva E, Chugani HT: Altered serotonin synthesisin the dentatothalamocortical pathway in autistic boys. Ann
having autistic disorder or other pervasive developmental
disorders. As there is evidence to suggest both brain struc-
5. Cook EH, Courchesne R, Lord C, Cox NJ, Yan S, Lincoln A, Hass
tural and brain chemical abnormalities in younger-aged
R, Courchesne E, Leventhal BL: Evidence of linkage between
SSRI LEVELS IN PEDIATRIC PATIENTS
the serotonin transporter and autistic disorder. Mol Psychiatry
20. Strauss WL, Layton ME, Hayes CE, Dager SR: 19F magnetic reso-
nance spectroscopy investigation in vivo of acute and steady-
6. McDougle CJ, Price LH, Volkmar FR, Goodman WK, Ward-
state brain fluvoxamine levels in obsessive-compulsive disor-
O’Brien D, Nielsen J, Bregman J, Cohen DJ: Clomipramine in au-
tism: preliminary evidence of efficacy. J Am Acad Child Adolesc
21. Strauss WL, Layton ME, Dager SR: Brain elimination half-life of
fluvoxamine measured by 19F magnetic resonance spectros-
7. McDougle CH, Naylor ST, Cohen DJ, Volkmar FR, Heninger GR,
copy. Am J Psychiatry 1998; 155:380–384
Price LY: A double-blind, placebo-controlled study of fluvoxam-
22. Strauss WL, Layton ME, Dager SR: Characterization of human
ine in adults with autistic disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1996;
brain pharmacokinetics using a two-compartment model. Biol
8. Mehlinger R, Scheftner WA, Poznanski E: Fluoxetine and autism
23. Strauss WL, Dager SR: Magnetization transfer of fluoxetine in
(letter). J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 1990; 29:985
human brain using fluorine magnetic resonance spectroscopy.
9. Fatemi SH, Realmuto GM, Khan L, Thuras P: Fluoxetine in the
treatment of adolescent patients with autism: a longitudinal
24. Giedd JN, Snell JW, Lange N, Rajapakse JC, Casey BJ, Kozuch PL,
open trial. J Autism Dev Disord 1998; 28:303–307
Vaituzis AC, Vauss YC, Hamburger SD, Kaysen D, Rapoport JL:
10. Koshes RJ: Use of fluoxetine for obsessive-compulsive behavior
Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging of human brain de-
in adults with autism (letter). Am J Psychiatry 1997; 154:578
velopment: ages 4 to 18. Cereb Cortex 1996; 6:551–560
11. Gordon CT, Rapoport JL, Hamburger SD, State RC, Mannheim
25. Caviness VS, Kennedy DN, Richelme C, Rademacher J, Filipek
CB: Differential response of seven subjects with autistic disor-
PA: The human brain ages 7 to 11 years: a volumetric analysis
der to clomipramine and desipramine. Am J Psychiatry 1992;
based on magnetic resonance images. Cereb Cortex 1996; 6:
12. Gordon CT, State RC, Nelson JE, Hamburger SD, Rapoport JL: A
26. Henry ME, Moore CM, Kaufman MJ, Michelson D, Schmidt ME,
double-blind comparison of clomipramine, desipramine and
Stoddard E, Vuckevic AJ, Berreira PJ, Cohen BM, Renshaw PF:
placebo in the treatment of autistic disorder. Arch Gen Psychi-
Brain kinetics of paroxetine and fluoxetine on the third day of
placebo substitution: a fluorine MRS study. Am J Psychiatry
13. Ghaziuddin M, Tsai L, Ghaziuddin N: Fluoxetine in autism with
depression. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 1991; 30:508–
27. Bolo NR, Hode Y, Nedelec JF, Laine E, Wagner G, Macher JP:
Brain pharmacokinetics and tissue distribution in vivo of flu-
14. Garber HJ, McGonigle JJ, Slomka GT, Monteverde E: Clomi-
voxamine and fluoxetine by fluorine magnetic resonance spec-
pramine treatment of stereotypic behaviors and self-injury in
troscopy. Neuropsychopharmacology 2000; 23:428–438
patients with developmental disabilities. J Am Acad Child Ado-
28. Wilens TE, Biederman J, Baldessarini RJ, Puopolo PR, Flood JG:
Developmental changes in serum concentrations of de-
15. Cook EH, Rowlett R, Jaselskis C, Leventhal BL: Fluoxetine treat-
sipramine and 2-hydroxydesipramine during treatment with
ment of children and adults with autistic disorder and mental
desipramine. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 1992; 31:
retardation. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 1992; 31:739–
29. Karson CN, Newton JE, Livingston R, Jolly JB, Cooper TB, Sprigg
16. Todd RD: Fluoxetine in autism (letter). Am J Psychiatry 1991;
J, Komoroski RA: Human brain fluoxetine concentrations. J
Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 1993; 5:322–329
17. Devane CL, Sallee FR: Serotonin selective reuptake inhibitors in
30. Courchesne E, Karns CM, Davis HR, Ziccardi R, Carper RA, Tigue
child and adolescent psychopharmacology: a review of pub-
ZD, Chisum HJ, Moses P, Pierce K, Lord C, Lincoln AJ, Pizzo S,
lished experience. J Clin Psychiatry 1996; 57:55–66
Schreibman L, Haas RH, Akshoomoff NA, Courchesne RY: Un-
18. Zito JM, Safer DJ, dis Reis S, Gardner JF, Boles M, Lynch F: Trends
usual brain growth patterns in early life in patients with autis-
in the prescribing of psychotropic medications in preschoolers.
tic disorder: an MRI study. Neurology 2001; 57:245–254
31. Sparks BF, Friedman SD, Shaw DW, Aylward EH, Echelard D, Ar-
19. Dager SR, Steen RG: Applications of magnetic resonance spec-
tru AA, Maravilla KR, Giedd JN, Munson J, Dawson G, Dager SR:
troscopy to the investigation of neuropsychiatric disorders.
Brain structural abnormalities in young children with autism
Neuropsychopharmacology 1992; 6:249–266