Back

Neuroanatomical Subtypes of Callous-Unemotional Traits in a Community Sample of Youth

Murtha, K.; Antoniades, M.; Seidlitz, J.; Barzilay, R.; Moore, T. M.; Shinohara, R.; Satterthwaite, T. D.; Kimonis, E.; Davatzikos, C.; Waller, R.

2026-07-16 neuroscience
10.64898/2026.07.14.738524 bioRxiv
Show abstract

ImportanceCallous Unemotional (CU) traits are associated with significant clinical and neurophysiological heterogeneity that may affect treatment effectiveness. ObjectiveTo uncover neuroanatomical subtypes of CU traits using weakly-supervised machine learning and assess whether emerging subtypes differ on relevant clinical, temperamental, and environmental constructs. Design, Setting, and ParticipantsImaging data was from the longitudinal Adolescent, Brain, Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study. Participants were 9-10 years old at baseline (M=9.925, 69.9% male) and included 222 children with CU traits and 234 typically developing controls matched on age, sex and income. Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe weakly-supervised heterogeneity through discriminative analysis (HYDRA) model was trained on grey matter (GM) volumes from 84 regions of interest (ROIs) and tested for reproducibility using cross-validation and permutation testing. Derived subtypes were compared cross-sectionally and prospectively on relevant clinical, temperamental, and environmental measures and subsequent GM volume at 2-year follow up. ResultsHYDRA revealed an optimal 2-subtype solution within children with CU traits. Subtypes showed comparable levels of aggression that were significantly higher than typically developing controls. At the same time, subtype 1 had larger GM volume, fewer internalizing symptoms, and less adversity exposure, while subtype 2 was characterized by smaller GM volume, more internalizing symptoms, and more adversity exposure. Conclusions and RelevanceThis study provides evidence of neuroanatomically distinct subtypes of CU traits characterized by different clinical and etiological profiles, with implications for diagnosis and treatment.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.