Autistic Adolescents' and Their Parents' Visions for the Future: How Aligned are They?

Introduction: The expectations individuals hold about the future can influence the decisions they make toward achieving their goals. Existing research suggests parents of autistic adolescents hold expectations about the future that are significantly related to the postsecondary outcomes they achieve. However, less research exists about the adolescents' own expectations and the extent to which autistic adolescents and their parents agree about the future. Methods: We used a scoring procedure to "quantitize" semi-structured interview data about what 46 adolescent-parent dyads envisioned for the future of the autistic adolescent across three areas of adulthood (postsecondary education, employment, and living situation). Adolescents ranged in age from 13-19 years (85.1% male) and were able to participate in a verbal interview. We scored the dyads' interviews on the extent to which they agreed or disagreed about the postsecondary future of the adolescent, as well as whose expectations were higher (when they differed). Results: Proportions of agreement and disagreement did not significantly differ, demonstrating moderate agreement. Notably, fewer than half (37.0-47.8%) of adolescents and their parents partly or strongly agreed about their visions for the future in each of the three areas. Only 17.4% of dyads partly or strongly agreed across all three areas, and 23.9% did not agree in any area. When adolescents' and parents' views differed, adolescents were significantly more likely to have a higher expectation across all three areas (ps < 0.01). Conclusions: Future research is needed to examine differences in autistic adolescents' and parents' visions of the future, and to explore interventions to support families to work toward shared goals for the future. This study contributes to a growing body of literature emphasizing the importance of including the perspectives of autistic adolescents in research and for them to have an active and substantial role in their own transition planning.

Single and combined effects of plant-derived and synthetic cannabinoids on cognition and cannabinoid-associated withdrawal signs in mice.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: It has been suggested that the non-euphorogenic phytocannabinoid cannabidiol (CBD) can ameliorate adverse effects of Δ9 -tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). We determined whether CBD ameliorates cognitive deficits and withdrawal signs induced by cannabinoid CB1 /CB2 receptor agonists or produces these pharmacological effects on its own. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: The effects of THC or the CB1 /CB2 receptor full agonist WIN55212 alone, CBD alone or their combination were tested across a range of doses. Cognitive effects were assessed in C57BL/6 mice in a conditional discrimination task and in the Barnes maze. Cannabinoid withdrawal signs were assessed following precipitated withdrawal by acute administration of the CB1 receptor antagonist SR141716, the 5-HT1A receptor antagonist WAY100635, the TRPV1 receptor antagonist capsazepine or the adenosine A2A receptor antagonist SCH58261. KEY RESULTS: THC produced significant motor and cognitive impairment in the Barnes maze task, none of which were attenuated by the addition of CBD. CBD alone did not affect cognitive performance. Precipitation of withdrawal signs by SR141716 occurred in mice chronically treated with THC or WIN55,212. These withdrawal signs were not attenuated by addition of chronic CBD. Chronic treatment with CBD alone did not induce withdrawal signs precipitated by SR141716 or WAY100635. Chronic CBD treatment also produced anxiolysis, which was not altered by attempting to precipitate withdrawal-induced anxiety with a range of antagonists. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: CBD as a monotherapy may prove to be a safer pharmacological agent, than CB1 receptor agonists alone or in combination with CBD, for the treatment of several disorders. LINKED ARTICLES: This article is part of a themed section on 8th European Workshop on Cannabinoid Research. To view the other articles in this section visit http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bph.v176.10/issuetoc.

Single and combined effects of Δ9 -tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol in a mouse model of chemotherapy-induced neuropathic pain.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The non-psychoactive phytocannabinoid cannabidiol (CBD) can affect the pharmacological effects of Δ9 -tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). We tested the possible synergy between CBD and THC in decreasing mechanical sensitivity in a mouse model of paclitaxel-induced neuropathic pain. We also tested the effects of CBD on oxaliplatin- and vincristine-induced mechanical sensitivity. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: Paclitaxel-treated mice (8.0 mg·kg-1 i.p., days 1, 3, 5 and 7) were pretreated with CBD (0.625-20.0 mg·kg-1 i.p.), THC (0.625-20.0 mg·kg-1 i.p.) or CBD + THC (0.04 + 0.04-20.0 + 20.0 mg·kg-1 i.p.), and mechanical sensitivity was assessed on days 9, 14 and 21. Oxaliplatin-treated (6.0 mg·kg-1 i.p., day 1) or vincristine-treated mice (0.1 mg·kg-1 i.p. days 1-7) were pretreated with CBD (1.25-10.0 mg·kg-1 i.p.), THC (10.0 mg·kg-1 i.p.) or THC + CBD (0.16 mg·kg-1 THC + 0.16 mg·kg-1 CBD i.p.). KEY RESULTS: Both CBD and THC alone attenuated mechanical allodynia in mice treated with paclitaxel. Very low ineffective doses of CBD and THC were synergistic when given in combination. CBD also attenuated oxaliplatin- but not vincristine-induced mechanical sensitivity, while THC significantly attenuated vincristine- but not oxaliplatin-induced mechanical sensitivity. The low dose combination significantly attenuated oxaliplatin- but not vincristine-induced mechanical sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: CBD may be potent and effective at preventing the development of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, and its clinical use may be enhanced by co-administration of low doses of THC. These treatment strategies would increase the therapeutic window of cannabis-based pharmacotherapies.

A selective cannabinoid CB2 agonist attenuates damage and improves memory retention following stroke in mice.

AIMS: We have recently demonstrated that treatment with a cannabinoid CB2 agonist was protective in a mouse middle cerebral artery occlusion model of cerebral ischemia/reperfusion injury. The present study aimed to determine whether these protective effects of CB2 agonism would extend to a mouse photoinjury model of permanent ischemia and determine associated alterations in cognition and infarct size. MAIN METHODS: Mice received three injections of the CB2 selective agonist O-1966 or vehicle 1h prior to and 2 and 5days following induction of stroke. Infarct size was assessed at 1, 3, or 7days post-injury and learning and memory effects of injury and O-1966 treatment were assessed on days 6 and 7 using a novel object recognition task and an operant acquisition and retention procedure. KEY FINDINGS: O-1966 treated mice had significantly smaller infarct volumes compared with vehicle treated mice. Photoinjury was also associated with a significant memory impairment on day 7 post-injury, and this deficit was reversed with O-1966 treatment. Surprisingly, sham-operated mice receiving O-1966 treatment showed a significant learning deficit in both the recognition and operant tasks compared with vehicle treated sham mice. SIGNIFICANCE: We conclude that CB2 activation is protective against cognitive deficits and tissue damage following permanent ischemia, but may dysregulate glial or neuronal function of learning and memory circuits in the absence of injury and/or inflammation.