Autism biomarkers: challenges, pitfalls and possibilities.
Blood and gene tests for autism are still useless—spend your hours on skill-based assessment.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The author looked at every blood, brain, or gene test sold as an “autism biomarker.”
He asked: Do these tests tell us anything useful? Do they hurt families?
The paper is a narrative review, not new data—more like a field report.
What they found
None of the biomarker tests changed a child’s treatment plan.
Some parents paid thousands and still got no answers.
The author says: stop using these tests; watch behavior instead.
How this fits with other research
Fernell et al. (2014) argues the opposite. They say early screening is vital and we do not need 20-year studies to prove it. The two papers clash on timing, not on goals—both want kids helped faster.
Rutter (2013) warned the field years earlier: “don’t over-read weak biology.” Dubuque (2015) picks up that baton and says the over-reading is now hurting families.
Lord et al. (2005) asked for tougher methods in psychosocial trials. Dubuque (2015) makes the same demand for biological tests—same standard, new domain.
Why it matters
If a family asks you for a “genetic autism panel,” you can show them this paper. Explain that today no blood test tells us what skills to teach. Stick to direct observation, VB-MAPP, and ABLLS-R. You will save money and keep the focus on behavior that counts.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Print the one-page summary from M (2015) and keep it in your assessment folder to show parents why you stay with behavior samples.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Network perspectives, in their emphasis on components and their interactions, might afford the best approach to the complexities of the ASD realm. Categorical approaches are unlikely to be fruitful as one should not expect to find a single or even predominant underlying cause of autism behavior across individuals. It is possible that the complex, highly interactive, heterogeneous and individualistic nature of the autism realm is intractable in terms of identifying clinically useful biomarker tests. It is hopeful from an emergenic perspective that small corrective changes in a single component of a deleterious network/configuration might have large beneficial consequences on developmental trajectories and in later treatment. It is suggested that the relationship between ASD and intellectual disability might be fundamentally different in single-gene versus nonsyndromic ASD. It is strongly stated that available biomarker "tests" for autism/ASD will do more harm than good. Finally, the serotonin-melatonin-oxidative stress-placental intersection might be an especially fruitful area of biological investigation.
Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2015 · doi:10.1007/s10803-014-2225-4