14388 results for ""Pennsylvania+German"+ACS+study+'Socius'+open+access"

in 36.88 milliseconds.

• Research Program on Genes, Environment and Health (RPGEH)

  The Kaiser Permanente Research Program on Genes, Environment, and Health (RPGEH) is a resource developed to facilitate research on genetic and environmental factors on common diseases and healthy aging. The RPGEH resource links biospecimens, health surveys, and comprehensive electronic medical records on broadly consented adult members of Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Plan, Northern California Region (KPNC). KPNC is an integrated health care delivery system with a membership of approximately 3.3 million people in northern California. The membership of KPNC is representative of the general population in the 14 county area in which facilities are located, although extremes of income are underrepresented. At the end of 2013, the RPGEH resource included: (1) demographic and behavioral surveys from over 430,000 participants; (2) biospecimens (DNA, serum, plasma, and/or saliva) from over 204,000 participants, including over 13,000 pregnant women; (3) genome-wide genotype data (70 billion SNP genotypes) on over 100,000 participants, including the Genetic Epidemiology Research on Adult Health and Aging (GERA) cohort; and (4) the longitudinal electronic medical records of the participants. The RPGEH was developed beginning in 2005 at the Division of Research of Kaiser Permanente Northern California by Catherine Schaefer (Director), Neil Risch (Co-Director), Lisa Croen, Eric Jorgenson, Lawrence Kushi, Charles Quesenberry, Sarah Rowell, Carol Somkin, Stephen Van den Eeden, Larry Walter, and Rachel Whitmer. Funding of the RPGEH was provided to C. Schaefer (PI) and N. Risch (co-PI) by the Wayne and Gladys Valley Foundation, The Ellison Medical Foundation, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, and the Kaiser Permanente National and Regional Community Benefit Programs. The GERA cohort was funded by a grant from NIH to RPGEH and UCSF (RC2 AG036607; C. Schaefer and N. Risch, PIs). At the time of the award of the RC2 project in late 2009, the RPGEH had established a cohort of about 140,000 individuals who had answered a detailed survey, provided saliva samples for extraction of DNA, and given broad consent for the use of their data in studies of health and disease. Survey and Cohort Recruitment. Initially, the RPGEH developed electronic disease registries to enable identification of phenotypes, using algorithms applied to EMR data. In 2007, the RPGEH mailed a four page survey to 1.9 million adult (≥ 18 years old) members of KPNC who had been members for two years or more, to obtain data on demographic and behavioral factors complementary to the clinical data in the EMR. The survey materials included a cover letter introducing the RPGEH, a two page list of Frequently Asked Questions, and the survey, which included questions on demographic factors such as education, race-ethnicity, income and marital status, dietary factors, physical activity, smoking, and alcohol consumption, as well as reproductive history and reproductive health. Members whose electronic medical records indicated a preference for written communications in Chinese or Spanish received survey materials both in English and a Chinese or Spanish translation. Approximately 400,000 completed surveys were returned. Saliva Sample Collection. Beginning in July 2008, respondents to the survey were asked to sign and return a consent form and authorization for use and disclosure of protected health information. The consent form authorized broad use of biospecimens, survey data, and data from participants' electronic health records for use in studies of genetic and environmental influences on health and disease. Respondents who returned completed consent forms were mailed (Oragene) saliva collection kits; more than 132,000 saliva samples were collected in two years. Completed saliva kits were scanned and archived in a temporary biorepository at the KPNC Division of Research. In late 2009, the RPGEH began collection of saliva samples from the California Men's Health Study (CMHS), a cohort that had been previously assembled in 2002-2003 and had been excluded from the RPGEH survey mailing with the intent of later adding CMHS participants to the assembled RPGEH cohort. The CMHS was developed to facilitate research on prostate cancer and other conditions in older men; the study protocol is described in Enger, et al., 2006. It enrolled and surveyed more than 40,000 men in KPNC, ages 45-69 years, who were members of KPNC during 2002-2003. CMHS men completed two mailed surveys with demographic and behavioral data similar to that of the RPGEH. The data on analogous variables were reconciled and integrated with the data derived from the RPGEH cohort for use in the RPGEH resource. By 2011, RPGEH collected approximately 15,400 saliva samples from men participating in the CMHS. RPGEH Access and Collaborations Website and Procedures. The RPGEH maintains a web portal for inquiries and applications for collaboration and access to data. The url is: https://rpgehportal.kaiser.org/. RPGEH has an application process and an Access Review Committee that reviews applications for collaboration and use. For more information, please contact RPGEH through the website.

  Study phs000788

• Drug screening of patient-derived organoids from colorectal peritoneal metastases

  Colorectal cancer (CRC) patients with peritoneal metastases (CRPM) have limited treatment options and the lowest CRC survival rates. We trialed the possibility of organoid directed precision treatment for CRPM patients. CRPM organoids (peritonoids) isolated from patients underwent next-generation sequencing and medium-throughput drug panel testing ex vivo to identify specific drug sensitivities for each patient. We measured the utility of such a service including: success of peritonoid generation, time to cultivate peritonoids, reproducibility of the medium-throughput drug testing, and documented changes to clinical therapy as a result of the testing. Peritonoids were successfully generated and validated from 68% (19/28) of patients undergoing standard care. Genomic and drug profiling was completed within 8 weeks and a formal report ranking drug sensitivities was provided to the medical oncology team upon failure of standard care treatment. This resulted in a treatment change for 2 patients, one of whom had a partial response despite previously progressing on multiple rounds of standard care chemotherapy. The barrier to implementing this technology in Australia is the need for drug access and funding for off-label indications. In conclusion, our approach is feasible, reproducible and can guide novel therapeutic choices in this poor prognosis cohort, where new treatment options are urgently needed. This platform is relevant to many solid organ malignancies.

  Study phs002023

• eMERGE Geisinger eGenomic Medicine (GeM) - MyCode Project Controls

  A research cohort of adult Geisinger Clinic patients was enrolled from community-based primary care clinics of the Geisinger Health System. Patients were eligible for enrollment if they were a primary care patient of a Geisinger Clinic physician and were scheduled for a non-emergent clinic visit. All participants provided written informed consent and HIPAA authorization. Consenting patient agreed to provide blood samples for broad biomedical research use, and permission to access data in their Geisinger electronic medical record for research. The enrollment rate was 90% of patients approached. The demographics of the cohort approximate those of the Geisinger Clinic outpatient population. Research blood samples were collected during an outpatient clinical phlebotomy encounter. Research blood samples are coded and stored in a central biorepository. Samples are linkable to clinical data in a de-identified manner for research via an IRB-approved data broker process. For genomic analysis, DNA is extracted from EDTA-anticoagulated whole blood. For the initial eMERGE Geisinger eGenomic Medicine (GeM) genotyping project, a subset of 1,232 unique samples were genotyped using Illumina HumanOmniExpress-12 v1.0 arrays, and used as population controls for other Geisinger Clinic case cohorts, including abdominal aortic aneurysm and gastric bypass surgery cases. These samples were selected from a larger subset of approximately 6,000 MyCode DNA samples using a partial matching algorithm that included age, sex, and body mass index as variables.

  Study phs000381

• Serrated Colorectal Cancer: An Emerging Disease Subtype

  This dataset represents two combined study populations. Serrated Colorectal Cancer: An Emerging Disease Subtype (called the Advanced Colorectal Cancer of Serrated Subtype Study or ACCESS Study) was a grant awarded to investigate a newly-recognized, biologically-distinct subtype of colorectal cancer (CRC) called “serrated CRC.” The objective of this project was to characterize factors related to the genetic predisposition, clinical presentation, and prognosis of serrated CRC. The study recruited incident invasive CRC cases diagnosed between April 2016 and December 2018, aged 20-74 years at diagnosis. Cases were identified through the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) cancer registry serving 13 counties in western Washington State. Eligibility for all individuals was limited to those who were English-speaking and could consent. Participation included completing a baseline epidemiologic questionnaire shortly after diagnosis, optional donation of a saliva sample for genetic analysis, and optional consent to release of medical records and tissue specimens related to their diagnosis. Tumor specimens were tested for serrated CRC-defining molecular characteristics. Further, we have vital status on all participants and cause of death on those that have died since enrollment. Hormones and Colon Cancer: Epigenetic Subtypes, Risks, and Survival (called the Post-Menopausal Hormones Study or PMH Study) was a grant awarded to investigate the impact of post-menopausal hormone use on colon cancer risk, tumor molecular characteristics, and outcomes. Eligible cases were females, newly diagnosed with invasive colorectal adenocarcinoma between October 1998 and February 2002, aged 50 to 74 years. Cases were residents of 10 out of the 13 counties in western Washington State served by the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) cancer registry. Eligibility for all individuals was limited to those who were English-speaking with available telephone numbers, in which they could be contacted. Unrelated population-based controls were randomly selected according to age distribution (in 5-year age intervals) of the eligible cases by using lists of licensed drivers from the Washington State Department of Licensing (for individuals aged 50 to 64 years) and rosters from the Health Care Financing Administration (now the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, for individuals older than 64 years). Participation included completing a baseline epidemiologic questionnaire, optional donation of a saliva sample for genetic analysis, and (for cases only) optional consent to release of medical records and tissue specimens related to their diagnosis. Tumor specimens were tested for epigenetic and other molecular characteristics. The ACCESS study was supported by funding from the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health (NCI/NIH) (R01CA196337, PI: Newcomb, PA), as was the PMH Study (R01CA076366, PI: Newcomb, PA). Additional support for the PMH Study came from the Seattle site of the Colon Cancer Family Registry (SCCFR) (U01CA167551, PI: Jenkins, M, and U01/U24CA074794, PI: Newcomb, PA). Additional support for case ascertainment was provided by the Cancer Surveillance System of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, which is funded by Contract Number HHSN261201300012I; NCI Control Number: N01 PC-2013-00012; Contract Number HHSN261201800004I; and NCI Control Number: N01 PC-2018-00004 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program of the National Cancer Institute with additional support from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center and the State of Washington. This research was also supported by the Genomics and Bioinformatics, Comparative Medicine, Specialized Pathology, Collaborative Data Services, and Experimental Histopathology Shared Resources of the Fred Hutch/University of Washington Cancer Consortium (P30 CA015704).Tumor marker testing was performed using formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded diagnostic tumor tissue specimens, and DNA extracted from those specimens. Testing for microsatellite instability (MSI) was based on either a 10-gene panel (BAT25, BAT26, BAT40, MYCL, D5S346, D17S250, ACTC, D18S55, D10S197, BAT34C4) or a 4-marker immunohistochemistry panel of DNA mismatch repair proteins (MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2). CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP) testing was based on a validated quantitative DNA methylation assay using a five-gene panel (CACNA1G, IGF2, NEUROG1, RUNX3, SOCS1) or eight-gene panel (CACNA1G, IGF2, NEUROG1, RUNX3, SOCS1, MLH1, CRABP1, CDKN2A). Somatic p.V600E BRAF mutation status was tested for using a fluorescent allele-specific PCR assay. KRAS mutations in codons 12 and 13 were also assessed through forward and reverse sequencing of amplified tumor DNA. DNA was extracted from blood/saliva samples using conventional methods. The genotyping panel completed was the Build37 OncoArray500K-C, including 1%-6% blinded duplicates to monitor the quality of the genotyping. Quality control procedures were performed to 1) make sure that there were no patterns of missing data by batch, study, or plate, 2) check for gender discrepancies and kinship, 3) complete Principal Component Analysis, and 4) test for Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE). Samples were excluded based on call rate, heterozygosity, unexpected duplicates, gender discrepancy, and unexpectedly high identity-by-descent or unexpected genotypic concordance (>65%) with another individual. In addition, variants were excluded based on call rate (98%), lack of HWE in controls (P

  Study phs002171

• Framingham Cohort

  Startup of Framingham Heart Study. Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death and serious illness in the United States. In 1948, the Framingham Heart Study (FHS) -- under the direction of the National Heart Institute (now known as the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, NHLBI) -- embarked on a novel and ambitious project in health research. At the time, little was known about the general causes of heart disease and stroke, but the death rates for CVD had been increasing steadily since the beginning of the century and had become an American epidemic. The objective of the FHS was to identify the common factors or characteristics that contribute to CVD by following its development over a long period of time in a large group of participants who had not yet developed overt symptoms of CVD or suffered a heart attack or stroke. Design of Framingham Heart Study. In 1948, the researchers recruited 5,209 men and women between the ages of 30 and 62 from the town of Framingham, Massachusetts, and began the first round of extensive physical examinations and lifestyle interviews that they would later analyze for common patterns related to CVD development. Since 1948, the subjects have returned to the study every two years for an examination consisting of a detailed medical history, physical examination, and laboratory tests, and in 1971, the study enrolled a second-generation cohort -- 5,124 of the original participants' adult children and their spouses -- to participate in similar examinations. The second examination of the Offspring cohort occurred eight years after the first examination, and subsequent examinations have occurred approximately every four years thereafter. In April 2002 the Study entered a new phase: the enrollment of a third generation of participants, the grandchildren of the original cohort. The first examination of the Third Generation Study was completed in July 2005 and involved 4,095 participants. Thus, the FHS has evolved into a prospective, community-based, three generation family study. The FHS is a joint project of the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute and Boston University. Research Areas in the Framingham Heart Study. Over the years, careful monitoring of the FHS population has led to the identification of the major CVD risk factors -- high blood pressure, high blood cholesterol, smoking, obesity, diabetes, and physical inactivity -- as well as a great deal of valuable information on the effects of related factors such as blood triglyceride and HDL cholesterol levels, age, gender, and psychosocial issues. Risk factors have been identified for the major components of CVD, including coronary heart disease, stroke, intermittent claudication, and heart failure. It is also clear from research in the FHS and other studies that substantial subclinical vascular disease occurs in the blood vessels, heart and brain that precedes clinical CVD. With recent advances in technology, the FHS has enhanced its research capabilities and capitalized on its inherent resources by the conduct of high resolution imaging to detect and quantify subclinical vascular disease in the major blood vessels, heart and brain. These studies have included ultrasound studies of the heart (echocardiography) and carotid arteries, computed tomography studies of the heart and aorta, and magnetic resonance imaging studies of the brain, heart, and aorta. Although the Framingham cohort is primarily white, the importance of the major CVD risk factors identified in this group have been shown in other studies to apply almost universally among racial and ethnic groups, even though the patterns of distribution may vary from group to group. In the past half century, the Study has produced approximately 1,200 articles in leading medical journals. The concept of CVD risk factors has become an integral part of the modern medical curriculum and has led to the development of effective treatment and preventive strategies in clinical practice. In addition to research studies focused on risk factors, subclinical CVD and clinically apparent CVD, Framingham investigators have also collaborated with leading researchers from around the country and throughout the world on projects involving some of the major chronic illnesses in men and women, including dementia, osteoporosis and arthritis, nutritional deficiencies, eye diseases, hearing disorders, and chronic obstructive lung diseases. Genetic Research in the Framingham Heart Study. While pursuing the Study's established research goals, the NHLBI and the Framingham investigators has expanded its research mission into the study of genetic factors underlying CVD and other disorders. Over the past two decades, DNA has been collected from blood samples and from immortalized cell lines obtained from Original Cohort participants, members of the Offspring Cohort and the Third Generation Cohort. Several large-scale genotyping projects have been conducted in the past decade. Genome-wide linkage analysis has been conducted using genotypes of approximately 400 microsatellite markers that have been completed in over 9,300 subjects in all three generations. Analyses using microsatellite markers completed in the original cohort and offspring cohorts have resulted in over 100 publications, including many publications from the Genetics Analysis Workshop 13. Several other recent collaborative projects have completed thousands of SNP genotypes for candidate gene regions in subsets of FHS subjects with available DNA. These projects include the Cardiogenomics Program of the NHLBI's Programs for Genomics Applications, the genotyping of ~3000 SNPs in inflammation genes, and the completion of a genome-wide scan of 100,000 SNPs using the Affymetrix 100K Genechip. Framingham Cohort Phenotype Data. The phenotype database contains a vast array of phenotype information available in all three generations. These will include the quantitative measures of the major risk factors such as systolic blood pressure, total and HDL cholesterol, fasting glucose, and cigarette use, as well as anthropomorphic measures such as body mass index, biomarkers such as fibrinogen and CRP, and electrocardiography measures such as the QT interval. Many of these measures have been collected repeatedly in the original and offspring cohorts. Also included in the SHARe database will be an array of recently collected biomarkers, subclinical disease imaging measures, clinical CVD outcomes as well as an array of ancillary studies. The phenotype data is located here in the top-level study phs000007 Framingham Cohort. To view the phenotype variables collected from the Framingham Cohort, please click on the "Variables" tab above. The Framingham Cohort is utilized in the following dbGaP substudies. To view genotypes, analysis, expression data, other molecular data, and derived variables collected in these substudies, please click on the following substudies below or in the "Substudies" section of this top-level study page phs000007 Framingham Cohort. phs000342 Framingham SHARe phs000282 Framingham CARe phs000363 Framingham SABRe phs000307 Framingham Medical Resequencing phs000401 Framingham ESP Heart-GO phs000651 Framingham CHARGE-S phs000724 Framingham DNA Methylation phs001610 Framingham T2D-GENES phs002558 Framingham ADSP phs002559 Framingham BRIDGET phs002560 Framingham Cholesterol phs002611 Framingham Post-Mortem Brain Tissue phs002938 Framingham Molecular QTL The unflagging commitment of the research participants in the NHLBI FHS has made more than a half century of research success possible. For decades, the FHS has made its data and DNA widely available to qualified investigators throughout the world through the Limited Access Datasets and the FHS DNA Committee, and the SHARe database will continue that tradition by allowing access to qualified investigators who agree to the requirements of data access. With the SHARe database, we continue with an ambitious research agenda and look forward to new discoveries in the decades to come.

  Study phs000007

• A Single-Cell and Spatial Atlas of Early Human Olfactory Development

  The human nasal region is a complex structure derived from neural crest and placodal lineages, but its development remains poorly understood due to limited fetal tissue access and its intricate architecture. To address this, we created a single-nucleus and spatial transcriptomic atlas of the human fetal nasal region using tissue from 10 fetuses between 7 and 12 post-conceptional weeks. Single-nucleus RNA sequencing (snRNA-seq) revealed 34 distinct cell types, including epithelial, cartilaginous, immune, neuronal, glial, muscular, and vascular cells. By integrating snRNA-seq with multiplexed error-robust fluorescence in situ hybridization (MERFISH), we tracked dynamic changes in cell composition and gene expression over time in the olfactory epithelium (OE) and surrounding nasal regions. We identified novel markers of olfactory sensory neuron development and key pathways regulating epithelial patterning and OE morphogenesis. Notably, we observed early molecular signatures consistent with the "one neuron-one receptor" model, with spatially organized expression of 171 olfactory receptor genes. Together, this study presents the first integrated molecular and spatial framework of early human nasal development. It offers an unprecedented molecular blueprint of olfactory system formation and serves as a foundational resource for embryologists and developmental biologists studying sensory neurogenesis, epithelial patterning, and congenital disorders.

  Dataset EGAD50000001712

• Bulk RNAseq FASTQ files of WNT7B reporter PDAC organoids (P28 and P40) sorted by mNeonGreen high and low

  This dataset contains raw FASTQ files from bulk RNA sequencing of two patient-derived PDAC organoid lines (P28 and P40) carrying a WNT7B reporter knock-in. Organoids were sorted into mNeonGreen high (WNT-high) and low (WNT-low) populations, with three biological replicates per sorted population. RNA was extracted using the Qiagen QiaSymphony SP system, and libraries were prepared with the Illumina Truseq stranded polyA kit. Sequencing was performed on an Illumina NextSeq2000 platform using single-end 50bp reads. Quality control was conducted with FastQC, and reads were trimmed with TrimGalore as appropriate. Data are controlled-access and intended for transcriptomic analysis of WNT7B expression-dependent transcriptional programs in PDAC organoids.

  Dataset EGAD50000002218

• Single cell RNAseq FASTQ files of three PDAC organoid lines (P28, P40, P47) using SORT-seq

  This dataset contains raw FASTQ files from single cell RNA sequencing of three patient-derived pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) organoid lines (P28, P40, P47) cultured under standard conditions. For each line, single cells were FACS sorted into 384-well capture plates, with each well containing a 50nl droplet of barcoded primers. Plates were processed following an adapted SORT-seq protocol, and cDNA libraries were generated using CEL-Seq2 with TruSeq small RNA primers (Illumina). Sequencing was performed on an Illumina NextSeq500 platform using paired-end reads (read 1: 26 cycles, index read: 6 cycles, read 2: 60 cycles). Data are controlled-access and intended for single cell transcriptomic analysis of PDAC organoid heterogeneity and WNT pathway activity.

  Dataset EGAD50000002220

• DAC for Central African ancient demography processes NGS dataset

  Title DAC Ancient tree-topologies and gene-flow processes among human lineages in Africa Contacts: Paul Verdu +33144057317 paul.verdu@mnhn.fr CNRS-MNHN-Université de Paris UMR7206 Eco-anthropology Short description The Data Access Committee for acess to genotype and sample information used in the article "Ancient tree-topologies and gene-flow processes among human lineages in Africa" by Gwenna Breton et al. 2025 ensures that data-access requests comply with the Informed Consent provided by donors, and with ethical and deontological guidelines with respect to privacy. DNA samples from individuals were collected with the subjects’ informed consent following the Declaration of Helsinki guidelines and approved by the following Ethics committees: Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD, France); Cameroon Ministry of Scientific Research and Technology; Central African Republic Ministère de l’Enseignement Supérieur et de la Recherche Scientifique; France Ministère de l’Enseignement Supérieur, de la Recherche et de l’Innovation (Comité de Protection des Personnes DC-2016-2740); French Commission Nationale Informatique et Liberté CNIL (declaration n°1972648); Uganda National Council for Science and Technology; Institutional Review Board of the University of Chicago Biological Sciences Division and the Pritzker School of Medicine University of Chicago Hospitals (protocol number 16986A); Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects of the Trustees of Dartmouth College and the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center (protocol number 22410); Human Research Ethics Committee (Medical) at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg (Protocol Numbers: M980553, M050902, M090576, M10270, M180654); Working Group of Indigenous Minorities in Southern Africa (WIMSA); South African San Council (SASC); and the Swedish Ethical Review Authority (Dnr 2019-05174). Requests for accessing all or part of the Central African data used in the article "Ancient tree-topologies and gene-flow processes among human lineages in Africa", by Gwenna Breton et al. 2024 (doi - PENDING), should be addressed to the DAC providing: 1) Data can only be used to explore human genetic evolution, evolutionary ecology and population history 2) The research institution where data will be stored and were analyses will be conducted. 3) The detailed coordinates of the researcher responsible for data storage and analyses. 4) A description (max 20 sentences) of the scientific finality and context of the project and classes of methodological analyses that will be performed to achieve it using the requested data. 5) When applicable, mention also other previously published data sets that will be used jointly with the requested datas et For accessing any or all the Central African genetic data used in the article "Ancient tree-topologies and gene-flow processes among human lineages in Africa", by Gwenna Breton et al. 2024 (doi - PENDING), the requester hereby ensures that: 1) Individual donor privacy should be respected at all times. Data cannot be made publicly available under any circumstances. 2) Data cannot be shared nor transferred to a third party without re-applying for eGA access to the DAC. 3) No direct or indirect commercial use of the data can be made 4) No individual medical genetics or disease diagnostics can be performed with the data 5) No medical or legal forensic investigations can be conducted with the data 6) No genealogical research can be conducted with the data (e.g. no paternity nor maternity testing, no genetic identification, no search of relatives using other datasets) 7) Appropriate citation of the article and data set used for any scientific communication using the data 8) Data is destroyed after the completion of the project. Any further re-use of the data is subject to a novel application to the DAC.

  Dac EGAC50000000447

• Genome-Wide Predictors of Treatment-Related Toxicities in SWOG S0221 Trial

  When undergoing treatment for breast cancer, many women experience severe side effects, some of which result in treatment-related death and some that can persist for years. Little is understood regarding factors that may predict drug toxicities. Pharmacogenetics, the investigation of variants in candidate genes in drug metabolism pathways, has been used to determine susceptibility to treatment-related toxicities, as well as to cancer recurrence. Although there have been some strong and important findings using this approach, such as identification of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that predispose to side effects associated with thiopurines and irinotecan, there has been less progress in assessment of genetic variants that predispose to toxicities resulting from the multi-drug regimen commonly used to treat breast cancer, anthracyclines (A), cyclophosphamide (C), and taxanes (T). These difficulties in identification of key gene variants may be due to the complex metabolic pathways of these drugs, the lack of rate limiting enzymes in the processes, or the limitations of single SNP analysis, rather than capturing all of the variability across the genes. In addition to drug metabolism pathways, however, there may be a number of constitutional factors or other processes that affect damage to normal tissues in the course of chemotherapy, some known or hypothesized, such as DNA repair and oxidative stress pathways, and others not yet discovered. However, there have been no clear candidate genes that account for a large part of the variation in drug or treatment response, and there are likely important genes that influence sensitivity of cells to chemotherapy through unknown pathways which have not yet been identified or hypothesized. The present technological capabilities to screen the entire genome for variants that discriminate populations allows the opportunity to identify these as yet unknown pathways, and open the doors to exciting new avenues of research into mechanisms that had not been previously considered. We conducted a genome-wide scan (GWAS) in a clinical trial (S0221), in which women with high risk breast cancer were treated with different dosing schedules of C, A and T. Blood specimens were collected and banked, and DNA extracted for genotyping on the Illumina OMNI 1M platform. The GWAS data were used to examine genetic variants significantly associated with grades 3 and 4 toxicities, including peripheral neuropathy recorded during the T segment. In S0221, toxicities were graded according to the NCI Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). The neurotoxicity is predominantly a distal sensory neuropathy, which is characterized by pain, numbness, tingling, and reduced functional capacity in the extremities. Other symptoms include parasthesias, ataxia, impaired vibration and joint position sense, and loss of tendon reflexes. By using a GWAS approach, it is likely that important pathways not previously considered can be revealed as important in susceptibility to treatment-related toxicities, identifying those at greatest risk for alternate drugs or dose reduction, and opening new areas of research for prevention of taxanes-related neuropathy among patients receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer.

  Study phs001428

• Disease Variant Landscape of a Large Multiethnic Population of Moyamoya Patients by Exome Sequencing

  We report a significant advance in Moyamoya disease (MMD) research through our unique access to a large MMD patient population combined with high depth exome sequencing and bioinformatics. We confirm a reported RNF213 founder mutation (FM), provide evidence for its ethnic specificity and identify novel variants in other genes that associate with Caucasian and non-RNF213 FM MMD. This work has a broader impact in vascular research by highlighting novel genetic aspects of cerebrovascular disease. Moyamoya Disease (MMD) is a rare cerebrovascular disorder characterized by unilateral or bilateral progressive stenosis or occlusion of the internal carotid artery, with frequent involvement of the anterior cerebral artery and the middle cerebral artery (MCA). Fragile collateral vessels subsequently develop and are particularly prone to hemorrhage. MMD patients are usually diagnosed angiographically following presentation of developmental delays, seizures, migraines, ischemia, and/or hemorrhage. The most common approach to re-establish normal blood flow is bypass surgery. While some progress has been made in identifying disease-associated genes, the underlying disease biology is not well understood. Moyamoya disease (MMD) is a rare cerebrovascular disease. Our unique access to a large MMD patient population combined with high depth exome sequencing and bioinformatics has led to a significant advance in the field. We confirm a reported RNF213 founder mutation (FM), provide evidence for its ethnic specificity and identify novel variants in other genes that associate with Caucasian and non-RNF213 FM MMD. This work has a broader impact in vascular research by highlighting novel genetic aspects of cerebrovascular disease. The 125 ethnically diverse, unrelated MMD patients were matched based on sex and broad ethnic category to 125 controls. Control DNA from the 1000 Genomes project was used to design a control Library by Personalis. 125 controls were selected from this Personalis Control DNA Library for our study. (The 1000 Genomes Project Consortium 2012). Genomic DNA was extracted using the Gentra Puregene kit (Qiagen, Valencia, CA). Libraries were prepared from approximately 3 µg of high quality genomic DNA (50-200 ng/µl) using Illumina TruSeq Genomic DNA High throughput Sample Prep Kits (Illumina, San Diego, CA) and exome enrichment (targeting 62Mb) was accomplished using the TruSeq Exome Target Enrichment kit (Illumina, San Diego, CA), all according to manufacturer's protocols. Target enrichment validation was confirmed by determining the concentration of the library by PicoGreen-based quantitation. Library yields ranged from 100-1000ng of DNA, a portion of which was run on the Bioanalyzer HS DNA chip (Agilent, Santa Clara, CA), with an average size of 300-550nt for DNA fragments. Exome Sequencing. Sequencing was performed using Illumina Hiseq2000 or HiSeq2500 sequencers with single lane, paired-end 2X100bp reads. DNA fragments were generated and amplified using Clonal Single Molecule Array technology (Illumina, San Diego, CA). The sequences were determined using the Clonal Single Molecule Array and Sequencing-by-Synthesis using Illumina's instrumentation and Reversible Terminator Chemistry. Each sequencing lane interrogated the DNA sequences of a pool of 3 individual sample libraries each carrying a unique index. Sequencing reads of at least 2x100bp in length for a total of approximately 8 Gb of sequence data were generated for each sample.

  Study phs001700

• Programmatic submission based on XML

  Programmatic submissions (XML based) For further information please check our Submission FAQs, submission quickguide as well as submission terms! Introduction Besides the Submitter Portal tool, EGA supports programmatic sequence and clinical data metadata submissions. If you are not sure what this means, you may want to explore our brief metadata introduction. Programmatic submissions are recommended for array-based submission. Moreove, it may be of help if your submission is recurrent or it is difficult to manage manually due to its sheer size. Otherwise, we highly recommend using the Submitter Portal to perform submissions. In this page we will guide you through the required steps to programmatically submit data to the EGA. Programmatic submissions require your metadata to be structured for an easy and straightforward validation and archival. It basically consists in formatting your metadata as Extensible markup language (XML) files and submitting them to the EGA using the WEBIN Before submitting metadata to the EGA, it is important to ensure that the information in your XML files is compliant with our standards. You can see further details on how these standards are maintained at EGA at our EGA Schemas documentation page. Using WEBIN, you can validate your XML files against EGA's schemas to ensure that your metadata is compliant before submission. WEBIN services WEBIN production service WEBIN test service We advise you to submit your metadata to the test service when submitting to the production service for the first time. The test service is identical to the production service except that all submissions will be discarded in the following 24 hours. This allows you to learn about the submission process without having to worry about data being submitted. Authentication Authentication is required each time a submission is made. The submission service uses HTTPS protocol for metadata encryption and identification to provide a secure submission environment. Data file upload Both Runs and Analyses reference files (e.g. FASTQ need to be uploaded to the EGA before these metadata objects are submitted. In other words, if you submit a Run that references a file that we cannot find associated with your account, the metadata submission will fail. See further details on how to upload your files in our File Upload documentation. Metadata model of the EGA Our metadata model is formed by multiple metadata objects. Check further details in our documentation at our EGA Schema documentation page. Working with EGA XMLs files Now that the basic concepts of the EGA metadata have been described, you can start preparing your programmatic submission through XML. Here you will find the guidance on how to prepare the XML files. Programmatic Submission Tutorial Video Take a look at the Programmatic Submission Tutorial Video, which explains the workflow of a programmatic submission and goes over an example metadata submission. Programmatic Submission Tutorial Video. When building your XML files, we recommend using text editors (e.g.Sublime Text or VisualStudio) that allow you to visualise the structure of the XML with ease. Furthermore, these editors constantly check the consistency of the XML structure. Alternatively, and if the submission consists of a big number of objects (specially analyses), you may find the tool star2xml handy. This tool allows for a direct conversion between metadata in a tabular format (e.g. a spreadsheet) into XMLs. Identifying objects: Aliases and center names Every EGA object must be uniquely identified within the submission account using their alias attribute. The aliases can be used in submissions to make references between EGA objects. Let us dig into EGA's use of aliases and center names: alias: every object should have a name that is unique within your submission account. Once submitted successfully, every alias will be assigned a unique and permanent accession (EGA ID). refname: when an object references another by its alias, the alias of the referenced object goes into the "refname" attribute of the referencing object. For example, if a sample has the alias "sample1", and an experiment uses this sample, then the experiment's "EXPERIMENT/SAMPLE/refname" attribute should be "sample1". center_name: The "center_name" attribute is required within the submission XML and, if not provided when the object is submitted, it will be automatically filled using your default EGA account center_name. This element is the "controlled vocabulary acronym or abbreviation that is provided to the account holder when the account is first generated". If the submitter is brokering a submission for another institute, the submitter should use their special broker account name in broker_name while the data centre acronym remains in center_name. Log-in details should have been provided when you requested a submission account. Please contact our Helpdesk team if you have any questions. run_center: Many submitting centers contract out the actual sample sequencing to another center. In these cases, the sequencing center should be acknowledged in the run_center attribute. Again, this is controlled vocabulary and the acronym should be sought from EGA helpdesk before submitting. Please contact our Helpdesk team if you have any questions. Prepare your XMLs The goal of this section is to provide sufficient information to be able to create the metadata XML documents required for programmatic submissions. Please note, the EGA utilises the XML schemas maintained at the European Nucleotide Archive (ENA). It is important due to the fact that by using a similar system, some pieces of documentation from the ENA's programmatic submission can also help you with your programmatic submission to the EGA. For example, you can submit programmatically without using a Submission XML by following the steps at Submission actions without submission XML. A submission does not have to contain all different types of XMLs. For example, it is possible to submit only a few samples; or a study that is later to be referenced. You can submit each object one by one, or submit all in a batch: you choose what method of submission works best for you. We do recommend, nevertheless, that you submit the objects to be referenced (e.g. samples or studies) first, and the objects that reference these (e.g. experiments or datasets) afterwards. You can see a graphical view of these objects and their relationships at our EGA Schemas page. Independently of the submission scenario, you will always require a Dataset XML. The entity of a dataset is what is used to control access to the given data, in the form of runs or analyses. In other words, when a requester is granted access, it is through the dataset and the objects (e.g. runs or analyses) that the dataset contains, granting access to them in one go. Given the nature of the EGA, a dataset XML will always be required for the data access. First, we will differentiate between submissions of "raw" and "processed" data: Runs and Analyses, respectively. Run data submissions Raw data derives from instruments "as is". For example, a plain sequence file (e.g. FASTQ or unaligned BAM files) would be considered raw data. A typical raw (unaligned) sequence read submission consists of 8 XMLs: Submission Study Sample Experiment Run DAC Policy Dataset When technical reads (e.g. barcodes, adaptors or linkers) are included in the submitted raw sequences, a spot descriptor must be submitted to describe the position of the technical reads so that they can be removed. The following data files can be submitted without providing spot descriptor information in the experiment/run XML: BAM files (single reads) SFF files (single reads without barcodes) FastQ files (single reads without any technical reads) Complete Genomics files Analysis data submissions Processed data is, in some way, refined raw data. This includes raw data that has been processed by some form of analysis method (e.g. alignment, noise reduction, etc.). For example, an aligned sequence (e.g. BAM file), that was created using raw FASTQ files, would be a processed file. This category includes most types of data: sequence alignment files (e.g. BAM or CRAM), clinical data (e.g. phenopackets), sequence variation files (e.g. VCF), sequence annotation, etc. A typical EGA analysis data submission consists of 7 EGA XML: Submission Study Sample Analysis DAC Policy Dataset We accept three different types of analysis data submissions: BAM files (for multiple read alignments) VCF files (for sequence variations) Phenotype files (in any format) In anycase, keep in mind that samples must be created in order to be referenced in the analyses. In other words, the provenance of the information within the BAM, VCF and phenotype files Example XMLs Below you can find a non-extensive list of example XMLs with descriptive fields (i.e. explaining what to provide in each field). Furthermore, you can also find real examples (i.e. the true value of the provided fields) in our GitHub repository. Submission XML The submission XML is used to validate, submit or update any number of other objects. The submission XML refers to other XMLs. New submissions use the ADD action to submit new objects. Object updates are done using the MODIFY action and objects can be validated using the VERIFY action. Descriptive submission XML example True values submission XML example Study XML The study XML is used to describe the study containing a title, a study type and abstract as it would appear in a publication. Descriptive study XML example True values study XML example Please use the following notation within the property "STUDY_LINKS" when including PubMed citations in the Study XML: <STUDY_LINKS> <STUDY_LINK> <XREF_LINK> <DB>PUBMED</DB> <ID>18987735</ID> </XREF_LINK> </STUDY_LINK> </STUDY_LINKS> Sample XML The sample XML is used to describe the samples used to obtain the data, whether they were sequenced, measured in any other way, or have an associated phenotype. The mandatory fields include information about the taxonomy of the sample, sex, subject ID and phenotype. For example, the mandatory attribute fields for each sample would look like these, within the array of "SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES": <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES> <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <TAG>subject_id</TAG> <VALUE>free text!</VALUE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <TAG>sex</TAG> <VALUE>female/male/unknown</VALUE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <TAG>phenotype</TAG> <VALUE>Free text, EFO terms (e.g. EFO:0000574) are recommended</VALUE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES> Sample is one of the most important objects to be described biologically, it is highly recommended that “TAG-VALUE” pairs are generated as SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES to describe the sample in as much detail as possible. For example, were we to give the population ancestry of the sample, we could add a new attribute to the array, in which, for example, we would indicate that the sample derives from an individual of "Mende in Sierra Leone" (MSL), with an african ancestry: <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <TAG>Population</TAG> <VALUE>MSL</VALUE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> Given that VALUE and TAG are free text, the combinations are limitless in order to give you full flexibility on the information you want to provide. We recommend you use the Experimental Factor Ontology (EFO) to describe the phenotypes of your samples. You can provide more than one phenotype by adding more items to the array of SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES. Phenotypes considered essential for understanding the data submission should be provided. Each phenotype described should be listed as a separate sample attribute <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE>. There is no limit to the number of phenotypes that can be submitted. If a suitable EFO accession cannot be found for your phenotype attribute, please consider using another controlled ontology database (e.g. HPO, MONDO, etc.) before using free text. Descriptive sample XML example True values sample XML example Experiment XML The experiment XML is used to describe the experimental setup, including instrument platform and model details, library preparation details, and any additional information required to correctly interpret the submitted data. Where any of these values differ between runs, a new experiment object must exist, since runs are grouped by experiments. Each experiment references a study and a sample by alias, or if previously-submitted, by accession. Pooled data must be demultiplexed by barcode for submission. Descriptive experiment ( Illumina paired read ) XML example True values experiment ( Illumina paired read ) XML example Run XML The run XML is used to associate data files with experiments and typically comprises a single data file (e.g. a FASTQ file). Please note that pooled samples should be de-multiplexed prior submission and submitted as different runs. Descriptive run XML example True values run XML example Analysis XML Given that an analysis can be used to submit any type of processed data to the EGA, we will list below an example of each of the three most common types of analysis XMLs submitted to the EGA: sequence alignments (e.g. BAM files); sequence variation (e.g. VCF files); and clinical metadata or phenotypes (e.g. phenopackets). Regardless of the type of processed data submitted in the analysis, the analysis must be associated with a Study and can reference multiple types of other objects, from samples to experiments, if they are available at the EGA. Just like with Runs, whenever a file is submitted to the EGA through an analysis object, the file MD5 checksums must be present, in order for the EGA to validate file integrity upon transfer. This also includes index files when applicable (e.g. .bai.md5 files). Ideally, any analysis that uses a reference sequence for some kind of alignment (e.g. BAM, CRAM or VCF files), would contain metadata about the alignment, such as INSDC reference assemblies and sequences, by either using accessions (e.g. CM000663.1) or common labels (e.g. GRCh37). Read alignment (BAM) Analysis XML The Analysis can be used to submit BAM alignments to EGA. Only one BAM file can be submitted in each analysis and the samples used within the BAM read groups must be associated with Samples. Descriptive bam alignments XML example True values bam alignments XML example Sequence variation (VCF) Analysis XML The Analysis can be used to submit VCF files to EGA. Only one VCF file can be submitted in each analysis and the samples used within the VCF files must be associated with Samples. Download analysis XML (VCF) Phenotype files The Analysis XML can be used to submit phenotype files to the EGA. Only one phenotype file can be submitted in each analysis and the samples used within the phenotype files must be associated with EGA Samples. Download analysis XML (Phenotype) DAC XML The DAC XML describes the Data Access Committee (DAC) affiliated to the data submission. The DAC may consist of a group or a single individual and is responsible for the data access decisions based on the application procedure described in the POLICY.XML. As with any other object, if it was already submitted to the EGA, there is no need to submit it again: you can reference an existing object within the EGA. Hence, A DAC XML does not need to be provided if your submission is affiliated to an existing EGA DAC.. Further information on DACs can be found here, and you can always contact our Helpdesk team if you have further inquiries. Descriptive dac XML example True values dac XML example Policy XML The Policy XML describes the Data Access Agreement (DAA) to be affiliated to the named Data Access Committee. Descriptive policy XML example True values study XML example Dataset XML The dataset XML describes the data files, defined by the Run.XML and Analysis.XML, that make up the dataset and links the collection of data files to a specified Policy. The dataset xml is commonly the last metadata object to be submitted, since it references multiple other entities. Please consider the number of datasets that your submission consists of. For example, a case-control study is likely to consist of at least two datasets. In addition, we suggest that multiple datasets should be described for studies using the same samples but different sequence technologies. Descriptive dataset XML example True values dataset XML example Validating and submitting your EGA Validating EGA's XMLs through Webin After you have ensured that the XMLs are properly formatted and contain all the required information. You can proceed to validate and submit your data. Use the curl command to validate your XML file: Once you have prepared your XML file and asserted you have access to Webin, you can validate your XML file programmatically against EGA's schemas using the curl command. There are multiple ways in which you can validate your XMLs. This variety has to do with the fact that: (1) there are 2 instances of Webin (test and production); and (2) that validation is a default step during submission. In other words, any time that you submit your data through Webin, it will be validated automatically before being accepted. This allows for 4 possible routes of validation, all having the same validation result: validating or submitting to either the production service or the test service of Webin. For example, directly validating a "study" object XML in the testing service (wwwdev…) would look like the following: curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=VALIDATE" "https://wwwdev.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" In this command, you would need to replace <USERNAME> and <PASSWORD> with your EGA account username and password, respectively. You would also replace <INPUT_FILE> with the path to your XML file. A mock example would look like the following: curl -u ega-test-data@ebi.ac.uk:egarocks -F "ACTION=VALIDATE" "https://wwwdev.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" The validation attempt can have different results depending on the given arguments: If your XML file is valid according to EGA's schemas, you will see a message indicating that your XML file is compliant. For example, see below for our mock example, where the "success" was "true" (i.e. no validation errors found). Nevertheless, notice how the "<STUDY accession=" is empty: it is because we were simply validating, so the study did not get an accession or ID. <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="receipt.xsl"?> <RECEIPT receiptDate="2023-04-11T15:19:28.850+01:00" submissionFile="submission-EBI-TEST_1681222768850.xml" success="true"> <STUDY accession="" alias="Mock example" status="PRIVATE"/> <SUBMISSION accession="" alias="SUBMISSION-11-04-2023-15:19:28:840"/> <MESSAGES> <INFO>VALIDATE action has been specified.</INFO> <INFO>Submission has been rolled back.</INFO> <INFO>This submission is a TEST submission and will be discarded within 24 hours</INFO> </MESSAGES> <ACTIONS>VALIDATE</ACTIONS> <ACTIONS>PROTECT</ACTIONS> If there are any errors or warnings, the tool will display them, allowing you to correct them before submitting your data to EGA. For example, in the following response, it is said that the object we were trying to submit was already existing, and therefore the "success" was "false". <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="receipt.xsl"?> <RECEIPT receiptDate="2023-04-11T15:12:35.609+01:00" submissionFile="submission-EBI-TEST_1681222355609.xml" success="false"> <STUDY alias="Example!_Human Microbiome Project SP56J" status="PRIVATE" holdUntilDate="2023-03-11Z"/> <SUBMISSION alias="SUBMISSION-11-04-2023-15:12:35:576"/> <MESSAGES> <ERROR>In study, alias: "Example!_Human Microbiome Project SP56J". The object being added already exists in the submission account with accession: "ERP127584".</ERROR> <INFO>VALIDATE action has been specified.</INFO> <INFO>Submission has been rolled back.</INFO> <INFO>This submission is a TEST submission and will be discarded within 24 hours</INFO> </MESSAGES> <ACTIONS>VALIDATE</ACTIONS> <ACTIONS>PROTECT</ACTIONS> If the curl command retrieves no response at all, please double check if your username and password are correctly provided. Also notice the "ACTION=..." argument passed to the Curl command. This specifies the action to take during the call to Webin, so we do not need a "Submission" XML just for a validation attempt. See more at submission actions without submission XML. Furthermore, validation of multiple files or objects (e.g. sample, experiment, study…) can be done in a single command by adding more arguments (i.e. '-F'). For example: curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=VALIDATE" "https://wwwdev.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" -F "SAMPLE=@sample.xml" -F "DATASET=@dataset.xml" As mentioned above, beside "validate" action in the test environment, you can also validate your metadata by three other methods: "Validate" in the production server. From our example above, you simply need to take the "dev" away from the URL. curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=VALIDATE" "https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" "Add" in the development server. From our example above, you would simply need to replace the action: from "validate" to "add". Whatever is submitted to this service will be discarded in 24h, so whether something gets submitted or not would not matter in the long run. curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=ADD" "https://wwwdev.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" "Add" in the productionserver. A combination of the previous two methods, which would render this attempt into a submission. This path is just to be taken when you are sure your metadata is compliant and what you want to submit. curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=ADD" "https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" What happens after the submission of a dataset XML? Once you have completed the registration of your dataset/s please contact our Helpdesk Team to provide a release date for your study. Please note that all datasets affiliated to unreleased studies are automatically placed on hold until the authorised submitter or DAC contact contact the EGA Helpdesk for the study to be released. We strongly advise you not to delete your data until EGA Helpdesk confirms that your data has been successfully archived.

  Documentation submission/metadata/submission/programmatic-submission-xml

• The Finland-United States Investigation of NIDDM Genetics (FUSION) Tissue Biopsy Study

  The Finland-United States Investigation of NIDDM Genetics (FUSION) study is a long-term effort to identify genetic variants that predispose to type 2 diabetes (T2D) or that impact the variability of T2D-related quantitative traits (QTs). Most of the variants associated with T2D and related traits (glucose and insulin, anthropometrics, lipids) through genome-wide association studies (GWAS) occur in non-coding regions, suggesting a strong regulatory component to disease susceptibility. Regulatory element activity is often tissue-specific, which further complicates discovery of the causal/functional variation. Therefore, there is a critical need to identify the appropriate cell type, regulatory elements, target genes, and causal variants(s) in T2D-relevant tissues. We hypothesize that a subset of T2D and related variants alter gene expression regulation in skeletal muscle and adipose tissue - two major insulin target tissues and play key roles in insulin resistance. To that end, our study contains a comprehensive survey of genomics, epigenomics and transcriptomics in skeletal muscle and adipose tissue from individuals with glucose tolerance categories ranging from normal to T2D.For this FUSION Tissue Biopsy Study, we obtained RNA-Seq, microRNA (miRNA)-Seq, and DNA methylation (methyl)-Seq data on biopsy samples from 331 individuals from across the range of glucose tolerance: 124 normal glucose tolerance (NGT), 77 impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), 44 impaired fasting glucose (IFG), and 86 newly-diagnosed T2Ds. Participants completed two study visits, two weeks apart. First visits comprised most of the clinical phenotyping, including four-point OGTT (fasting, and 30, 60, and 120 minute post-load); BMI, WHR; lipids; blood pressure; and many other variables. Participants also completed FUSION health history, medication, and lifestyle questionnaires. On the second visit, we obtained ~250mg vastus lateralis skeletal muscle, ~750mg abdominal subcutaneous adipose, and a ~5x15mm section of abdominal skin. Visits were completed in March 2013. RNA isolation is ongoing in the Collins laboratory at the NIH, RNA and miRNA sequencing at the NIH Intramural Sequencing Center (NISC), and genotyping at the Center for Inherited Disease Research (CIDR). Individual-level data is available here for the 306 individuals who consented to data deposit. To focus on evaluation of gene expression and its regulation in skeletal muscle, we analyzed mRNA extracted from vastus lateralis skeletal muscle obtained from 271 of the 331 individual subjects from Finland, along with genome-wide genotypes. Individual-level data is available here for the 250 subjects who consented to the use of their data.Release phs001048.v2.p1 adds muscle data for an additional 42 subjects and data from adipose tissue for 276 subjects. Total RNA was isolated using Trizol extraction in the Collins laboratory at the NIH. The mRNA was poly-A selected, 24-plex libraries were generated using the Illumina TruSeq directional mRNA-seq library protocol and RNA sequencing was performed on HiSeq2000 sequencers using 101bp paired-end reads at NISC. miRNA libraries were prepared from total RNA from 296 muscle and 270 adipose samples, pooled and sequenced 50bp single-end reads on Illumina HiSeq2500. Data for 272 muscle and 251 adipose samples are available here for individuals with consent for data deposit. DNA was extracted from blood in the Collins laboratory, and genotyping on the Illumina Omni2.5M array was performed at CIDR. Genotypes were imputed using the HRC 2016 reference panel. In order to assess regions of open chromatin in skeletal muscle, we obtained muscle tissue from a commercial provider to perform ATAC-seq; these samples were sequenced at the University of Michigan DNA Sequencing Core.Release phs001048.v3.p1 adds single-nucleus (sn) RNA-seq and ATAC-seq data in 287 skeletal muscle samples out of the original 331 individuals. Individual-level data is available here for the 265 subjects who consented to the use of their data. The frozen tissue biopsy samples were processed in ten batches, each consisting of 40-41 samples. These batches were organized using a randomized block design to protect against experimental contrasts of interest including cohort, age, sex, BMI among others. Samples in each batch were pulverized, pooled together followed by nuclei isolation. The nuclei were processed on the 10X Genomics Chromium platform separately for snATAC-seq and snRNA-seq (v. 3.1 chemistry for snRNA-seq).Release phs001048.v4.p1 adds additional phenotypes and provides some corrections to several previous phenotypes.

  Study phs001048

• The International Consortium for Prostate Cancer Genetics Genome Wide Association Study of Familial Prostate Cancer

  Initially, the ICPCG focused largely on high-risk prostate cancer pedigrees using linkage analysis. However, association studies have also been informative to find prostate cancer susceptibility variants in the genome. We hypothesize that genome-wide (GW) association studies of familial cases of prostate cancer will have the power to identify rarer and perhaps less penetrant risk variants associated with prostate cancer than have been identified to date. Our approach will be to examine evidence for association in selected, independent cases from high-risk pedigrees; we hypothesize that they represent a more homogeneous set of cases with potentially different associations. Use of the 5M plus exome SNP platform will allow us to include in our search more rare variants in our search than have ever been investigated for prostate cancer. Aim 1. Identify a set of independent prostate cancer cases selected from ICPCG high-risk prostate cancer pedigrees that have 3 or more related prostate cancer cases and have an average age at diagnosis &#8804; 75 years. Identify appropriate matched controls from participating ICPCG groups/ populations. Aim 2. Perform GW SNP genotyping with the Illumina 5M plus exome SNP set on the set of independent prostate cancer cases and controls described in Aim 1. Aim 3. Perform association analyses appropriately matching controls for different ICPCG populations and groups. There will be a two-stage design for confirmation. Aim 4. Test reported associations using the extensive sample set available to us by collaboration with the PRACTICAL consortium that has access to 50 000 DNA samples from 34 groups internationally (over 7,000 of whom are positive for prostate cancer family history).

  Study phs000733

• Department of Human Genetics, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Data Access Committee

  Dac EGAC00001000076

• MOSAIC Window DLBCL Data

  This dataset will include Spatial Transcriptomics from the 10x Genomics Visium SD technology, Single-Cell RNA-Seq from the 10x Genomics Chromium Flex protocol, Bulk RNA-Seq (sequenced on Illumina), WES (sequenced on Illumina), H&E, and Clinical data from 10 DLBCL patients. For Visium and Chromium data we are sharing the outputs of respectively Space Ranger and Cell Ranger. For Bulk RNA-Seq we are including processed files such as counts.tsv, FPKM.tsv, fusion_genes.tsv, TPM count matrix.tsv, DESeq2 count matrix.tsv, multiqc_report. For WES, we are sharing the presence or absence of single nucleotide variants (SNVs), small insertions and deletions (indels), and copy number variants (CNVs).* Researchers from private or public institutions outside the MOSAIC Consortium will be able to apply to access this data and, pending approval, use the data for their research.

  Dataset EGAD50000001702

• MOSAIC Window Ovarian Data

  This dataset will include Spatial Transcriptomics from the 10x Genomics Visium SD technology, Single-Cell RNA-Seq from the 10x Genomics Chromium Flex protocol, Bulk RNA-Seq (sequenced on Illumina), WES (sequenced on Illumina), H&E, and Clinical data from 15 Ovarian patients. For Visium and Chromium data we are sharing the outputs of respectively Space Ranger and Cell Ranger. For Bulk RNA-Seq we are including processed files such as counts.tsv, FPKM.tsv, fusion_genes.tsv, TPM count matrix.tsv, DESeq2 count matrix.tsv, multiqc_report. For WES, we are sharing the presence or absence of single nucleotide variants (SNVs), small insertions and deletions (indels), and copy number variants (CNVs).* Researchers from private or public institutions outside the MOSAIC Consortium will be able to apply to access this data and, pending approval, use the data for their research.

  Dataset EGAD50000001704

• MOSAIC Window Mesothelioma Data

  This dataset will include Spatial Transcriptomics from the 10x Genomics Visium SD technology, Single-Cell RNA-Seq from the 10x Genomics Chromium Flex protocol, Bulk RNA-Seq (sequenced on Illumina), WES (sequenced on Illumina), H&E, and Clinical data from 10 Mesothelioma patients. For Visium and Chromium data we are sharing the outputs of respectively Space Ranger and Cell Ranger. For Bulk RNA-Seq we are including processed files such as counts.tsv, FPKM.tsv, fusion_genes.tsv, TPM count matrix.tsv, DESeq2 count matrix.tsv, multiqc_report. For WES, we are sharing the presence or absence of single nucleotide variants (SNVs), small insertions and deletions (indels), and copy number variants (CNVs).* Researchers from private or public institutions outside the MOSAIC Consortium will be able to apply to access this data and, pending approval, use the data for their research.

  Dataset EGAD50000001706

• Reference Standards for Mosaic Variant Detection

  After conception, postzygotic mutations continuously occur throughout life in humans, causing somatic mosaicism in an individual. The variant type, time of origination, and locations of the mosaic mutations result in unique mosaic patterns in a combinatorial manner and further affect phenotypes, including various noncancerous diseases. Several efforts have, thus, been made to identify the mutational landscape and mechanisms underlying the mosaic mutations. From a technical aspect, the accurate detection of mutations is at the core of the mosaicism research, and the construction of a standard reference is a critical first step to serve as the basis for analytical validation and benchmarks for germline and somatic mutation detection. Furthermore, a reference standard for mosaic mutations is urgently needed to enable more advanced research.Herein, we generated robust, large-scale, and cell line mixture-based reference standards that contain abundant mosaic SNVs and INDELs along with wild-type sites and germ line variants. Moreover, the whole reference standard set mimics the cumulative aspect of mosaic variant acquisition in the early developmental stage through a progressive cell line mixing with confirmed genotypes. It can be used for optimizing the current use of mosaic variant detection strategies, as well as developing algorithms for future improvements.We previously generated an NCBI BioProject (PRJNA758606) to release much of these data. Only the data that are subject to authorized access constraints have been included in this submission to dbGaP. The two data sources are thus, complementary to each other.

  Study phs003399

• Exploration of CNV’s and SNV’s in cancers with well-known genetic rearrangements: Identification of additional genetic changes in rearrangements-driven cancer

  Specific cancers are well known to have specific gene rearrangements. Representative cancer is chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) which is famous for BCR/ABL gene rearrangements. By the way, also genetic rearrangements are not infrequently found in acute leukemia, and those include CBFB/MYH11 rearrangements, PML/RARA rearrangements, AML/ETO rearrangements, and BCR/ABL rearrangements. The situation is same is for lung adenocarcinoma of non-smokers and prostate cancers, and ALK and RET gene rearrangements are recently found. However, not all these rearrangements are sufficient to develop cancer, and it is suggested that some genetic aberrations are required for the development and progression of cancer in addition to these genetic rearrangements. In this study, we have a plan to explore the existence of additional genetic changes including single nucleotide variants (SNV’s) and copy number variations (CNV’s) in cancers with specific genetic rearrangements so as to define additional genetic changes that confer full oncogenic potential to cancer cells. So as to look at SNV’s and small indels, we are going to use whole exome sequencing (WES) data. And as for CNV’s, we are going to use array-CGH data. Also, to check the functionality of these genetic changes, we are going to use whole transcriptome data (WTS). In addition, in samples with whole genome sequencing (WGS ) data, we are going to explore genetic changes in intronic regions also. In fact, we sequenced 10 AML samples which are known to have specific genetic rearrangements. Analysis of these WGS, WES and WTS data are under the way. If we have a chance to access WES, array-CGH and WTS data of other cancer samples with specific genetic rearrangements, we would be able to compare additional genetic changes required for oncogenesis in cancer cells with various genetic rearrangements. We hope this result will enlighten our understanding of cancer genetics further.

  Study EGAS00001000673

• Guiding Evidence Based Therapy Using Biomarker Intensified Treatment in Heart Failure (GUIDE-IT-BioLINCC)

  Accessing Data: Please refer to &#8220;Authorized Access&#8221; below regarding accessing data through the BioData Catalyst ecosystem. The data from this accession is not available for download through dbGaP.Objective: To determine whether an amino-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-pro-BNP)-guided treatment strategy improves clinical outcomes vs usual care in high-risk patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).Background: Heart failure is a common disorder. Standard treatment for HF includes diuretics to control fluid, and drugs called "neurohormonal antagonists" (such as beta-blockers and ACE-inhibitors) to help the heart work more efficiently. The natriuretic peptides, specifically NT-pro-BNP, are biomarkers that reflect HF severity and are significantly associated with adverse outcomes in HF. Smaller studies have evaluated adjusting HF therapy based on natriuretic peptide levels (&#8220;guided therapy&#8221;) with inconsistent results.Participants: A total of 894 participants were enrolled at 45 sites in the United States and Canada, with 446 randomized to the NT-pro-BNP-guided strategy treatment group and 448 randomized to the usual care treatment group.Design: GUIDE-IT was a multicenter randomized clinical trial with participants randomized to either the NT-pro-BNP-guided therapy strategy or usual care. Given the nature of the study intervention, treatment assignment was not blinded. For participants randomized to the NT-pro-BNP-guided strategy, clinicians were instructed to titrate HF therapy to target an NT-pro-BNP level After an initial visit at 2 and 6 weeks, visits occurred every 3 months throughout the remainder of the study. After therapy adjustment for HF (whether driven by NT-pro-BNP levels or clinical reasons), participants had a 2-week follow-up visit for reassessment. All participants in either group also had blinded NT-pro-BNP concentrations measured in a core laboratory at each study visit. The primary end point was the composite of time-to-first HF hospitalization or cardiovascular mortality. Secondary end points included all-cause mortality, total hospitalizations for HF, days alive and not hospitalized for cardiovascular reasons, the individual components on the primary end point, and adverse events. Conclusions: The guided strategy intervention was stopped in July of 2016 (median follow-up of 15 months) after the study met prespecified inefficacy criteria. Compared to usual care, a strategy of NT-pro-BNP-guided therapy was not more effective in improving time-to-first HF hospitalization or cardiovascular mortality in high-risk participants with HFrEF.

  Study phs003621

• Privacy Notice for Data Access Committee Account

  Privacy Notice for EGA Data Access Committee Account This Privacy Notice explains what personal data is collected by the specific service you are requesting, for what purposes, how it is processed, and how we keep it secure. Note that this service collects personal data directly provided by the user, and also collects personal data from users that is provided by other organisations. 1. Who controls your personal data and how to contact us? European Genome- Phenome Archive - EGA offers a service for permanent archiving and sharing of all types of personally identifiable genetic and phenotypic data resulting from biomedical research projects, jointly managed by European Molecular Biology Laboratory – European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI) and Fundació Centre de Regulació Genòmica - Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG). EMBL-EBI and CRG represent joint Data Controllers’ of processing of your personal data. They and their Data protection officers may be contacted for data protection queries and for exercising your rights under Section 8. You may contact EMBL-EBI, represented by Mallory Freeberg, by: email at mfreeberg@ebi.ac.uk , orpost at EMBL-EBI, Wellcome Genome Campus, CB10 1SD Hinxton, Cambridgeshire, UK. EMBL’s Data Protection Officer may be contacted by: email at dpo@embl.org, orpost at EMBL Heidelberg, Data protection officer, Meyerhofstraße 1, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany. You may contact CRG, whose EGA team is represented by dr. Jordi Rambla de Argila, by: email at jordi.rambla@crg.eu, orpost at Fundació Centre de Regulació Genòmica - Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), Dr.Aiguader 88, PRBB Building, 08003 Barcelona, Spain. CRG Data protection officer may be contacted by: email at dpo@crg.eupost at Fundació Centre de Regulació Genòmica - Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), C/ Dr. Aiguader, 88, PRBB Building, 08003 Barcelona, Spain. 2. Which is the lawful basis for processing personal data? We process your personal data on the grounds of important public interest. For monitoring your activities on the website, we process your personal data on the grounds of important public interest. Such legal basis is found in Article 5(1)(a) of EMBL Internal Policy No 68 on General Data Protection (hereinafter IP 68), which is equivalent to Article 6 (1)(e) of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (hereinafter GDPR) and upon which personal data are processed for the achievement of the aims laid down in 1973 agreement establishing EMBL, such as the promotion of the cooperation in the fundamental research, in the development of advanced instrumentation and in advanced teaching in molecular biology and dissemination of information. 3. What personal data is collected from users of the service? How do we use this personal data? We collect the following personal data from you: NameEmail addressTitle/PositionOrganisationOrganisational affiliationBusiness addressTelephone numberIP addressesDate and time of a visit to the service websiteOperating systemAmount of data transmittedBrowserUsernamePassword The data controller will use your personal data for the following purposes: To provide DAC user account and authenticated access to the service,To publicly publish some information to facilitate scientific research,To better understand the needs of the data subjects and guide future improvements of the service,To create anonymous usage statistics (from number of DACs, datasets per DAC). 4. Who will have access to your personal data? The personal data will be disclosed to: Authorised staff in the data controller’s institutions acting on data controller`s behalf and instructions (for all user account data),The general public via Internet will get access to your name, email address, business address, telephone number and organisation you belong to. 5. Will your personal data be transferred to third countries (i.e. countries not part of EU/EEA) and/or international organisations? Data categories ‘name`, `email address`, `telephone number`, `business address`; `organisation’ of the DAC user are published on the Internet. They thus become accessible to recipients in countries outside the European Economic Area. Insofar as the second joint controller may be subject to GDPR, data transfer to and from the first joint controller (EMBL-EBI), is necessary for important reasons of public interest embedded in the aims of EMBL and justified in the Article 9(4) of IP 68 (equivalent to Article 49(1)(d) of GDPR) read in conjunction with EMBL`s 1973 establishing agreement and Article 179(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 6. How long do we keep your personal data? Any personal data directly obtained from you will be retained as long as the service is live. Such duration serves the purpose of enabling scientific research and ensures legal compliance and facilitates internal and external audits if they arise. By contrast, the log files for the data categories related to anonymous usage statistics (raw web service logs) are processed only for 30 days and thereafter erased. 7. The joint Data Controllers provide these rights regarding your personal data You have the right to: Not be subject to decisions based solely on an automated processing of data (i.e. without human intervention) without you having your views taken into consideration.Request at reasonable intervals and without excessive delay or expense, information about the personal data processed about you. Under your request we will inform you in writing about, for example, the origin of the personal data or the preservation period.Request information to understand data processing activities when the results of these activities are applied to you. It must be clarified that rights under points 4 and 5 are only available whenever you need support whilst using our website. For other processing based on the grounds of important public interest you cannot exercise your rights to object, rectify or erase your personal data according to the Article 13(2)(a)(b) of IP 68 (equivalent to Article 17(3)(b)(d) and Article 21(6) of the GDPR). 8. Supervisory authority If you wish to complain against the processing of your personal data, you may do so by post at: EMBL Heidelberg, Data Protection Committee, Meyerhofstraße 1, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany, or Autoritat Catalana de Protecció de Dades (Catalan Data Protection Authority), C/Rosselló 214, Esc A, 1r 1a, Barcelona 08008, Spain. Published at: February 6, 2019

  Documentation data-protection/privacy-notice/ega-dac

• Single cell transcriptional characterization of human megakaryocyte lineage commitment and maturation

  Single cell RNA-sequencing of sternal bone marrow reciding Hematopoietic Stem Cells (HSCs) and Megakaryocytes (MKs) from individuals undergoing elective open heart valve replacement. HSCs were defined as Lineage-, CD34+, CD38-, CD45RA-, CD90+, CD49f+ cells. MKs where CD41a+, CD42b+ and ploidy was determined with Hoechst. A sternal bone marrow scraping was taken directly following median sternotomy using a Volkmann’s spoon. The sample was collected into an EDTA Vacutainer tube containing 1.8mg/ml EDTA. 4mL of Dulbecco’s phosphate buffered saline (PBS, Sigma) containing 10% human serum albumin (HSA, Gemini Bio Products) was added and the whole volume was resuspended by pipetting 2-3 times. The sample was then put on metallic thermal beads (ThermoFisher Scientific) at a temperature between 0-4°C and transported to the University of Cambridge for further processing. For HSC isolation the cells were stained with the following antibody cocktail: PECy5 conjugated anti-lineage specific antibodies: CD2 (BD), CD3 (BD), CD10 (BD), CD11b (BD), CD11c (BD), CD19 (BD), CD20 (BD), CD56 (BD), biotinylated CD42b (Pab5, NHS Blood and Transplant, International Blood Group Reference Laboratory [IBGRL]), biotinylated GP6 (Pab5, NHS Blood and Transplant, International Blood Group Reference Laboratory [IBGRL]) used in combination with PECy5 conjugated streptavidin (Biolegend). Alexa Fluor 700 conjugated anti-CD34 (BD), PerCP-Cy5.5 conjugated anti-CD38 (BD), Pacific Blue conjugated anti-CD45RA (Invitrogen), PECy7 conjugated anti-CD90 (BD),PE conjugated anti-CD49f (BD). After staining cells were kept at 4°C before sorting using a FACS Aria Fusion flow sorter (BD). Single HSCs defined as Lineage-, CD34+, CD38-, CD45RA-, CD90+, CD49f+ cells were sorted by FACS directly into individual wells of a 96-well plate. Index sort data was collected for each single cell. For MK isolation the cells were stained for surface MK markers with mouse anti-human CD41a APC conjugated antibody (BD) and mouse anti-human CD42b PE conjugated antibody (BD) and for ploidy analysis with 1ug/ml Hoechst 33342 (Invitrogen). After incubation at 37°C for 30 minutes, the cells were kept at 4°C before sorting using a FACS Aria Fusion flow sorter (BD). Single cells and MK pools of 20 cells were sorted by FACS according to ploidy level using a 100uM nozzle directly into individual wells of a 96-well plate. cDNA synthesis and poly(A) enrichment was performed following the G&amp;T-seq protocol (Macaulay et al. 2015), a variation of the Smart-seq2 protocol1. ERCC spike-in RNA (Ambion) was added to the lysis buffer in a dilution of 1:4,000,000.

  Dataset EGAD00001006677

• The EGA Helpdesk team: 2025 in review and what we are building next

  Behind every dataset submitted, every access request processed, and every technical question answered, there is a team working quietly to keep things moving: the Helpdesk (HD). With the onset of 2026, this feels like the right moment to look back on what 2025 has been like for the HD team: the challenges we faced, how we adapted, and where we're heading next. Why the Helpdesk matters to EGA The EGA Helpdesk is more than a support channel. It plays a key role in maintaining trust in the EGA ecosystem. By supporting data submitters, researchers, Data Access Committees (DACs), and institutional partners, the HD helps ensure that data can flow securely, efficiently, and reliably. When issues arise, the Helpdesk is often the first place where their impact is felt and addressed. In that sense, the HD sits at the intersection of technology, policy, and people. One Helpdesk, two locations, one shared mission The EGA Helpdesk is a joint, distributed team working closely across two locations: CRG (Barcelona, Spain) and EMBL-EBI (Cambridge, UK). Although we are based in different institutions, we operate as a single Helpdesk, with shared workflows, priorities, and responsibility towards users. At CRG, the HD team is formed by: Andrea Max Àlex and me At EMBL-EBI, we work closely with: Silvia Coline Aravind What defines us as a team is simple: we work user-first, even under pressure. In a highly technical environment, clarity, empathy, and consistency matter just as much as tools and processes. A close collaboration across sites is essential to making that happen. What does the EGA Helpdesk do? The HD supports users across the full lifecycle of data in EGA. This includes: Data submissions, uploads, and encryption workflows. Data access requests and permissions. Questions around policies, consent, and data usage. Technical and system-related issues. Coordination between users, internal teams, and external partners. 2025: growth, change, and recalibration 2025 was a year of growth, but not always a predictable one. Early in the year, several technical and system-related challenges required us to adjust our original plans. Priorities shifted, timelines changed, and some improvements had to be rethought. For the HD team, this is often the hardest part of the job: we see delays through the eyes of users and understand the real impact they can have on ongoing research. One of the key lessons from 2025 was that stability is not only a technical challenge, but also an organisational one. Teamwork proved to be essential: anticipating peak periods, sharing context early, and coordinating closely across teams made a tangible difference. When things became complex, working together across roles and locations was what allowed us to keep moving forward. In 2025, the Helpdesk received 5.313 tickets and resolved 5.511 requests, reflecting both increased adoption of EGA and the team’s ability to absorb higher demand. At the same time, demand continued to grow. Compared to 2024, ticket creation increased by over 6%, while resolution capacity grew by more than 11%. The team not only kept up with incoming requests but also resolved part of the accumulated backlog, finishing the year having solved more tickets than were created. The real challenge of 2025 was not overall performance, but how the workload was concentrated during peak months. Seasonality and demand spikes placed pressure on the system, even while overall efficiency remained strong. On a team level, 2025 was also a year of transition. I joined the HD leadership role in January 2025, stepping into a period of change and rapid learning. Later in the year, in October, we said goodbye to Raül, and in January 2026, we welcomed Àlex, strengthening the team for the next phase. What users needed most in 2025 While requests vary widely, some themes stood out throughout the year: Support with data submissions and uploads Data access requests and permissions Technical and system-related issues As EGA matures, day-to-day operations have become more complex. Many long-running tickets are not delayed due to a lack of follow-up, but because they depend on external approvals, cross-institutional coordination, or multi-step processes. Understanding these patterns helps us focus not just on resolving tickets, but on improving how work flows through the system. Looking ahead to 2026 With a reinforced team and clearer insights from 2025, our focus for 2026 shifts from throughput to flow. Key priorities include: Strengthening our web content and documentation Reducing structural backlog Improving cross-team and cross-system coordination Anticipating peak demand earlier and planning capacity accordingly Challenges will continue to arise in 2026, as they always do. However, 2025 reinforced something important: a stable, empathetic, and well-aligned Helpdesk team is essential to supporting EGA's mission at scale. Supporting users well means supporting research, and that remains at the core of what we do.

  Blog ega-helpdesk-team-2025-in-review-and-upcoming-improvements

• A panel of reference haplotypes for imputing complement component 4 (C4) gene structural variation

  Neuropsychiatric and autoimmune disorders have substantial epidemiological correlations (Benros et al., JAMA Psychiatry 2013, PMID: 23760347) and broad, genome-wide patterns of shared genetic risk (Pouget et al., Hum Mol Genet, PMID: 31211845; Tylee et al., Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet 2018, PMID: 30325587). Some cases of psychosis involve autoantibodies against the NMDA receptor, AMPA receptor, or other synaptic proteins (reviewed in Dalmau et al, Lancet Neurol 2011, PMID: 21163445). The related autoimmune conditions lupus and Sjogren&#39;s Syndrome also involve the development of autoantibodies. The possibility that neuropsychiatric disorders can have molecular mechanisms in common with autoimmune disorders - for example, that psychosis involves an inflammatory or autoimmune component in some patients, or that immune molecules are re-used in the brain to underlie other important biological activities (Stevens et al., Cell 2007, PMID: 18083105) - could open novel therapeutic possibilities for neuropsychiatric disorders. At a genetic level, the strongest genetic associations of schizophrenia, lupus, and Sjogren&#39;s Syndrome to common genetic variation involve associations to genetic markers in the Major Histocompatibility Complex (MHC) locus. Bipolar disorder in some studies also associates with variation in or near the MHC locus, though less strongly than schizophrenia does. Intriguingly, the same specific SNPs appear to associate strongly with schizophrenia, lupus, and Sjogren&#39;s; these strongly associating SNPs span a genomic segment that includes the HLA class II genes (which have an important role in antibody production) and the complement component 4 (C4) genes. The specific genes and alleles responsible for these associations need to be completely defined, and the extent to which they represent shared or distinct genetic influences in neuropsychiatric and autoimmune illnesses needs to be clarified. The complement component 4 (C4A and C4B) genes are present in the MHC locus, between the class I and class II HLA genes. C4A and C4B commonly vary in genomic copy number and encode complement proteins with distinct affinities for molecular targets. The complex genetic variation at C4 - arising from many alleles with different numbers of C4A and C4B genes - has been challenging to analyze in large cohorts. We recently developed an approach to this problem based on imputation: people share long haplotypes with the same combinations of SNP and C4 alleles, such that C4A and C4B gene copy numbers can be imputed from SNP data (Sekar et al., Nature 2016, PMID: 26814963). In the current work, to analyze C4 in large cohorts, we developed a way to identify C4 alleles from whole-genome sequence (WGS) data, then analyzed WGS data from 1,234 individuals to create a large multi-ancestry panel of 2,530 reference haplotypes of MHC SNPs and C4 alleles that can then be imputed into still-larger cohorts for which SNP data are available. With this dbGaP submission, we make this reference panel available for other studies. Protocols and software for imputing C4 alleles into genome-wide SNP data, and for performing molecular analyses on the C4 genes (such as direct measurement of copy number from genomic DNA), can be found on the McCarroll Lab web site (http://mccarrolllab.org/resources). We are also working to create additional reference panels for imputation of C4 alleles that will be based on still-larger and more diverse population samples; links to these will also be available on the McCarroll Lab web site as we create and validate them.

  Study phs001992