14305 results for ""Pennsylvania+German"+ACS+study+'Socius'+open+access"

in 10.95 milliseconds.

• Single molecule molecular inversion probe capture developed using the CIViC database

  This study evaluated the use of the Clinical Interpretations of Variants in Cancer database (CIViC) to develop an Open-sourced CIViC Annotation Pipeline (OpenCAP). OpenCAP is a resource that allows users to develop a clinical capture panel that can be linked back to clinical summaries within the CIViC database. This method for capture panel development and variant annotation was tested using 27 cancer samples from 5 tumor subtypes with original exome or genome sequencing. Specifically, using OpenCAP, 111 variants were identified as relevant for the capture panel and 2,027 smMIPs were designed to target these variants. The smMIPs panel design was employed on all samples to validate the capture panel design. When compared to original sequencing, the CIViC smMIPs capture panel demonstrated a 95% sensitivity for variant detection (n = 61 variants). Additionally, the CIViC smMIPs capture panel identified 182 additional clinically relevant variants that had been missed on original sequencing.

  Study phs001890

• FEGA and European GDI: working together to improve human health

  The Federated EGA is a global resource for discovery of and access to sensitive human omics and associated data consented for secondary use, through a network of human data repositories to accelerate biomedical research and improve human health. The Federated EGA network was launched in September 2022 with five inaugural nodes, and since 2023 seven operational nodes can share data across national borders in adherence to European and national laws. A few weeks after FEGA's official launch, in November 2022, the European Genomic Data Infrastructure (GDI) project was kicked-off . This European Commission co-funded project, coordinated by ELIXIR, is aimed to deliver federated, sustainable and secure data infrastructure to access genomic and related phenotypic and clinical data across Europe. This project supports the aim of the 1+MG initiative (25 EU countries, Norway and UK) to enable personalised medicine and health through a shared framework and infrastructure for securely accessing and integrating high quality genomic data and other health data across borders.1+MG will be an integral component of the European Health Data Space (EHDS) for secondary use (Healthdata@EU) as an authorised participant. How are Federated EGA and GDI similar? Given their shared visions, the Federated EGA and European GDI networks have a lot in common. To begin, they share the same overall goal of establishing networks of “nodes” that host sensitive human data within a jurisdiction and connecting these nodes in a global network to support data discovery and promote human genome data access for research and healthcare. FEGA and GDI are both initially focused on enabling access to human genomic data, while FEGA ambition is to expand the scope to clinical research data and other omics data in the future. FEGA and GDI are both built on open and interoperable software solutions, a subset of which are based on the LocalEGA components. FEGA and GDI implementation solutions are based on international community standards, for example those developed by the Global Alliance for Genomics and Health, which contributes to making them interoperable. Both FEGA and GDI allow for the nodes to make use of any solution that is fully compatible. As illustrated in Figure 1, a final key point is the significant overlap of institutions involved in envisioning and operating FEGA and GDI nodes, with the clear wish to keep them interoperable in the future. What distinguishes Federated EGA from GDI? Despite being largely similar, there are some differences between the FEGA and GDI networks, which we aim to clarify in this post. The first difference is the governance model that the nodes will operate to comply with national laws and GDPR. In the FEGA network, nodes have taken inspiration from the EGA data access model, where the infrastructure is a data processor of the hosted data and data controllership remains with the originating Data Access Committees (i.e. Data controllers) for each dataset. On the other hand, in the GDI network the controllership of datasets will be transferred to a 1+MG European Digital Infrastructure Consortium (EDIC) legal entity created by the Member States (MS), who will make data access decisions, with data holders having veto powers for their datasets. Importantly, FEGA nodes have the flexibility to choose another model to fit with their data protection framework, including becoming data controllers for their datasets. The second difference is the inclusion criteria for data. While FEGA nodes are designed to accept almost any type of omics data in need of control access (e.g. genomics, transcriptomics, genotyping, single cells sequencing, patient-tracked metagenomics), GDI nodes are initially, but not only, focused on accepting whole genome and exome sequencing data and affiliated data from sources such as (i) the Genome of Europe use case of the 1+MG initiative which specifically aims to fulfil the mission of building “a European network of national genomic reference cohorts of at least 500,000 citizens”) (ii) data collection of other types of genomic data identified by countries through the 1+MG dashboard and (iii) genomic data coming from data holders which would need to fulfil EHDS requirements. The third difference is the maturity of the software stacks. The FEGA network provides a set of software for data and metadata submission, storage, permissions management, and file distribution (the LocalEGA package). GDI is building a complete set of open source reference for the five functionalities covering the full data life cycle (a few more compared to the LocalEGA) including federated processing (analytics, AI/ML), which is still under active development. Notably, one of the GDI functionalities - storage and interfaces - can be satisfied by using the LocalEGA storage solution, highlighting the ability of FEGA and GDI to be interoperable. In both FEGA and GDI, nodes are allowed to use alternative solutions as long as they are fully interoperable with the networks. Figure 1 provides a simple overview of these described commonalities and differences. Figure1: schematic overview of the main commonalities and difference among a FEGA and a GDI node Can the same institute run a FEGA and a GDI node at the same time? The answer is Yes! We believe this is entirely possible and encouraged. As long as 1+MG requirements are continuously fulfilled in the implementation. The same trained personnel could operate the infrastructure and leverage the same national funding to run a FEGA and a GDI node. Several European nodes, especially GDI vanguard nodes like Norway, Sweden, Finland and Spain are following this model. The idea is that a lot of the work can be reused, given the overlapping scope and the interoperable technology. Thus, the hosted datasets can be discovered via the two catalogues, perhaps accessible under the same or different governance models. From a FEGA node perspective, the GDI datasets could simply be a subset of the datasets hosted in the FEGA node, which have their specific governance as any other. What's next? So, the amazing teams of people building the Federated EGA network and the European GDI network are working together to create infrastructures able to provide secure access to human genomic and associated data around Europe. Because we all know how much human genomics can improve healthcare and precision medicine. And we all want to collaborate to make it happen. This article has been reviewed collectively by members of the EGA and the GDI coordination team.

  Blog fega-and-gdi

• Single cell atlas of human glioma

  We profiled 87 primary-recurrentpatient-matched paired GBM specimens with single-nucleus RNA and bulk-DNA sequencing and single-cell open-chromatin and spatial transcriptomics/proteomics assays. We found that recurrent GBMs are characterized by a shift to a mesenchymal phenotype in response to therapy

  Dataset EGAD00001008811

• AmsterdamUMC Data Access Committee for the MAPS study

  The current data access committee reviews and assesses data requests of researchers that seek to gain access to data acquired from the MAping the Peritoneal immune System (MAPS) project as performed at the AmsterdamUMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

  Dac EGAC50000000096

• Mechanisms_of_patient_response_to_Dabrafenib_in_Melanoma

  Samples will be from the BRF113683 (BREAK-3) study which is a Phase III Randomized, Open-label Study Comparing GSK2118436 to Dacarbazine (DTIC) in Previously Untreated Subjects With BRAF Mutation Positive Advanced (Stage III) or Metastatic (Stage IV) Melanoma (n=250 enrolled)•NGS [Agilent capture (Sanger V2 panel): 360 genes and 20 gene fusions; Illumina HiSEQ Sequencing]•CNV: [via NGS or Affy SNP 6.0 or Illumina Omni (TBD)]Bioinformatics: Analysis will be performed using core Sanger informatics pipelines similar to those previously described (Papaemmanuil E et al. (2013) Blood. 22:3616 -3627). Briefly, copy number analysis will be performed using the ASCAT algorithm, and base substitutions, small insertions and deletions using the CAVEMAN and Pindel algorithms, respectively. Statistical approaches including generalized linear models will be used to predict clinical variables such as maximum clinical response and duration of response using genetic data. Sanger and EBI to conduct analysis; Raw data and correlation with clinical endpoints to be analyzed by both EBI/Sanger and GSK (unique pipeline analyses to increase call confidence)

  Study EGAS00001000946

• The genetic structure of Norway

  The aim of the present study was to describe the genetic structure of the Norwegian population using genotypes from 6369 unrelated individuals with detailed information about places of residence. Using standard single marker- and haplotype-based approaches, we report evidence of two regions with distinctive patterns of genetic variation, one in the far northeast, and another in the south of Norway, as indicated by fixation indices, haplotype sharing, homozygosity and effective population size. We detect and quantify a component of Uralic Sami ancestry that is enriched in the North. On a finer scale, we find that rates of migration have been affected by topography like mountain ridges. In the broader Scandinavian context, we detect elevated relatedness between the mid- and northern border areas towards Sweden. The main finding of this study is that despite Norway’s long maritime history and as a former Danish territory, the region closest to mainland Europe in the south appears to have been the most isolated region in Norway, highlighting the open sea as a barrier to gene flow into Norway.

  Study EGAS00001004826

• Experimental PfSPZ Vaccine in Adults Without Malaria

  The study was performed to evaluate whole-blood transcriptomic profiles via RNA-seq before, during, and after immunization with the PfSPZ Vaccine in malaria-naïve, healthy adults enrolled in VRC 312 (NCT01441167). VRC 312 was the second study of the PfSPZ Vaccine and the first study to evaluate intravenous (IV) administration of this vaccine. The study was an open-label evaluation of the safety, tolerability, immunogenicity, and protective efficacy of the vaccine at successively higher administered by the IV route. The highest dosages were evaluated for protection against a malaria challenge after 4 to 6 vaccinations. The primary objectives of the study were related to the safety and tolerability of the vaccine at the 4 different dosage levels when administered IV; the secondary objectives were related to PfSPZ vaccine-mediated protection against Plasmodium falciparum (Pf) challenge at the 3 higher dosage levels, and the exploratory objectives were related to the immunogenicity of the PfSPZ Vaccine and defining an immune correlate of protection. To further determine potential molecular correlates of immunogenicity and/or protection, RNA-seq was performed on whole blood collected from subjects in all dose groups at time points before, during, and after immunization.

  Study phs002422

• EGA account management

  How to manage your EGA account Welcome to the documentation page for creating an EGA user. The European Genome-Phenome Archive (EGA) is a platform for archiving, managing, and sharing human genomic and phenotypic data. To submit, access, and manage requests for the data hosted on the EGA platform, users are required to register for an account. This documentation page provides step-by-step instructions for creating an EGA user account, as well as information on the different types of EGA user accounts and their associated privileges. You can check the EGA data flow for a better understanding. Manage EGA account step-by-step guide Contact Information Public Keys Password Authenticator Federated Identity Sessions Request an EGA account step-by-step guide Fill in this form.You cannot use a generic email account (e.g., Gmail). Make sure you use your institutional email account.Your email is by default your username.The criteria for a strong password is: It should contain between 8 and 32 charactersIt should contain at least one uppercase letterIt should contain at least one numberIt should contain at least one special characterYou will need to wait for the Helpdesk team to check your identity. Please allow two business days for this step.After the Helpdesk validation step, you will receive an email with a link to validate your institutional email.Click the link to verify your email. It will redirect you to the EGA website.As soon as your account has been validated, you will be able to start adding more information to your EGA profile. For that, you first need to log in using your credentials from step 1. Manage EGA account step-by-step guide As a logged-in user, go to your profile by clicking on Welcome > My Profile. To modify it, click the Edit button.You will see the following options: Contact Information In this section, you can modify the personal information of your EGA account. Public Keys Adding a public key is necessary for downloading data via Live Outbox distribution. If you don’t know how to generate your key, you can follow the instructions available on How do I create a key? Password In the Password tab, you can change your password anytime to ensure the security of your account. However, if you receive an email notifying you that your password was modified and you did not initiate the change, it could be a sign that your account has been compromised. In this case, you should immediately contact our Helpdesk team to report the issue and receive assistance in restoring your account security. Authenticator You can set your two-factor authentication (2FA) system for your EGA account as an identity and access management security method that requires two forms of identification to access resources and data. To obtain your code, please follow the instructions below, also available in the Authenticator tab in your profile. Sessions The Sessions tab displays a list of all devices where you are currently logged in as an EGA user. This includes any open sessions you have on your computer, phone, or other devices. By reviewing the list of active sessions, you can monitor the devices that have access to your account and ensure that there are no unauthorised logins. If you notice any suspicious activity, you can close the sessions from this page to immediately terminate access to your account from the unauthorised device.

  Documentation how-to-manage-your-account

• Cholesterol and Pharmacogenetics (CAP) Study

  The Cholesterol and Pharmacogenetics Study was a 6-week open label, non-randomized study of 40mg/day simvastatin treatment in 335 black and 609 white (944 total) men and women. Plasma lipids and lipoproteins were measured on two occasions prior to treatment and at 4 and 6 weeks of treatment. The study was designed to test for genetic associations with baseline measurements and changes in response to simvastatin treatment. Whole genome genotyping was performed on 592 white CAP study participants in two stages. In Stage 1, 304 were genotyped for 314,621 SNPs to tag for common genomic variation. In Stage 2, 290 participants were genotyped, including 280 who were genotyped for 620,901 SNPs. Two samples were excluded due to gender discrepancies. More recently, CAP self-reported black participants were genotyped on Illumina Omni2.5Exome chips. PolyA-selected strand-specific RNA-seq libraries were generated in several batches from lymphoblastoid cell lines (LCLs) derived from 268 white and 165 black CAP participants. The LCLs were exposed to sham buffer (control) or 2 uM activated simvastatin for 24 hours, producing a total of 866 100/101 bp paired end RNA-seq libraries sequenced on Illumina HiSeq 2000 machines.

  Study phs000481

• A phase II trial of the aurora kinase A inhibitor alisertib for patients with castration resistant and neuroendocrine prostate cancer: efficacy and biomarker evaluation

  Neuroendocrine prostate cancer (NEPC) is an aggressive variant of prostate cancer that may develop de novo or as a mechanism of treatment resistance. N-myc is capable of driving NEPC progression. Alisertib inhibits the interaction between N-myc and its stabilizing factor Aurora-A, inhibiting N-myc signaling, and suppressing tumor growth. In this single arm, multi-institutional open label phase 2 clinical trial of alisertib, sixty men were treated with alisertib 50mg twice daily for 7 days every 21-days. Eligibility included metastatic prostate cancer and at least one: small cell neuroendocrine morphology; ≥50% neuroendocrine marker expression; new liver metastases without PSA progression; elevated serum neuroendocrine markers. The primary endpoint was six-month radiographic progression free survival. Pre-treatment biopsies were evaluated by whole exome and RNA-seq.

  Study phs001666