281 results for "10.37717+DELTAS+Africa+grant+DOI+SACIDS"

in 37.78 milliseconds.

• NEI CIDR Methylation Profiling of Primary Open Angle Glaucoma in NEIGHBOR Samples

  This is a case-control study of Primary Open Angle Glaucoma (POAG). POAG is a progressive optic neuropathy that eventually leads to blindness. More than 30 million people worldwide have Primary Open Angle Glaucoma (POAG), of which greater than 3 million are blind. Gene expression changes in the retina have been observed for POAG. Several recent studies, including the NEIGHBOR consortium (NEI Glaucoma Human genetic collaboration) have used GWAS to identify correlative regions of the genome. Despite this, the genetic basis of Glaucoma is not well understood. Epigenetic variation may account for low heritability and environmental effects on human disease. Despite the significant advances being made in understanding the role of epigenetics in gene regulation in other fields, little is known about the relationship between DNA methylation patterns, retinal gene expression, and retinal disease. The goal of this study is to identify differentially methylated regions in the peripheral blood of patients with POAG. The case identification is as per the NEIGHBOR description: Cases and controls were recruited from ophthalmology clinics and were examined by ophthalmologists. For cases the clinical exam included intraocular pressure measurements, optic nerve assessment and visual field evaluation. Controls had no family history of glaucoma, normal intraocular pressure and normal optic nerves. POAG and control samples come from two sources: Duke University and Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary (MEEI). These samples were collected and genotyped as part of the NEIGHBOR study. From the 219 POAG cases contributed to NEIGHBOR by Duke, 75 samples were selected for exome sequencing by Dr. Terry Gaasterland (UCSD) as part of an ARRA grant. These samples were selected to mirror the distribution of the entire set of Duke patients for variables such as age, cup-to-disc ratio, CCT, and IOP. From these 75 patients, 43 were selected for our study and an additional seven patients chosen at random, for a total 50 patients from Duke. From the 219 Duke controls, 50 were selected to match the age (at the time of blood draw) and sex of the 50 Duke POAG patients. From the NEIGHBOR control samples from MEEI, 27 were selected who best matched the age (at blood draw), time since sample collection and sex of the POAG probands from GLAUGEN. Additional individual-level phenotype and genotype data may be obtained through the authorized access portal of phs000238 (Neighbor - Glaucoma GWAS Study).

  Study phs000458

• Honolulu Heart Program (HHP-BioLINCC)

  Data Access NOTE: Please refer to the “Authorized Access” section below for information about how access to the data from this accession differs from many other dbGaP accessions. Access to Biospecimens is through the NHLBI Biologic Specimen and Data Repository Information Coordinating Center (BioLINCC). Biospecimens from HHP include DNA, plasma, serum, and whole blood. Please note that use of biospecimens in genetic research is subject to a tiered consent. Objectives: The initial objectives of the Honolulu Heart Program were to: 1) estimate morbidity and mortality from coronary heart disease and stroke among Japanese men in Honolulu; 2) compare morbidity and mortality from coronary heart disease and stroke among Japanese men in Japan, Honolulu, and San Francisco; 3) investigate relationships among risk factors, coronary heart disease, and stroke in Japanese men in Honolulu; 4) compare distributions of risk factors among men in Japan, Honolulu, and San Francisco, and relate similarities and differences in risk factors to the occurrence of disease in these areas and in other populations, including Framingham and Puerto Rico; 5) conduct an autopsy study, and to relate pathological findings to morbidity and mortality data; and 6) investigate relationships between risk factors and pathological evidence of atherosclerosis and its complications.Background: The Honolulu Heart Program was initiated in 1965 by the NHLBI as a prospective study of environmental and biological causes of cardiovascular disease among Japanese Americans living in Hawaii. This population was known to have low incidence of coronary heart disease and higher incidence of stroke. The study provided opportunities to investigate relationships among disease frequencies, pathologic findings, and disease predictors in the cohort and to compare the findings in this population with those in other populations, especially cohorts of Japanese men resident in Japan or the U.S.Participants: There were 8006 participants.Design: The study began in 1965 with the first examination of a cohort of 8,006 Japanese-American men residing on the island of Oahu, Hawaii who were born during the period 1900-1919. The first examination was completed in 1968 and was followed by the initiation of a second examination that same year. Three subsequent sub-examinations (Lipoprotein Exams I, II and III) were conducted between 1970 and 1982 to collect lipid measurements on a subset of those who participated in Exam II. The fourth examination of surviving members of the original cohort was conducted during 1991-93 and collected data on 3,741 men. Morbidity and mortality follow-up continues through grant and contract-supported efforts, and the current HHP dataset includes events through 1998.

  Study phs003907

• Genetic Testing to Understand and Address Renal Disease Disparities

  People of African ancestry (Blacks) have increased risk of kidney failure due to numerous socioeconomic, environmental, and clinical factors. Two variants in the APOL1 gene (GeneID: 8542) are now thought to account for much of the racial disparity associated with hypertensive kidney failure in Blacks. One in 7 AAs carry this risk allele, but it is nearly absent in other populations; the variants protect against infection with African trypanosomiasis which is endemic to Africa. However, this knowledge has not been translated into clinical care to help improve patient outcomes and address disparities. It is unknown whether patient or clinician knowledge of genetic risk impacts patient care (i.e., renal surveillance, BP medication use/intensification) or outcomes such as BP control and CKD. GUARDD is a randomized trial to evaluate the effects and challenges of incorporating genetic risk information into primary care. Hypertensive, nondiabetic, adults with self-reported African ancestry, without kidney dysfunction, are recruited from diverse clinical settings and randomized to undergo APOL1 genetic testing at baseline (intervention) or at one year (waitlist control). Prior to enrolling their patients, providers are educated about genomics and APOL1. Guided by a genetic counselor, trained staff return APOL1 results to patients and provide low-literacy educational materials. Real-time clinical decision support tools alert clinicians of their patients' APOL1 results and associated risk status at the point of care. Our academic - community clinical partnership designed a study to generate information about the impact of genetic risk information on our primary outcome - patient care (renal surveillance by clinicians, of serum creatinine and/or urine albumin tests. with a sub-aim of reduction of systolic blood pressure). Secondary outcomes include impact on primary outcomes at 12 months, psycho-behavioral differences of patients between groups and over time, clinician knowledge, attitudes and beliefs at baseline and 12 months, and differences in outcomes between those tested and not tested. GUARDD will help establish the effective implementation of APOL1 risk informed management of hypertensive patients at high risk of CKD, and will provide a robust framework for future endeavors to implement genomic medicine in diverse clinical practices. It will also add to the important dialog about factors that contribute to and may help eliminate racial disparities in kidney disease.

  Study phs001620

• New England-Based Case-Control Study of Ovarian Cancer

  The case-control data provided to dbGaP were collected under NCI grant number CA54419 which had 3 enrollment phases: I (1992-1997), II (1998-2002) and III (2003-2008). Altogether, CA54419 funded 15 years of data and specimen collection, resulting in one of the longest running population based case-control studies of ovarian cancer. The study goal was to examine reproductive factors, lifestyle exposures, and genetic background in relation to ovarian cancer risk. The project recruited cases from Eastern Massachusetts and New Hampshire, and became known as the New England-based Case-Control study (NECC) of ovarian cancer. 3957 ovarian cancer cases diagnosed at ages 18-80 and residing in Eastern Massachusetts and New Hampshire were identified through tumor boards and registries. Of these, 3083 (78%) were eligible and among those eligible, 2203 (71%) were enrolled. After excluding 127 non-epithelial and 35 mixed mesodermal tumors, 2041 cases with epithelial tumors of ovarian, primary peritoneal, and fallopian tube origin, including borderline malignancies were included. On average, cases were interviewed 10 months after their diagnosis. A pathologist reviewed pathology reports and recorded histologic subtype, grade, and stage. Mixed ovarian cancers described as predominantly one type were classified as that type. Undifferentiated, transitional cell tumors, or mixed serous/transitional cell tumors were counted as serous. Other mixed epithelial, malignant Brenner, and unspecified epithelial tumors were classified as other. 2100 controls were identified through random digit dialing (RDD), driver-license lists, and town-resident lists. During the first funding phase from 1992 to 1997, 420 (72%) controls identified through RDD and 102 (51%) through town-resident lists agreed to participate. From 1998 to 2008, only town-resident lists were used to identify potential controls. 4366 controls were identified, of whom 1426 (33%) were ineligible if they had died, moved, or were seriously ill or if they did not have a working telephone, speak English, or have at least one ovary. Of eligible controls, 1362 (46%) declined to participate by phone or via 'opt-out' postcard and 1578 (54%) were enrolled. Controls were frequency matched to cases by 5-year age groups and region of residence. In all phases, after written informed consent, demographic information, reproductive and medical history, and habits were assessed by in-person or telephone interview (in a few instances). All of the questions were framed with respect to a reference date defined as 1 year before the diagnosis date for women in the case group and the date of interview for those in the control group. This study was approved by institutional review boards at Dana Farber Harvard Cancer Center and Dartmouth Medical Center.

  Study phs001034

• Birth Defects: Moebius Syndrome and Related Congenital Facial Weakness Disorders

  It is estimated that about 1 in every 33 infants in the United States is born with a birth defect. Among these, the subset of birth defect syndromes associated with facial weakness and lack of facial expression can have profound implications for social interactions and psychosocial development. Moebius syndrome is defined by congenital and non-progressive facial weakness and limited eye abduction, and most cases are believed to result from dysfunction of cranial nuclei/nerves VI and VII. Although rare, this syndrome causes significant impairment because of facial weakness and associated intellectual disabilities, autism, hearing loss, difficulty swallowing and breathing, peripheral neuropathy, muscle hypotonia, heart defects, chest wall abnormalities, and limb malformations. The phenotypic spectrum and the associated genetic and environmental factors underlying Moebius syndrome are poorly understood. The goal of this research is to identify causative gene mutations for Moebius syndrome and related conditions, such as Moebius-Poland or -Robin sequence, hereditary congenital facial paresis (HCFP), and oculoauriculovertebral dysplasia (Goldenhar syndrome). This proposal builds on an ongoing collaboration among researchers at Mount Sinai Medical Center, Boston Children's Hospital, NHGRI intramural program, and the Moebius Syndrome Foundation, but aims to greatly extend that work by collaboration with investigators in the NIH Clinical Center (CC). Our groups have already defined a new autosomal dominant syndrome with Moebius syndrome, Kallmann syndrome, cyclic vomiting resulting from a TUBB3 E410K substitution. We have also identified a new autosomal recessive Moebius-related syndrome with bilateral facial palsy, hearing loss, and strabismus resulting from a HOXB1 R207C substitution. Through collaborative efforts of these extramural teams with intramural investigators, whole exome sequencing (WES) has been conducted for four families with Moebius-like features, and data analyses are ongoing. The overall goal of this new grant application will be to conduct extensive phenotype analysis on approximately 24 families per year with Moebius and other undefined syndromes with facial weakness. Studies to be conducted at the CC include neurology, psychiatry, neurocognitive, rehabilitation medicine (muscle strength, speech/language pathology), ophthalmology, audiology, and genetics evaluations; autism screening; electromyography, nerve conduction, and blink reflex studies; videoscopy of quantitative eye movement recordings; 3D-CT craniofacial imaging; MRI of the brain, orbit, internal auditory canals, posterior fossa including brain diffusion tensor imaging for tractography; and genetic counseling. Jointly with the extramural teams, WES analysis and variant confirmation will be performed. A more comprehensive definition of the phenotypic and genotypic spectrum of these birth defects will have a significant impact on our understanding of the molecular pathways underlying dysmorphologies, cranial nerve development, and more common childhood disorders such as autism. Thus, this project will lead to strategies for prevention and treatment of birth defects.

  Study phs001383

• NIPT samples for systematic evaluation of NIPT aneuploidy detection software tools

  This dataset contains two sets of samples. The reference sample set consists of a total of 669 samples that had been reported previously to be euploid by the NIPTIFY screening test. The validation sample set is based on a previously published validation study by Zilina et al. (1), consisting of 423 samples, of which 259 were high-risk pregnancies that had undergone diagnostic invasive prenatal analysis (1). All samples were sequenced with Illumina NextSeq 500 platform, producing 85 bp single-end reads with an average per-sample coverage of 0.32× at the University of Tartu, Institute of Genomics Core Facility, according to the manufacturer’s standard protocols, as described previously (1). This study was performed with the approval of the Research Ethics Committee of the University of Tartu (#315/T-13). 1. Zilina O, Rekker K, Kaplinski L, Sauk M, Paluoja P, Teder H, et al. Creating basis for introducing non‐invasive prenatal testing in the Estonian public health setting. Prenat Diagn [Internet]. 2019 Dec 6;39(13):1262-8. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/pd.5578

  Dataset EGAD00001007712

• PREDICT-HD Huntington Disease Study

  The purpose of this project is to make clinical measurements from the PREDICT-HD consortium available through the dbGaP mechanism. The phenotype data will first be converted into a community open standard and subsequently exported to dbGaP for archival and open access distribution of the results of the studies. This will permit members of the scientific community to utilize a permanent resource for investigating the interactions of phenotypes upon an international cohort of early Huntington Disease. In version 2 cut of the data we provided HD CAG repeat lengths for both alleles as well as enrollment age of all participants. We have also generated unique identifiers prospectively compatible with the larger initiative GWAS in Huntington's Disease project (also on DbGaP). As such, the version 1 cut of the data was mainly proof of concept and should be deprecated. Going forward, all updates will add-on to version 2 cut of the data. In version 3 cut of the data, we provided baseline or the first usable MRI T1-weighted imaging analysis subcortical and cortical segmentations and cortical parcellations based on a customized Freesurfer 5.2 pipeline developed at The University of Iowa. The customizations to the standard pipeline were mainly to improve bias field correction and image normalization such that segmentation of gray, white, internal csf, dura and surface CSF are optimized for the Freesurfer pipeline. There are 1111 subjects with results in this data release. In version 4 cut of the data, we provided all longitudinal clinical measurements for all subjects (total of 1476) assessmented or enrolled through the end of 2013. Additionally, we are providing measurements on 39 baseline FDG PET images spatially normalized by SPM5 into MNI space, relative regional metabolic values computed in 120 volumes of interest (VOI) defined in the Automated Anatomical Labeling (AAL) Atlas (Tzourio-Mazoyer et al. 2002), and global metabolic values calculated by SPM standard mean voxel value (within per image fullmean/8 mask). This project is a funded ancillary study of PREDICT-HD. In version 5 cut of the data, we provided the first of many forthcoming results from ancilliary studies of PREDICT-HD. In this data cut, we provide individual subject results derived from structural MRI data. The earliest MRI session for each subject was used. The results summarized represent source based morphometry loading coefficients for 23 components (see: "Patterns of Co-Occurring Gray Matter Concentration Loss across the Huntington Disease Prodrome", Ciarochi et al., 2016, Front Neurol. 2016; 7: 147, Published online 2016 Sep 21. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2016.00147]. In this version 6 cut of the data, we provide a full set of derived data, more than 10,000 raw MRI images, and ancillary study data sets. For sample information please link to: PREDICT-HD Biospecimen Resources

  Study phs000222

• Capturing the Genetic Diversity of the Himba Population

  The Himba people are a semi-nomadic, Bantu-speaking pastoralist group from the northwestern Kunene region of Namibia. Because of their limited population size, restricted geographic distribution, and endogamy, founder populations represent an ideal system for genetic analyses due to reduction of the confounding environmental and cultural variables. The original study used genotype data and demographic interview data to understand family dynamics and ancestry in a population of Himba pastoralists. HLA allele calls and genome-wide methylation array data were later generated for a subset of the initial dataset for 2 additional studies. These 3 molecular datasets, available through dbGaP, are relevant to broader studies of ancestry, allele frequencies and the relationship of Himba to other ethnic groups in sub-Saharan Africa. The Himba population provides a unique opportunity to study questions regarding extra-pair paternity and mate selection because Himba culture allows both men and women, married and not, to take multiple partners. Previous estimates of extra-pair paternity rates in human populations have been very low, but these estimates lack global and cultural diversity in population representation. Thus, investigating the rate of extra-pair paternity in the Himba greatly aids in understanding the global variation in non-paternity rates among human populations. Saliva samples were collected from parents and children, and were genotyped on Illumina SNP array platforms (MEGAex and H3Africa). In total, 678 individuals' genotype array data are deposited. Paternity results were de-identified and protected by a double blind protocol (no researcher has full knowledge of individual paternity results). Due to the sensitive nature of this study, paternity assertions are not available for access. For a subset of 360 individuals, HLA class 1 (A, B, C) and class 2 (DPA1, DPB1, DQA1, DQB1, DRB1) genes were targeted for DNA sequencing using a probe-based capture method. HLA alleles at the four field resolution were determined from the sequence capture using the consensus calls obtained from two algorithms: NGSengine® 2.10.0 (GenDX, Utrecht, the Netherlands) and HLA Explore™ (Omixon Biocomputing Ltd. Budapest, Hungary). These data were used to investigate evidence for mate selection based on HLA dissimilarity in the Himba. Himba cultural norms permit concurrent arranged marriages and chosen sexual partnerships allowing us to directly test for evidence of disassortative mate selection based on HLA genotype. Due to the sensitive nature of this study, partnership data are not available for access.For a subset of 51 Himba individuals methylation array data was generated from the saliva-derived DNA. These data were generated in order to investigate the accuracy of epigenetic age predictors in this population and to construct population-specific epigenetic age predictors in a subsequent publication. Chronological ages are available for these 51 individuals.

  Study phs001995

• Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS)

  Background and Rationale for the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS) Over the last several decades, advances in treatments for childhood and adolescent cancer have substantially improved survival following diagnosis. These improvements gave rise to the responsibility for investigating long-term treatment-associated morbidity and mortality. Early efforts to describe late effects were largely conducted through single-institution and limited consortia studies. However, by the mid-1980s, it became increasingly clear that these approaches had inherent limitations, including small sample size, convenience sampling, incompletely characterized populations, and limited length of follow-up. To overcome these limitations, the CCSS was proposed and funded by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) as a U01 grant in 1994. Subsequently, the strengths of the CCSS, including an efficient and extensive infrastructure, plus expanding database and biorepository, were recognized and appreciated. Thus, in consultation with the NCI, the CCSS was converted to a U24 (resource grant) funding mechanism to serve the scientific community in 2000. The overarching goal of the CCSS resource is to increase the conduct of innovative and high impact research related to pediatric cancer survivorship. CCSS has been used extensively by researchers from a wide range of disciplines to address a broad spectrum of topics. Strengths of the resource include its large size, comprehensive annotation of treatment exposures, ongoing longitudinal follow-up with characterization of a wide array of participant characteristics and outcomes, and an established biorepository. Design of the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study The Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS) is a multi-institutional, multi-disciplinary collaborative research resource comprised of a retrospective hospital-based cohort of survivors of childhood cancer and a comparison sibling cohort. Eligible survivors from 31 participating institutions were diagnosed between 1970 and 1999, prior to age 21 years, with selected common pediatric cancers (leukemia, central nervous system tumors, Hodgkin lymphoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, kidney tumors, neuroblastoma, soft tissue sarcoma, or bone tumors). All patients who survived five years from the date of diagnosis were eligible, regardless of disease or treatment status. The baseline questionnaire was completed by 24,368 survivors and 5,039 siblings recruited to serve as a comparison group. To date, participants have completed three general follow-up surveys, as well as a number of specialized surveys on specific topics (e.g. health care, insurance, screening practices, men's and women's health issues, adolescent health, sleep and fatigue). In addition, biological samples (buccal cells, saliva and/or blood) have been collected for over 11,000 participants. Full descriptions of the design and characteristics of the CCSS have been previously published (Robison et al; Leisenring et al.), and available data and samples are described at https://ccss.stjude.org/develop-a-study/gwas-data-resource.html. Treatment Data in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study A key feature of CCSS is the availability of detailed treatment data, which were collected by abstraction of medical records for each individual member of the cohort. Detailed abstraction included dates of therapy, protocol information, and specific details regarding surgery, chemotherapy and radiation. Quantitative dose details were collected for 22 specific chemotherapeutic agents, including alkylating agents, anthracyclines, platinum compounds and epipodophyllotoxins. In addition to individual agent doses, algorithms have been created to calculate cumulative doses of all drugs in a specific class, such as anthracyclines (doxorubicin, daunomycin and idarubicin) or platinum agents (cisplatinum and carboplatinum). Data abstracted for surgeries included dates and both the names and corresponding International Classification of Diseases (9th revision) code. For radiation treatment data, all relevant records were sent to the Radiation Physics Center at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center for detailed abstraction and dosimetry. Initial body region dosimetry was performed for all participants, followed by more detailed dosimetry as needed for specific studies. Genomics Data in the Childhood Cancer Survivor StudyThe NCI's Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics and CCSS investigators collaborated to conduct genomics studies (SNP array genotyping and whole exome sequencing) using samples from the CCSS Biorepository. Studies included all cohort participants with available DNA regardless of sex or ancestry when the genomics studies were initiated. Phenotype Data in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study Vital status and cause of death for both participants and non-participants is determined via linkage with the National Death Index (NDI). Identification of subsequent neoplasms is based on self-report, followed by validation using medical records, or via NDI. A wide array of additional health outcomes have been ascertained via a comprehensive set of questions on the CCSS questionnaires, covering potential adverse events across a range of organ systems (hearing/vision/speech, urinary, hormonal, heart and circulatory, respiratory, digestive, brain and nervous systems). In addition to health outcomes, longitudinal data have been collected on demographics, health behaviors, family history, screening practices, insurance status, and a range of psychosocial and neurocognitive factors. A full listing of available variables and copies of the CCSS questionnaires are available at http://ccss.stjude.org. Research Areas in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study Extensive use by the research community has resulted in over 265 published manuscripts on a wide range of topics, including associations between treatment factors and mortality, subsequent neoplasms, chronic health conditions, cardiac events, neurocognitive sequelae, psychosocial factors, fertility, and health status. Additional topics have included health behaviors, screening practices, health care access and utilization, statistical and exposure assessment methodology, and development of risk prediction models. A full listing of published manuscripts using CCSS data is available on the CCSS website at https://ccss.stjude.org/published-research/publications.html. The Childhood Cancer Survivor Study as a Resource for Investigators The CCSS is an NCI-funded resource (U24 CA55727) to promote and facilitate research among long-term survivors of cancer diagnosed during childhood and adolescence. Interested investigators are encouraged to develop research ideas and propose projects within CCSS, whether or not they are from a participating CCSS institution. The CCSS is now accepting proposals to collaborate with CCSS and NCI investigators in the use of genomics data and corresponding outcomes-related data to address innovative research questions relating to potential genetic contributions to risk for treatment-related outcomes. Any researcher, or group of researchers, qualified to conduct genetic research can submit a proposal. There are no restrictions relative to country, institution, or prior involvement in CCSS. A full description of the process for developing a proposal for genetic research in CCSS can be found at https://ccss.stjude.org/develop-a-study/gwas-data-resource.html, along with listings of approved proposals.

  Study phs001327

• CIDR, NCI, NIDA Sequencing of Targeted Genomic Regions Associated with Smoking

  This study includes samples from two projects: Collaborative Genetic Study of Nicotine Dependence (COGEND; PI: Laura Bierut) and Genetic Study of Nicotine Dependence in African Americans (AAND; PI: Laura Bierut and Eric Johnson). The majority of the COGEND subjects included in the current study overlap with the two datasets already available on dbGaP. GWAS data are available for COGEND subjects through the Study of Addiction: Genetics and Environment (SAGE), dbGaP study accession phs000092. It should be noted that the case definition in the SAGE study is DSM-IV alcohol dependence. GWAS data are available for additional COGEND subjects through The Genetic Architecture of Smoking and Smoking Cessation, dbGaP study accession phs000404. The overall goal of this project is to apply deep sequencing to key genomic regions associated with nicotine dependence in order to accelerate the discovery of variation in molecular pathways that govern the development of nicotine dependence. The sample includes unrelated cases and controls of European American and African American descent. Cases are defined by a commonly used definition of nicotine dependence, a current score of 4 or more (maximum score of 10) on the Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND). Control status is defined as an individual who smoked at least 100 cigarettes during their lifetime, yet never became dependent (lifetime FTND<2). By selecting controls who smoked cigarettes, we focus on those genetic effects that are specific to the development of nicotine dependence. COGEND: COGEND was initiated in 2001 as a three-part program project grant funded through the National Cancer Institute (NCI; PI: Laura Bierut). The three projects included a study of the familial transmission of nicotine dependence, a genetic study of nicotine dependence, and a study of the relationship of nicotine dependence with nicotine metabolism. The primary goal was to detect, localize, and characterize genes that predispose or protect an individual with respect to heavy tobacco consumption, nicotine dependence, and related phenotypes and to integrate these findings with the family transmission and nicotine metabolism findings. The primary design was a community based case-control study. Nicotine dependent cases and non-dependent, smoking controls were identified and recruited from Detroit and St. Louis. More than 54,000 subjects aged 25-44 years were screened by telephone; more than 3,100 subjects were personally interviewed; and more than 2,900 subjects donated blood samples for genetic studies. AAND: AAND was initiated in 2009 to identify and characterize genetic determinants of nicotine dependence in a large African American population. Community-based recruitment of approximately 100,000 people was conducted to ascertain 1,000 African American nicotine dependent cases and 1,000 African American non-dependent, smoking controls. All subjects were between the ages of 25-44. Subjects were screened by telephone; if they qualified as a case or control, they completed the same interview that was used in COGEND and donated a blood sample. Both studies (COGEND and AAND) included measures of basic socio-demographic variables, including age, sex, race/ethnicity, family income, and educational attainment using the Semi-Structured Assessment for the Genetics of Nicotine Dependence. Information on nicotine dependence, as assessed by the Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND) is available for all subjects. In addition, participants also completed the Nicotine Dependence Syndrome Scale (NDSS; Shiffman et al., 2004) and the Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Dependence Motives (WISDM-68; Piper et al, 2004). All subjects were assessed in person by trained research assistants.

  Study phs000813

• CINECA_synthetic_cohort_EUROPE_UK1 referencing fake samples

  Please note: This synthetic data set (with cohort “participants” / ”subjects” marked with FAKE) has no identifiable data and cannot be used to make any inference about cohort data or results. The purpose of this dataset is to aid development of technical implementations for cohort data discovery, harmonization, access, and federated analysis. In support of FAIRness in data sharing, this dataset is made freely available under the Creative Commons Licence (CC-BY). Please ensure this preamble is included with this dataset and that the CINECA project (funding: EC H2020 grant 825775) is acknowledged. For any questions please contact isuru@ebi.ac.uk or cthomas@ebi.ac.uk This dataset (CINECA_synthetic_cohort_EUROPE_UK1) consists of 2521 samples which have genetic data based on 1000 Genomes data (https://www.nature.com/articles/nature15393), and synthetic subject attributes and phenotypic data derived from UKBiobank (https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1001779). These data were initially derived using the TOFU tool (https://github.com/spiros/tofu), which generates randomly generated values based on the UKBiobank data dictionary. Categorical values were randomly generated based on the data dictionary, continuous variables generated based on the distribution of values reported by the UK Biobank showcase, and date / time values were random. Additionally we split the phenotypes and attributes into 4 main classes - general, cancer, diabetes mellitus, and cardiac. We assigned the general attributes to all the samples, and the cardiac / diabetes mellitus / cancer attributes to a proportion of the total samples. Once the initial set of phenotypes and attributes were generated, the data data was checked for consistency and where possible dependent attributes were calculated from the independent variables generated by TOFU. For example, BMI was calculated from height and weight data, and age at death generated by date of death and date of birth. These data were then loaded to the development instance of Biosamples (https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biosamples/) which accessioned each of the samples. The genetic data are derived from the 1000 Genomes Phase 3 release (https://www.internationalgenome.org/category/phase-3/). The genotype data consists of a single joint call vcf files with call genotypes for all 2504 samples, plus bed, bim, fam, and nosex files generated via plink for these samples and genotypes. The genotype data has had a variety of errors introduced to mimic real data and as a test for quality control pipelines. These include gender mismatches, ethnic background mislabelling and low call rates for a randomly chosen subset of sample data as well as deviations from Hardy Weinberg equilibrium and low call rates for a random selection of variants. Additionally 40 samples have raw genetic data available in the form of both bam and cram files, including unmapped data. The gender of the samples in the 1000 genomes data has been matched to the synthetic phenotypic data generated for these samples. The genetic data was then linked to the synthetic data in BioSamples, and submitted to EGA.

  Dataset EGAD00001006673

• Study of Addiction: Genetics and Environment (SAGE)

  This study is part of the Gene Environment Association Studies initiative (GENEVA) funded by the National Human Genome Research Institute. The overarching goal is to identify novel genetic factors that contribute to addiction through a large-scale genome-wide association study of DSM-IV alcohol dependent (and frequently illicit drug dependent) cases and non-dependent, unrelated control subjects of European and African American descent. The focus of this proposal is a case-control design of unrelated individuals for a genetic association study of addiction. Cases are defined as individuals with DSM-IV alcohol dependence (lifetime) and potentially other illicit drug dependence. In addition to the categorical diagnosis, we have data on ordinal measurements of number of DSM-IV symptoms for alcohol, nicotine, marijuana, cocaine, opiates and other drugs so that we will able to construct quantitative measurements of addiction severity over a wide range of substances. Controls are defined as individuals who have been exposed to alcohol (and possibly to other drugs), but have never met lifetime diagnosis for alcohol dependence or dependence on other illicit substances. Analyses that include refinement of the phenotype and incorporation of important demographic and environmental factors into association studies will be pursued. Cases and controls were selected from three large, complementary datasets: the Collaborative Study on the Genetics of Alcoholism (COGA), the Family Study of Cocaine Dependence (FSCD), and the Collaborative Genetic Study of Nicotine Dependence (COGEND). COGA: COGA was initiated in 1989 and is a large-scale family study that has had as its primary aim the identification of genes that contribute to alcoholism susceptibility and related characteristics. COGA is funded through the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA). Subjects were recruited from 7 sites across the U.S. Alcohol dependent probands were recruited from treatment facilities and assessed by personal interview. After securing permission, other family members were also assessed. A set of comparison families was drawn from the same communities as the families recruited through the alcohol dependent probands. Assessment involved a comprehensive personal interview developed for this project, the Semi-Structured Assessment for the Genetics of Alcoholism (SSAGA), which gathers detailed information on alcoholism related symptoms along with other drugs and psychiatric symptoms. Families with three or more first-degree relatives who were alcohol dependent were invited for more extensive testing, including neurophysiology evaluations (ERPs and EEGs) and a battery of neuropsychological assessments. Blood was obtained for genetic studies. Institutional Review Boards at all sites approved the protocols, including sharing in the NIAAA national repository. COGA has four Co-Principal Investigators Bernice Porjesz, Victor Hesselbrock, Howard Edenberg, and Laura Bierut. COGA includes nine different centers where data collection, analysis, and storage take place. The nine sites and Principal Investigators and Co-investigators are: University of Connecticut (Victor Hesselbrock); Indiana University (Howard Edenberg, John Nurnberger, Jr., Tatiana Foroud); University of Iowa (Samuel Kuperman); SUNY Downstate (Bernice Porjesz); Washington University in St. Louis (Laura Bierut, Alison Goate, John Rice); University of California at San Diego (Marc Schuckit); Howard University (Robert Taylor); Rutgers University (Jay Tischfield); Southwest Foundation (Laura Almasy). Q. Max Guo serves as the NIAAA Staff Collaborator. This national collaborative study is supported by the NIH Grant U10AA008401 from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) and the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). Family Study of Cocaine Dependence (FSCD): This project was initiated in 2000 as a case-control family study of cocaine dependence funded through the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA; PI: Laura Bierut). The primary goal was to increase the understanding of the familial and non-familial antecedents and consequences of cocaine dependence. Cocaine dependent individuals were systematically recruited from chemical dependency treatment units (both public and private; residential and outpatient) in the greater St. Louis metropolitan area. Community based control subjects were identified through a Missouri Driver's License Registry (maintained at Washington University for research purposes) and matched by age, race, gender, and residential zip code. As a supplement to this project, blood samples were collected for future genetic analysis and were included in the NIDA Genetics Consortium. Phenotypic data, DNA, and cell lines are in the NIDA Center for Genetics Studies. Collaborative Genetic Study of Nicotine Dependence (COGEND): COGEND was initiated in 2001 as a three-part program project grant funded through the National Cancer Institute (NCI; PI: Laura Bierut). The three projects included a study of the familial transmission of nicotine dependence, a genetic study of nicotine dependence, and a study of the relationship of nicotine dependence with nicotine metabolism. The primary goal is to detect, localize, and characterize genes that predispose or protect an individual with respect to heavy tobacco consumption, nicotine dependence, and related phenotypes and to integrate these findings with the family transmission and nicotine metabolism findings. The primary design is a community based case-control family study. All subjects were recruited from Detroit and St. Louis. Nicotine dependent cases and non-dependent smoking controls were identified and recruited. In addition, one sibling for each case and control subject was recruited in a subset of the sample. Over 56,000 subjects aged 25-44 years were screened by telephone, over 3,100 subjects were personally interviewed, and over 2,900 donated blood samples for genetic studies. All three studies (COGA, COGEND, FSCD) include measures of basic socio-demographic variables, including age, sex, race/ethnicity, family income, educational attainment, religious participation, and family structure. Other important covariates and/or potential moderators of genetic effects include comorbid addictions and age at initiation of use for cigarettes, alcohol and drugs. The assessments also include measures of various life stressors, such as physical and sexual abuse, which have been implicated in gene-environment interactions for several disorders. Coding for both individual variables and indices has been standardized across studies. All subjects were assessed in person by trained research assistants. Funding support for genotyping, which was performed at the Johns Hopkins University Center for Inherited Disease Research (CIDR), was provided by the NIH GEI (U01HG004438), the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, and the NIH contract "High throughput genotyping for studying the genetic contributions to human disease"(HHSN268200782096C). Note for Publications Related to Study: The Study of Addiction: Genetics and Environment (SAGE) has not yet generated publications. Below is a listing of publications related to the three studies from which the SAGE sample was selected. COGA has over 228 publications listed at www.niaaagenetics.org This study is part of the Gene Environment Association Studies initiative (GENEVA, http://www.genevastudy.org) funded by the trans-NIH Genes, Environment, and Health Initiative (GEI). The overarching goal is to identify novel genetic factors that contribute to addiction through a large-scale genome-wide association study of DSM-IV alcohol dependent (and frequently illicit drug dependent) cases and non-dependent, unrelated control subjects of European and African American descent. Genotyping was performed at the Johns Hopkins University Center for Inherited Disease Research (CIDR). Data cleaning and harmonization were done at the GEI-funded GENEVA Coordinating Center at the University of Washington.

  Study phs000092

• Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) Cohort

  MESA The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) is a study of the characteristics of subclinical cardiovascular disease (disease detected non-invasively before it has produced clinical signs and symptoms) and the risk factors that predict progression to clinically overt cardiovascular disease or progression of the subclinical disease. MESA researchers study a diverse, population-based sample of 6,814 asymptomatic men and women aged 45-84. Thirty-eight percent of the recruited participants are white, 28 percent African-American, 22 percent Hispanic, and 12 percent Asian, predominantly of Chinese descent. Participants were recruited from six field centers across the United States: Wake Forest University, Columbia University, Johns Hopkins University, University of Minnesota, Northwestern University and University of California - Los Angeles. Each participant received an extensive physical exam to determine coronary calcification, ventricular mass and function, flow-mediated endothelial vasodilation, carotid intimal-medial wall thickness and presence of echogenic lucencies in the carotid artery, lower extremity vascular insufficiency, arterial wave forms, electrocardiographic (ECG) measures, standard coronary risk factors, sociodemographic factors, lifestyle factors, and psychosocial factors. Selected repetition of subclinical disease measures and risk factors at follow-up visits allows study of the progression of disease. Blood samples have been assayed for putative biochemical risk factors and stored for case-control studies. DNA has been extracted and lymphocytes cryopreserved (for possible immortalization) for study of candidate genes and possibly, genome-wide scanning, expression, and other genetic techniques. Participants are being followed for identification and characterization of cardiovascular disease events, including acute myocardial infarction and other forms of coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, and congestive heart failure; for cardiovascular disease interventions; and for mortality. In addition to the six Field Centers, MESA involves a Coordinating Center, a Central Laboratory, and Central Reading Centers for Computed Tomography (CT), Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Ultrasound, and Electrocardiography (ECG). Protocol development, staff training, and pilot testing were performed in the first 18 months of the study. The first examination took place over two years, from July 2000 - July 2002. It was followed by four examination periods that were 17-20 months in length. Participants have been contacted every 9 to 12 months throughout the study to assess clinical morbidity and mortality. MESA Family The general goal of the MESA Family Study, an ancillary study to MESA funded by a grant from NHLBI, is to apply modern genetic analysis and genotyping methodologies to delineate the genetic determinants of early atherosclerosis. This is being accomplished by utilizing all the current organizational structures of the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) and Genetic Centers at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and University of Virginia. In the MESA Family Study, the goal is to locate and identify genes contributing to the genetic risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD), by looking at the early changes of atherosclerosis within families (mainly siblings). 2128 individuals from 594 families, yielding 3,026 sibpairs divided between African Americans and Hispanic-Americans, were recruited by utilizing the existing framework of MESA. MESA Family studied siblings of index subjects from the MESA study and from new sibpair families (with the same demographic characteristics) and is determining the extent of genetic contribution to the variation in coronary calcium (obtained via CT Scan) and carotid artery wall thickness (B-mode ultrasound) in the two largest non-majority U.S. populations. In a small proportion of subjects, parents of MESA index subjects participating in MESA Family were studied but only to have blood drawn for genotyping. The MESA Family cohort was recruited from the six MESA Field Centers. MESA Family participants underwent the same examination as MESA participants during May 2004 - May 2007. DNA was extracted and lymphocytes immortalized for study of candidate genes, genome-wide linkage scanning, and analyzed for linkage with these subclinical cardiovascular traits. While linkage analysis is the primary approach being used, an additional aspect of the MESA Family Study takes advantage of the existing MESA study population for testing a variety of candidate genes for association with the same subclinical traits. Genotyping and data analysis will occur throughout the study. MESA Air The general goal of the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis and Air Pollution ('MESA Air') is to prospectively examine the relation between an individual level assessment of long-term ambient air pollution exposures (including PM2.5 and the progression of subclinical cardiovascular disease in a multi-city, multi-ethnic cohort. MESA Air will also prospectively examine the relationship between an individual level assessment of long-term ambient air pollution exposures and the incidence of cardiovascular disease, including myocardial infarction and cardiovascular death. MESA AIR is funded by a grant from the United States Environmental Protection Agency to the University of Washington and subcontracts from the UW to other participating institutions. MESA Air will assess if ambient air pollution is associated with changes over time in subclinical measures of atherosclerosis and plasma markers of inflammation, oxidative damage, and endothelial activation in a longitudinal data model, adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and specific cardiovascular risk factors (such as diabetes, hypertension, smoking, and diet). The study will similarly assess if the incidence of cardiovascular events is associated with long-term exposure to ambient air pollution, using a proportional hazards model. The study includes refinement of statistical tools, and explores joint/independent effects of acute and long-term pollutant exposure in the occurrence of cardiovascular disease. The MESA Air study is built on the foundation of the ongoing MESA study. The parent MESA Study cohort is located in six geographic areas ('Field Centers') that capture tremendous exposure heterogeneity, comparable to or greater than the variability in locations of prior U.S. cohort studies. In addition to the six Field Centers, the study involves a Coordinating Center, a Central Laboratory, and Reading Centers for Computed Tomography (CT), ultrasound and air pollution data. The cohort for the MESA Air study currently includes 6226 subjects: 5479 enrolled in the parent MESA study; 257 recruited specifically for this study, and 490 recruited from the MESA Family study. The entire MESA Air cohort will be followed over a 10-year project period for the occurrence of cardiovascular disease events. On two occasions over the ten-year study period, 3600 subjects from the MESA Air cohort, residing in nine locales, will undergo computed tomography scanning to assess presence and extent of coronary artery calcification (CAC), and ultrasound of the carotid artery to determine intima-media thickness (IMT). We will also repeatedly assess plasma markers of inflammation, oxidative damage, and endothelial function in 720 subjects. MESA Air adds state-of-the-art air pollution exposure assessment information to the MESA cohort study, and introduces new subjects and outcome measures to achieve our aims. The study will assess long-term individual-level exposure to ambient air pollutants for each subject using community-scale monitoring, outdoor spatial variation, subject proximity to pollution sources, pollutants' infiltration efficiency, and personal time-activity information. The exposure models will be validated using detailed monitoring in a subset of subjects. The MESA 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" box located on the right hand side of this top-level study page phs000209 MESA Cohort. phs000420 MESA SHARe phs000283 MESA CARe phs000403 MESA ESP Heart-GO

  Study phs000209

• CIDR: Collaborative Study on the Genetics of Alcoholism Case Control Study

  This is a case-control study of alcoholism, in which the subjects have been drawn from the Collaborative Study on the Genetics of Alcoholism (COGA), a large, ongoing family-based study that includes subjects from seven sites around the US. COGA has gathered detailed, standardized data on study participants, including diagnostic and neurophysiological assessments. This sample has already proved successful in identifying several genes that influence the risk for alcoholism and neurophysiological endophenotypes, which have been independently replicated. COGA data were included as part of two Genetic Analysis Workshops, and the phenotypes are familiar to the genetics community. Alcoholic probands were recruited from treatment facilities, assessed by personal interview, and after securing permission, other family members were also assessed. A set of comparison families was drawn from the same communities as the families recruited through an alcoholic proband. Assessment involved a detailed personal interview developed for this project, the Semi-Structured Assessment for the Genetics of Alcoholism (SSAGA), which gathers detailed information on alcoholism related symptoms along with other drugs and psychiatric symptoms. Many participants also came to the laboratories for electroencephalographic studies. Neurophysiological features that have been shown to be useful endophenotypes for which we have linkage and in some cases association results are included on a subset of the case-control sample: the beta power of the resting electroencephalogram (EEG), the P3(00) amplitude of the visual event-related potential (ERP), and the theta and delta event-related oscillations (EROs) underlying the P3 (See Porjesz et al., 2005; Porjesz and Rangaswamy, 2007 for reviews). A brief description of COGA is in Edenberg, H. J. (2002) The Collaborative Study on the Genetics of Alcoholism: an update. Alcohol Res Health 26, 214-218., Bierut, LJ, NL Saccone, JP Rice, A Goate, T Foroud, HJ Edenberg, L Almasy, PM Conneally, R Crowe, V Hesselbrock, T-K Li, JI Nurnberger, Jr, B Porjesz, MA Schuckit, J Tischfield, H Begleiter, and T Reich (2002) Defining alcohol-related phenotypes in humans: The Collaborative Study on the Genetics of Alcoholism. Alcohol Res Health 26, 208-213. Edenberg HJ and Foroud T (2006) The genetics of alcoholism: identifying specific genes through family studies. Addiction Biology 11, 386-396. This case-control sample of biologically unrelated individuals was drawn from COGA subjects. All cases meet DSM-IV criteria for alcohol dependence. Controls are individuals who have consumed alcohol, but did not meet any definition of alcohol dependence or alcohol abuse, nor did they meet any DSM-IIIR or DSM-IV definition of abuse or dependence for other drugs (except nicotine). All cases and controls have undergone identical clinical assessments. Many individuals in this case-control sample have not previously been genotyped. The Collaborative Study on the Genetics of Alcoholism (COGA) has four Co-Principal Investigators: B. Porjesz, V. Hesselbrock, H. Edenberg, L. Bierut. COGA includes nine different centers where data collection, analysis, and storage take place. The nine sites and Principal Investigators and Co-Investigators are: University of Connecticut (V. Hesselbrock); Indiana University (H.J. Edenberg, J. Nurnberger Jr., T. Foroud); University of Iowa (S. Kuperman); SUNY Downstate (B. Porjesz); Washington University in St. Louis (L. Bierut, A. Goate, J. Rice); University of California at San Diego (M. Schuckit); Howard University (R. Taylor); Rutgers University (J. Tischfield); Southwest Foundation (L. Almasy). Q. Max Guo serves as the NIAAA Staff Collaborator. This national collaborative study is supported by the NIH Grant U10AA008401 from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) and the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). Funding support for genotyping, which was performed at the Johns Hopkins University Center for Inherited Disease Research, was provided by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, the NIH GEI (U01HG004438),and the NIH contract "High throughput genotyping for studying the genetic contributions to human disease" (HHSN268200782096C). COGA has over 250 publications listed at www.niaaagenetics.org

  Study phs000125

• Genome-Wide Association Study of Hypertriglyceridemia in Mexicans

  Coronary artery disease (CAD) is the number one cause of death and mortality world-wide. High levels of serum triglycerides (TGs) and low levels of serum high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) are major risk factors for CAD. Previous epidemiological studies have shown that these two lipid disturbances are highly common dyslipidemias in Mexicans. However, the genetic factors underlying high serum TGs and low HDL-C are underinvestigated and poorly identified in Mexicans. As the Mexican-American and the genetically related Latin-American populations represent the fastest growing minority in the United States, elucidation of the unknown genetic factors influencing the increased susceptibility of Mexicans to these common dyslipidemias is of great relevance to these U.S. minorities and the American healthcare system. This study is a research collaboration between investigators at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) and Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición (INCMN), Mexico City, to perform a two-stage genome-wide association study (GWAS) for hypertriglyceridemia and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) in Mexicans (Weissglas-Volkov et al. 2013, PMID: 23505323). This study was funded by an RO1 grant from NIH/NHLBI (PI Paivi Pajukanta; PI of the subaward Teresa Tusie-Luna). In stage 1 of the GWAS, we tested all GWAS SNPs from the Illumina Infinium Human610-Quad platform that passed quality control for association in ~2,200 hypertriglyceridemia cases and controls. In stage 2, we genotyped the ~1,200 positive signals of stage 1 in additional ~2,200 hypertriglyceridemia cases and controls, and performed a combined analysis of the two stages to identify genome-wide significant variants. The subjects were recruited at the INCMN. The DNA isolation and clinical laboratory measurements of the case-control study samples were performed at INCMN using standardized procedures. Genotyping and statistical analyses of the data were performed at UCLA. A summary of this GWAS can be found in Weissglas-Volkov et al. 2013 Journal of Medical Genetics, PMID: 23505323. Briefly, using the two-stage GWAS design, we identified a novel Mexican-specific genome-wide significant locus for serum TG levels close to the Niemann-Pick type C1 protein (NPC1) gene (Weissglas-Volkov et al. 2013, PMID: 23505323). Of the European lipid GWAS loci, three TG loci (APOA5, GCKR, and LPL) and four HDL-C loci (ABCA1, CETP, LIPC and LOC55908) resulted in genome-wide significant signals in Mexicans. Furthermore, our cross-ethnic mapping narrowed three European TG GWAS loci, APOA5, MLXIPL, and CILP2 that exhibited long range LD and a large number of candidate SNPs in the European GWAS scan. In the apolipoprotein A1C3A4A5 gene cluster region, the cross-ethnic fine mapping and LD comparisons reduced the number of candidate variants to one SNP, rs964184. We also found that although 52% of the associations from European lipid GWAS meta-analysis could be generalized to Mexicans, in 82% of the European GWAS loci, a different variant other than the European lead SNP provided the statistically strongest evidence of association in the Mexican scan (Weissglas-Volkov et al. 2013, PMID: 23505323). Taken together, our Mexican GWAS for lipids identified a novel Mexican-specific locus for high serum TGs; restricted three European GWAS loci; and investigated which European lipid GWAS variants extend to the Mexican population (Weissglas-Volkov et al. 2013, PMID: 23505323). This NHLBI sponsored RO1 project aimed to identify genetic variants contributing to serum lipid levels in Mexicans. In addition to de-identified genome wide genotypic data, a selected list of de-identified phenotypic data related to hypertriglyceridemia and related metabolic traits are also available in dbGaP.

  Study phs000618

• Kids First: Genomics of Orofacial Cleft Birth Defects in Latin American Families

  The Gabriella Miller Kids First Pediatric Research Program) (Kids First) is a trans-NIH effort initiated in response to the 2014 Gabriella Miller Kids First Research Act and supported by the NIH Common Fund. This program focuses on gene discovery in pediatric cancers and structural birth defects and the development of the Gabriella Miller Kids First Pediatric Data Resource (Kids First Data Resource). Both childhood cancers and structural birth defects are critical and costly conditions associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Elucidating the underlying genetic etiology of these diseases has the potential to profoundly improve preventative measures, diagnostics, and therapeutic interventions. All of the WGS and phenotypic data from this study are accessible through dbGaP and https://kidsfirstdrc.org, where other Kids First datasets can also be accessed. The Kids First study of nonsyndromic orofacial cleft (OFC) birth defects in Latin American families is a whole genome sequencing study of 283 Latin-American parent-case trios drawn from ongoing collaborations led by Dr. Mary L. Marazita of the University of Pittsburgh Center for Craniofacial and Dental Genetics, and including a collaboration with Dr. Lina Moreno Uribe and Dr. Andrew Lidral of the University of Iowa. All families were ascertained through the Clinica Noel where patients with OFCs receive care from the Antioquia University School of Dentistry in Medellin, Colombia (key on-site colleagues included Dr. Luz Consuelo Valencia-Ramirez and Dr. Mauricio Arcos-Burgos). Genetic studies have shown that this population is comprised of an admixture of immigrant male Caucasians (mainly Spaniards and Basques) and native Amerindian females. Every subject has had a genetic evaluation, including a pedigree analysis for a family history of clefting and other birth defects, a pregnancy history for environmental exposures, and a complete physical exam to rule out suspected or known syndromes or environmental phenocopies. Sequencing was done by the Broad Institute sequencing center funded by the Kids First program (grant number U24-HD090743). The case in each of the Kids First OFC trios has cleft lip (CL, Figure A below), cleft palate (CP, Figure B), or both (CL+CP, Figure C): OFCs are genetically complex structural birth defects caused by genetic factors, environmental exposures, and their interactions. OFCs are the most common craniofacial anomalies in humans, affecting approximately 1 in 700 newborns, and are one of the most common structural birth defects worldwide. On average a child with an OFC initially faces feeding difficulties, undergoes 6 surgeries, spends 30 days in hospital, receives 5 years of orthodontic treatment, and participates in ongoing speech therapy, leading to an estimated total lifetime treatment cost of about $200,000. Further, individuals born with an OFC have higher infant mortality, higher mortality rates at all other stages of life, increased incidence of mental health problems, and higher risk for other disorders (notably including breast, brain, and colon cancers). Prior genome-wide linkage and association studies have now identified at least 18 genomic regions likely to contribute to the risk for nonsyndromic OFCs. Despite this substantial progress, the functional/pathogenic variants at OFC-associated regions are mostly still unknown. Because previous OFC genomic studies (genome-wide linkage, genome-wide association studies (GWAS), and targeted sequencing) are based on relatively sparse genotyping data, they cannot distinguish between causal variants and variants in linkage disequilibrium with unobserved causal variants. Moreover, it is unknown whether the association or linkage signals are due to single common variants, haplotypes of multiple common variants, clusters of multiple rare variants, or some combination. Finally, we cannot yet attribute specific genetic risk to individual cases and case families. Therefore, the goal of the current study is identify specific OFC risk variants in Latin American families by performing whole genome sequencing of parent-case trios.

  Study phs001420

• Sporadic ALS Australia Systems Genomics Consortium (SALSA-SGC)

  In 2016 we established the Sporadic ALS Australia Systems Genomics Consortium (SALSA-SGC) funded by the Ice Bucket Challenge Grant administered by the Motor Neurone Disease Research Institute of Australia. The goals of the SALSA-SGC are to collect biological samples from clinics across Australia with matched in depth clinical and self-report phenotypes and to generate multiple levels of genetic and genomic data. In this first data generation exercise of the SALSA-SGC the majority of the samples were collected prior to the formal establishment of SALSA-SGC from clinics across Australia.Briefly, the cohort includes the University of Sydney’s Australian Motor Neuron Disease DNA Bank (MND Bank) cohort recruited April 2000 to June 2011), with study protocol approved by the Sydney South West Area Health Service Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC). Cases were recruited from around Australia via state-based MND associations with diagnosis verified by a neurologist. The remainder of the cases were recruited from clinics across Australia between 2015 and 2017 under HREC approvals from Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital, Macquarie University Multidisciplinary Motor Neurone Disease Clinic,  Calvary Health Care Bethlehem in Melbourne , Fiona Stanley Hospital in Perth, and from 2016 under HREC approvals at each site for the sporadic ALS Australia Systems Genomics Consortium (SALSA-SGC). The ALS cases were diagnosed with definite or probable ALS according to the revised El Escorial criteria. Some controls were recruited as either partners or friends of patients, healthy individuals free of neuromuscular diseases. We are providing GWAS and MWAS data in this dataset. Individual level GWAS data were generated using Illumina Infinium CoreExome-24 version 1.1 chips for N= 846 cases and N=665 controls. Individual MWAS data was generated using the Illumina Human methylation 450K array for N=782 cases and N=613 controls. There 1315 individuals where GWAS and MWAS data has been generated and is available. Further information on these data sets can be found: Paper 1: Restuadi, R, Garton, FC, Benyamin, B, Lin, T, et al. Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Genetic Correlation with Cognitive Performance, educational attainment and schizophrenia: evidence from polygenic risk score analysis. (submitted) Paper 2: Nabais, MF, Lin, T, Benyamin, B et al. Significant out-of-sample classification from methylation profile scoring for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. 2020. NPJ genomic medicine. 5(10). Files provided in this submission include: GWAS: This folder contains QCed genotype for the Australian ALS case-control cohort. Contains PLINK files for genotyping data (not imputed yet). The individuals selected here have: good consistency on phenotype data ethics approval registered as part of sporadic ALS studies unrelated by GRM cut-off 0.05 No ancestry QC yet MWAS: This folder contains the IDAT and post-QC normalized DNAm (beta) for the Australian ALS case-control cohort. 2019_AUS_ALS_PCTG_DNAm.tar.gz - IDATS for 1315 individuals analyzed in the MWAS study normalized_beta_values - Binary files (created with the OSCA software) containing information on the individuals, probes and the DNAm (beta) values obtained after QC phenotype_file - contains all the covariates analysed in the MWAS including: case-control status, coded 0 = Control and 1 = ALS, predicted age, predicted cell-type proportions, predicted smoking scores, slide and chip position and sex Important Notes: The DNAm data were normalized together with samples that were not part of this ALS case/control study and thus, the normalization procedure may not be 100% reproducible using only the IDAT files uploaded here. Summary data has been made publicly available and can be accessed directly: Data collection and sample processing were performed at several clinics across Australia. Genotyping and DNA methylation arrays were performed by the Human Studies Unit, at the Institute for Molecular Bioscience (University of Queensland). Quality control of the genotypic, phenotypic and DNA methylation data was done by the Program of Complex Traits Genomics, at the Institute for Molecular Bioscience (University of Queensland).

  Study phs002068

• Microsatellite data show recent demographic expansions in sedentary but not in nomadic human populations in Africa and Eurasia.

  The transition from hunting and gathering to plant and animal domestication was one of the most important cultural and technological revolutions in human history. According to archeologists and paleoanthropologists, this transition triggered major demographic expansions. However, few genetic studies have found traces of Neolithic expansions in the current repartition of genetic polymorphism, pointing rather toward Paleolithic expansions. Here, we used microsatellite autosomal data to investigate the past demographic history of 87 African and Eurasian human populations with contrasted lifestyles (nomadic hunter-gatherers, semi-nomadic herders and sedentary farmers). Likely due to the combination of a higher mutation rate and the possibility to analyze several loci as independent replicates of the coalescent process, the analysis of microsatellite data allowed us to infer more recent expansions than previous genetic studies, potentially resulting from the Neolithic transition. Despite the variability in their location and environment, we found consistent expansions for all sedentary farmers, while we inferred constant population sizes for all hunter-gatherers and most herders, which could result from constraints linked to a nomadic or semi-nomadic lifestyle and/or competition for land between herders and farmers. As an exception, we inferred expansions for Central Asian herders. This might be linked with the arid environment of this area, which may have been more favorable to nomadic herders than to sedentary farmers. Alternatively, current Central Asian herders may descent from populations who have first experienced a transition from hunter-gathering to sedentary agropastoralism, and then a second transition to nomadic herding.

  Study EGAS00001000652

• DAC Portal documentation

  DAC Portal Welcome to the DAC Portal documentation! If you are involved in governance or legal aspects, technical or operational aspects, or serving as a data steward, this page will be helpful for you. By exploring these materials, you can define your own Data Access Committee (DAC) and policies, understand the minimal requirements for a DAC and a policy object, and comprehend how the EGA data access requests are managed. DAC Portal Index Setting up your account DACs and Policies Pending Request table Manage Data Requests History page Audit your DACs, policies, and datasets Deprecation User Preferences DAC API - A programmatic approach Setting up your account Register yourself as an EGA user. The Helpdesk team will validate your account (this could take up to 48 hours). After validation, you will receive an email with a link to verify your email - Make sure you click on the link to verify your account! If you don’t receive the email, please check your spam folder. Once your account is active you can login to the DAC Portal. We recommend you to check out the Take The Tour! DACs and Policies Create a DAC Click on Create a DAC Add the title and description to your DAC. Once ready, click on the ‘Create’ button. You will have to wait until the Helpdesk Team validates the creation of your DAC. Once approved by Helpdesk, your DAC will be assigned with a persistent identifier (EGAC). Edit a DAC Once your DAC is registered and approved, you can edit it and add contacts. Remember, you can add as many contacts as needed. And, you can also remove/add contacts anytime. To add a contact, you must write the username or email of a registered EGA user in the Members field. Once you have typed the whole username or email, a drop-down menu will appear where you can select the contact. Select a contact from the drop-down menu. Make sure you write the full username or email of the contact so it appears as an option. Make sure that you select one main contact. Set up the role you want to grant to the new contact of the DAC. We recommend you to check out the FAQ to learn more about the different roles! After adding all the necessary contacts and assigning roles, click on Update. This will send an email notification to the new DAC member, letting them know about the invitation to managing the DAC. Once they log into the DAC Portal, they will be able to either accept or turn down the invitation. Create a policy First, please note that all information registered in a policy metadata object will be publicly available on the EGA website. For each released dataset, all users will be able to read the policy under the “Data Access” tab. Select Create a Policy from the Policies tab. Select the DAC that you want your policy to depend on. Add the title and terms and conditions for accessing and using your data. If you already have an external website for data access requests, you can add the URL directly here (see example here). You can find a template of a Data Access Agreement (DAA) document in our Policy documentation page. The DAA template is provided for guidance only and should be adapted to suit your own purpose depending on the security policies, terms for publication or embargoes, and restrictions on data use or sharing. You can also add Data Use Ontologies (DUO) to your policy. These DUO codes are used to semantically tag the terms and conditions of using the data linked to the policy (example). For more information, you can refer to the Data Uso Ontology documentation. Once completed, make sure to click the Create button in order to register your policy. A persistent identifier (EGAP) will be assigned automatically. Edit a policy Please, note that you will not be able to edit the policy if it shows in orange. Meaning that you are a member of the DAC linked to that policy. Members don’t have edit rights. Only admins can edit objects. You can check your registered policies on My policies, available at the menu in the top-right corner. Select your policy. It will then display the information of that policy, allowing you to edit the information. Once you are done with the modifications, click Update. Pending Requests Table Table Settings Upon selecting a specific DAC, you will be presented with a customisable table showcasing all pending data access requests. This table allows you to tailor the displayed information according to your preferences by selecting desired columns. Available Columns (Displayed with the Eye Icon): Date: The date when the data access request was submitted. Full Name: Name and surname of the user submitting the request. Email: Email address associated with the user's request. Username: The username linked to the EGA account of the user submitting the request. Organisation: Affiliated organisation of the user submitting the request. Dataset: EGA accession ID for the requested EGA dataset. Dataset Title: Title of the requested dataset. DAC Comment: Space provided for internal comments related to the request. Expiration: Option to specify an expiration date for granted permissions. Check more information on the pending request table here! Table Filters By default, all data access requests are displayed. However, you have the option to apply filters to refine your view. Follow these steps to apply filters: Click on the More button. This action will reveal the different columns available for applying filters. As you select columns, the checked fields will be displayed at the top of the request table. Choose the specific values within the selected columns that you want to filter for. Click the Search button to apply the selected filters. Do you find yourself frequently applying the same filters? You can save multiple combinations of filters for easy access at any time! Here's how: Click the Save button. Provide a descriptive name for the filter combination. Click Save to confirm. To load saved filters, simply select the saved filter from the dropdown menu to apply it automatically. Check more information on filters here! Advanced Search For users requiring more granular control over their data access requests, the DAC Portal offers an Advanced Search feature using JIRA Query Language (JQL). With JQL, you can craft precise and complex queries to filter and retrieve specific data access requests based on various criteria such as date, user details, dataset attributes, and more. Using JQL's flexibility, you can create custom queries to meet your specific needs, allowing for advanced filtering options beyond the standard filters provided. You can find the Advanced Search feature following these steps: Click the … button Select Advanced To view the allowed fields for filtering and explore all available options, simply click on the info icon. Once you have written the filtering values, click the Search button to apply. Check more information on filters here! Manage Data Requests Upon logging into the DAC Portal, you'll notice a sand clock icon next to the DAC ID, indicating the number of pending requests. Click on the DAC to review these requests. Accept requests Click on the right side of the toggle button to grant access to the user. You can manage other requests before proceeding to the next step. After managing the requests, click on the Apply button. A confirmation box will appear summarising the options to be applied. Click on Yes, Confirm to proceed with granting permissions. Deny requests Click on the left side of the toggle button to deny access to the user. Provide a reason for the denial. Note that the user will receive an email with this reason. Click on the Done button. You can manage other requests before proceeding to the next step. After managing the requests, click on the Apply button. A confirmation box will appear summarising the options to be applied. Click on Yes, Confirm to proceed with denying permissions. Tips! Apply a filter to view all requests to be managed at once. Use the toggle in the row with column names to grant or deny permissions for multiple requests simultaneously. You can grant and deny permissions in the same action, simplifying the process. The confirmation box will provide a summary of all actions, including grants, denials, DAC comments, and expiration dates. History Page The History page serves as a dedicated space to view information regarding all requests managed by all DAC members. Here, you can review active permissions and revoke them as needed. Go to the History page by clicking on the "HISTORY" button from a DAC page in the DAC Portal. Here are the different row types you may find: Current permissions: row in green with a toggle button to revoke permissions on the right. Approved requests: row in green, with no toggle button. Request denied: row in red with “request denied” on the right. Permission revoked: row in red with “permission revoked” on the right. Distinctions to Note! Between Request Denied and Permission Revoked: Request Denied: Refers to requests that were rejected from the outset, indicating that access to the dataset was never granted. Permission Revoked: Indicates that permissions were previously granted but have since been revoked. Users with permissions revoked have previously accessed the dataset. Between Approved Request and Current Permissions: Approved Request: Represents an entry when a data access request has been approved in the past. Current Permissions: Denotes ongoing permissions where a user has present access to the dataset. An approved request may now appear as Permission Revoked in the present. By observing these different rows, users can gain insight into the complete history of a user's interactions and permissions regarding a dataset over time. To revoke access to a specific user for a dataset, follow these steps: Go to History page Look for the row with the specific permissions. You can use the filters! Click on the toggle button to revoke access. Add a denial reason. Bear in mind that the requester will receive the denial reason! Click on the Apply button. Check more information on the Hisotry page here! Audit your metadata objects In the DAC Portal, you can efficiently manage and audit various metadata objects pertinent to your role as a Data Controller. Upon accessing the DAC Portal, you will encounter three primary tabs on the homepage: DAC: Contains information about Data Access Committees (DACs). Policies: Provides insights into linked policies. Datasets: Displays datasets and relevant details. Within each tab, you'll find a comprehensive list of the objects you manage, these being grouped by type (DAC, Policies, Datasets), as well as by your role (member/admin). Whilst the lists give you a quick look, to check how things are connected, we've added a table at the bottom DACs and policies. DACs Let’s check which policies are linked to a specific DAC: Go to "My DACs." Select a DAC. Click on "EDIT" to see more details. You are now on this page: Scroll down to see the linked policies. Click on “List of linked policies of this DAC” and you will see a list of all policies linked to your selected DAC. Policies Do you want to view a list of datasets connected to a particular policy? Follow the same steps mentioned earlier, but head to the policy tab this time. In the policy tab, you'll find a list of all your policies. Here, you may notice two different icons next to the policy ID (EGAP): DAC Icon (): This represents the DAC. Hover your mouse over the icon to see the DAC ID. Dataset icon (): This indicates datasets falling under that policy. The number next to the icon tells you how many datasets are linked to the policy. For example, if you see "2" next to the icon, it means there are two datasets linked to that policy. If you want to check the linked datasets and their relevant information, simply click on a specific policy. You'll then find the "List of linked datasets of this policy" at the bottom of the page. Datasets Finally, in the dataset tab, by default you will see a list of all the datasets you can manage with all your DACs and policies. Yet, we've included two handy ways to organise them: DAC vs. policy: You can group by datasets, either by DAC or policy. Released vs. unreleased: You can sort out datasets based on their release status. Feel free to experiment with both options! For instance, if you want to see which DACs have unreleased datasets, simply select DAC and unreleased, and you'll get the details you need! Deprecation Do you have a bunch of metadata objects like DACs and policies that you don’t need anymore? This section shows you how to get rid of them! But what does "deprecation" mean for EGA? It's basically changing the status of a metadata object to "deprecated," which means we won't be using it in the future. In simple terms, it's like saying these objects are no longer useful. However, because we believe in making metadata FAIR, once an object has a persistent identifier, we can't just delete it. So, instead of deleting, we deprecate it. Here's a helpful tip! If you want to make a metadata object disappear from the DAC Portal, deprecate it. You won’t see it in the portal anymore! Let’s say you want to deprecate a DAC. Let’s do it! Go to "My DACs." Select a DAC. Click "EDIT" to see more details. You are now in this page: Click on the Deprecate button It will then appear a message. There are two options here: Your DAC is not linked to any policy, hence it’s ready to be deprecated. Click on “Yes. Confirm” to deprecate your DAC object! Your DAC is linked to at least one policy, and you need to either: Deprecate the linked policy first, or Link the policy to a different DAC Now, let’s say you don’t want to get rid of the policy altogether, but you want to change the DAC it’s linked to. Here's how: Go to the policy tab. Find the policy you want to change (for example, EGAP50000000019). Choose a new DAC to link it to. Click on Update. See the Edit Policy section for more details. After ensuring that the DAC we want to deprecate isn’t linked to any policy, return to the "My DACs" section and follow the steps outlined previously. This will lead you to a confirmation message. You can only deprecate DACs and Policies. To deprecate a dataset, please contact our Helpdesk team. Check more information on how deprecation works here! User Preferences We have implemented email notifications in the DAC Portal. Here’s the complete list: DACs: Pending requests Approved by Helpdesk Rejected by Helpdesk DAC Invitation Requesters: Data access request approved Data access request denied Permissions revoked Upcoming expiration date As a DAC member, you will be able to decide whether you want to receive the DAC notifications or not. For that, go to the top-right corner menu, select User Preference. You will be able to decide whether you want to receive notifications for: Approved by Helpdesk Rejected by Helpdesk DAC Invitation For pending requests, you will be able to select how often do you want to receive the notification: Daily Weekly Fortnightly As a DAC member, you are responsible for managing data access requests. Consequently, you will receive notifications for pending requests. If you prefer not to manage these requests, please arrange to be removed as a contact for your DAC. Here's a tip! Do you have a pending request that you don’t want to receive a notification? Add a DAC comment! The EGA understands that a request resolution can take some time, for this reason, if you add a comment (make sure you save it by clicking the APPLY button!) we will filter those requests at the time of sending the notification! DAC API - A programmatic approach In addition to the new DAC Portal, we are excited to announce the release of the DAC API. This enables users to programmatically manage permissions. If you are interested in learning more about the technical specifications, you can click the button below. Check out the DAC API specification!

  Documentation access/data-access-committee/dac-portal

• NHLBI TOPMed: MESA and MESA Family AA-CAC

  The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) is a study of the characteristics of subclinical cardiovascular disease (disease detected non-invasively before it has produced clinical signs and symptoms) and the risk factors that predict progression to clinically overt cardiovascular disease or progression of the subclinical disease. MESA researchers study a diverse, population-based sample of 6,814 asymptomatic men and women aged 45-84. Thirty-eight percent of the recruited participants are white, 28 percent African-American, 22 percent Hispanic, and 12 percent Asian, predominantly of Chinese descent. Comprehensive phenotypic and pedigree data for MESA study participants are available through dbGaP entry phs000209. MESA Participants were recruited from six field centers across the United States: Wake Forest University, Columbia University, Johns Hopkins University, University of Minnesota, Northwestern University and University of California - Los Angeles. Each participant received an extensive physical exam and determination of coronary calcification, ventricular mass and function, flow-mediated endothelial vasodilation, carotid intimal-medial wall thickness and presence of echogenic lucencies in the carotid artery, lower extremity vascular insufficiency, arterial wave forms, electrocardiographic (ECG) measures, standard coronary risk factors, sociodemographic factors, lifestyle factors, and psychosocial factors. Selected repetition of subclinical disease measures and risk factors at follow-up visits allows study of the progression of disease. Blood samples have been assayed for putative biochemical risk factors and stored for case-control studies. DNA has been extracted and lymphocytes cryopreserved (for possible immortalization) for study of candidate genes and possibly, genome-wide scanning, expression, and other genetic techniques. Participants are being followed for identification and characterization of cardiovascular disease events, including acute myocardial infarction and other forms of coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, and congestive heart failure; for cardiovascular disease interventions; and for mortality. In addition to the six Field Centers, MESA involves a Coordinating Center, a Central Laboratory, and Central Reading Centers for Computed Tomography (CT), Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Ultrasound, and Electrocardiography (ECG). Protocol development, staff training, and pilot testing were performed in the first 18 months of the study. The first examination took place over two years, from July 2000 - July 2002. It was followed by five examination periods that were 17-20 months in length. Participants have been contacted every 9 to 12 months throughout the study to assess clinical morbidity and mortality. MESA Family The general goal of the MESA Family Study, an ancillary study to MESA funded by a grant from NHLBI, is to apply modern genetic analysis and genotyping methodologies to delineate the genetic determinants of early atherosclerosis. This is being accomplished by utilizing all the current organizational structures of the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) and Genetic Centers at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and University of Virginia. In the MESA Family Study, the goal is to locate and identify genes contributing to the genetic risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD), by looking at the early changes of atherosclerosis within families (mainly siblings). 2128 individuals from 594 families, yielding 3,026 sibpairs divided between African Americans and Hispanic-Americans, were recruited by utilizing the existing framework of MESA. MESA Family studied siblings of index subjects from the MESA study and from new sibpair families (with the same demographic characteristics) and is determining the extent of genetic contribution to the variation in coronary calcium (obtained via CT Scan) and carotid artery wall thickness (B-mode ultrasound) in the two largest non-majority U.S. populations. In a small proportion of subjects, parents of MESA index subjects participating in MESA Family were studied but only to have blood drawn for genotyping. The MESA Family cohort was recruited from the six MESA Field Centers. MESA Family participants underwent the same examination as MESA participants during May 2004 - May 2007. DNA was extracted and lymphocytes immortalized for study of candidate genes, genome-wide linkage scanning, and analyzed for linkage with these subclinical cardiovascular traits. While linkage analysis is the primary approach being used, an additional aspect of the MESA Family Study takes advantage of the existing MESA study population for testing a variety of candidate genes for association with the same subclinical traits. Genotyping and data analysis will occur throughout the study.

  Study phs001416

• Broccoli Sprouts Extracts Trial (BEST-COPD-BioLINCC)

  Data Access NOTE: Please refer to the “Authorized Access” section below for information about how access to the data from this accession differs from many other dbGaP accessions. Objectives: To establish a safe and tolerable dose of sulforaphane that effects in vivo antioxidants via Nrf2 for development as a potential novel treatment for participants with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD).Background: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), caused primarily by smoking, is the third leading cause of death in the United States and world-wide. Surprisingly, there are few treatments available to address the pathobiology of COPD other than cessation of smoking. The development and progression of COPD are associated with increased inflammatory response(s) and increased oxidative stress in the lung. Thus, one approach to the development of novel therapies is the stimulation of endogenous antioxidant defense mechanisms.Nuclear factor erythroid-2-related factor 2 (NFE2L2/Nrf2) is a transcription factor activated by oxidative stress. Nrf2 activity promotes anti-oxidant enzymes, and anti-oxidant enzymes play key roles in cellular defenses. Sulforaphane, a derivative of broccoli and other cruciferous vegetables, has been shown to stimulate Nrf2 activity in both in vivo and in vitro experiments. For example, activation of Nrf2 protected mice from developing emphysema after chronic smoke exposure and decreased oxidative stress. Similarly, activation of Nrf2 in human COPD lung cells resulted in decreased oxidative stress. Therefore, this study was designed to assess whether daily ingestion of sulforaphane by COPD participants for four weeks increased Nrf2 activity in alveolar macrophages and bronchial epithelial cells. Participants: There were a total of 89 participants randomized to one of three treatment arms. Of these, 31 participants were randomized to the placebo arm, and 29 participants were randomized to the each of the sulforaphane arms. One participant withdrew from the placebo arm, therefore, a total of 88 participants completed the study.Design: Participants were assigned to receive sulforaphane at 25 micromoles (4.4mg), sulforaphane at 150 micromoles (26.6 mg), or placebo (microcellulose) once daily by mouth. Computer-generated treatment assignments were blinded to participants, clinical staff, and study staff. Doses were back-filled with methylcellulose and presented in similar capsules to compensate for appearance and weight differences in sulforaphane and placebo treatments arms.There were a total of five study visits over the six-week study period. Prior to randomization, participants were assessed for eligibility, which included baseline data collection. Participants provided medical histories, underwent a physical examination, pre-and-post bronchodilator spirometry, lung volume measurements, carbon monoxide diffusing capacity (DLCO), and pulse oximetry over the six-week study period. Follow up data and biospecimens were collected at the final visit, which was targeted for four weeks after randomization. Two fiberoptic bronchoscopies were performed under sedation to collect endobronchial brushings and bronchoalveolar lavage used to isolate alveolar macrophages and bronchial epithelial cells. The first bronchoscopy was performed on the day of randomization, and the second bronchoscopy was performed the day after the final visit. In addition, nasal brushings were obtained prior to bronchoscopy to isolate nasal epithelial cells. The primary outcomes were changes in Nrf2 target gene expression at four weeks in alveolar macrophages and bronchial epithelial cells. The target genes for the primary outcome were NQ01, H01, AKR1C1, and AKR1C3. Secondary outcomes included the evaluation of: expression of other genes in the Nrf2/Keap1 pathway (e.g. Nrf2/NFE2L2, KEAP1, and SLPI), markers of oxidative stress (e.g., isoprostane and thiobarbituric acid reactive substances) in plasma and expired breath condensate, and cytokine profiles in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid. Conclusions: Sulforaphane administered at four weeks doses of 25umoles and 150umoles to participants with COPD did not significantly increase Nrf2 target gene expression in alveolar macrophages or bronchial epithelial cells. In addition, changes in oxidative stress markers and the expression of other genes in the Nrf2/Keap1 pathway were not statistically significant between the treatment groups.Wise RA, Holbrook JT, Criner G, et al. Lack of Effect of Oral Sulforaphane Administration on Nrf2 Expression in COPD: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo Controlled Trial. Vij N, ed. PLoS ONE. 2016; 11(11):e0163716. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0163716 (PMID: 27832073; PMID: 28350841).

  Study phs004022

• What is a DAC?

  What is a DAC? Given the complexity, scale, and diversity of global submitters and studies, the EGA operates a distributed data access model in which requests are made to the data controller, not to the EGA. The European Commission defines a data controller, in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), as the person that determines the purposes for which and the means by which personal data is processed. A Data Access Committees, commonly referred to as DACs, comprise on or more individuals (or data controllers) that review data access requests and make decisions on who can access personally identifiable genetic, phenotypic, and clinical data deposited at the EGA. Therefore, the members of a DAC should be individuals who have the authority to approve data access requests. The animation describes how you can authorise access to your sensitive data with the help of Data Access Committee and Authorisation tool. Acknowledgement to CSC - IT Center for Finland, Elixir Finland, Elixir Europe. Frequently Asked Questions How can I create a Data Access Committee? How can I create a Data Access Committee? The members of a DAC can come from different areas of expertise, such as data management, data analysis, information technology, legal and compliance, subject matter experts, privacy and security, and representatives from the organisations or individuals that provide data to the DAC. The specific members of a DAC can vary depending on the needs of the organisation and the type of data being managed. The EGA strongly suggests checking with your organisation to align with its regulations How should a DAC be named? The chosen name must be informative to the applicant.  For example, internal identifiers, such as grant numbers, should not be used. Individual PI names should also not be used. DAC's are often named after the organisation or department of the data source.  Browse the full list of DAC names currently in the EGA. How can I become an EGA DAC contact? To register a DAC at the EGA you must create first as an EGA user. Once your EGA user has been approved by the Helpdesk team, you will be able to log in to the DAC Portal. How can I register a DAC? To register a DAC, follow the DAC Portal instructions.  You will be required to provide a DAC name, name of the individual(s) that make up your DAC and contact details for your DAC including your Institutional email(s). Wherever possible, the DAC should make sure that all points of contact are readily available and able to answer any initial data requests/queries in < 2 weeks.  Once your DAC is registered, you will have to wait upon the validation from our Helpdesk team. As soon as all the validations have been completed, your DAC will be activated. Alternatively, you can also establish a DAC at the EGA during a programmatic submission through Webin API. Which are the possible roles of a DAC contact? There are two possible roles for DAC contacts: member and admin. An admin has additional privileges compared to a member: An “admin” can manage data requests, create and edit policies, edit the content of the DAC, add or remove contacts, and decide the role of each contact. A “member” can manage data requests and create policies. However, a member does not have permission to modify DAC details, edit information from policies where they are not admins, or add/remove contacts. There is no limit to the number of admins in a DAC, and each admin is responsible for deciding who should have editing privileges. This allows for a more decentralised and democratic approach to managing the DAC. How can I modify the information of a DAC? To modify a DAC, follow the instructions here. Keep in mind that only DAC contact with an admin role can modify the information of a DAC. If your DAC was registered before the lauch of the DAC Portal, and its ID is EGAC0 (not EGAC5), you must use the programmatic submission to modify it. Please, do not hesitate to contact our Helpdesk team if you need help with this! To prevent potential data breaches and ensure adherence to GDPR regulations, it is essential that the European Genome-Phenome Archive (EGA) is informed via the Helpdesk team of any changes to the Data Access Committee (DAC). This should be done in addition to any changes being made on the DAC portal. Data Controllers (as per the definition in the DPA) are also responsible for notifying the previous DAC of any modifications. Without proper notification, changes might not be automatically updated in our system, leading to the risk of incorrect permissions being applied and potential data access issues. Therefore, it is imperative that all Data Controllers follow this protocol to maintain data integrity and security. What’s the link between DAC, policy and dataset? A dataset is linked to one single policy. At the same time, one policy has a one to one relationship with a DAC. In this example, you can see that in this dataset page, we are only showing the information of one DAC (1 dataset - 1 DAC). However, the ratio of objects does not work the same in the other direction. One DAC can own multiple policy objects. And each policy object can be reused in several datasets. Thus, one DAC can manage one or more datasets. In this example, you can see that in this DAC page, we are showing all the datasets that are managed by one DAC (1 DAC - >400 datasets). EGA Data Access Committee Best Practices Which are the EGA DAC best practices? Refer to DAC Best Practices What happens if a DAC member changes institutions? EGA is committed to the protection and ownership of the data stored in our systems. We respect the institution's ownership of the data, and as such, if a DAC member changes institutions, the ownership of the data will not be transferred to the new institution. Therefore, before changing institutions, we request that the DAC contact add a new member who will replace them once they no longer work at the institution. This ensures that the data remains protected and is accessible to authorised personnel at the institution. To prevent potential data breaches and ensure adherence to GDPR regulations, it is essential that the European Genome-Phenome Archive (EGA) is informed via the Helpdesk team of any changes to the Data Access Committee (DAC). This should be done in addition to any changes being made on the DAC portal. Data Controllers (as per the definition in the DPA) are also responsible for notifying the previous DAC of any modifications. Without proper notification, changes might not be automatically updated in our system, leading to the risk of incorrect permissions being applied and potential data access issues. Therefore, it is imperative that all Data Controllers follow this protocol to maintain data integrity and security. What happens if EGA detects an unresponsive DAC? EGA defines an unresponsive DAC as a DAC with one or more contacts who do not respond to data access requests. EGA has procedures in place to identify these types of DACs, escalate the issue, and attempt to reassign the DAC to a responsive contact. This is a crucial step in ensuring that data can be accessed and utilised by researchers. If EGA identifies an unresponsive DAC, the organisation will first try to resolve the issue by escalating it to the appropriate parties. This may involve attempting to reassign the DAC to a more responsive contact. Unfortunately, in situations where we cannot reassign the DAC, the dataset will be withdrawn from the public website and the files will be removed from our system. If an EGA ID is referenced in a publication, the EGA will take extra steps to ensure that the public is made aware of the data's unavailability. I don't want to receive an email notification for pending requests. How can I do that? If you are an EGA DAC with pending requests, you will always receive emails for new data access requests. However, the EGA understands that a request resolution can take some time, for this reason, if you add a comment (make sure you save it by clicking the APPLY button!) we will filter those requests at the time of sending the notification! How can I manage data access requests? What documentation does the DAC need to provide? Each dataset that is submitted to the EGA must be linked to a policy object. The policy is a Data Access Agreement (DAA), which defines the terms and conditions of using the dataset, such as how the data files should be stored once downloaded or details of publication embargoes that should be observed by the approved user. As part of the Data Access Agreement, information regarding the application can be captured to help inform the DAC when making its decision. For example, requestors could be asked to provide a proposed title for their research and a proposal of how the data will be used. By asking for provision of such information the DAC can be assured that the requestor fully understands any consents associated with the data. It is important that accounts created at the EGA, are created solely for those individuals that will be downloading the data from the EGA. As part of the data access request, we strongly encourage you to identify individuals that will need an account at the EGA in order to prevent sharing of login details, which is strictly prohibited under EGA user account policy. Such information can easily be captured in the DAA. NOTICE The data access agreement template below is provided for guidance only and should be adapted as you see fit to suit your own purpose. In the interest of promoting data sharing, we suggest that if an agreement cannot be met around clause 19 in this example that both parties should agree to remain silent, and that the clause should be removed from the agreement. Example DAA How can the DAC provide the DAA? The DAC should provide their own DAA when registering a policy. Data requestors will download this document and should fill it in and send it back to the DAC. Data access decisions should be based on such documentation. The DAA can be downloaded through the request data webpage. Once it has been filled in, the signed copy of the DAA can be uploaded back to the request data webpage and sent to the DAC for review. How can I grant access to the data? Once you receive a data access request, you can login to the DAC Portal. In this portal you will see all your pending requests and will be able to grant or decline access to the requestors. I am a member of the Data Access Committee. Could I approve somebody else to deal with the requests on my behalf? If you want to delegate data access decisions to someone else, make sure that the individual's account is officially registered as a member of the DAC. Remember that a DAC contact with an "admin" role can always add new members to an existing DAC, remove members, and modify contact details through the DAC Portal. Can I automatise the process of managing data access requests? The answer is yes! You can use a programmatic approach using our DAC API! Check out the DAC API specification! Data Breach What should a DAC do if they suspect a breach? If a DAC suspects a data breach of one or more of their datasets, they should immediately contact the EGA Helpdesk team at this link. The DAC must provide the following information when contacting the EGA Helpdesk team: A list of affected datasets An estimated date of the data breach (or interval of dates) A list of unauthorised users who accessed the data (if available). Otherwise, they can provide a list of authorised users for the affected datasets Any observations they would like to raise to the EGA team Once the DAC has contacted the EGA team, we will respond within 48 hours (please allow some leeway during peak times) and activate our data breach protocol. What can I expect from the EGA if they detect a breach? Once the EGA determines that a security incident has occurred, we will notify all DAC members that a data breach has been detected, and take steps to contain the incident. Containment approaches may include: Revoking a data provider's access to the EGA resources, such as by changing passwords. Removing affected EGA datasets from distribution, such as by withdrawing a dataset. Disabling certain functions or services, such as the EGA ingestion pipeline. Shutting down the system or disconnecting it from the network. After the incident has been contained, the EGA will determine whether it is necessary to eradicate components related to the incident. Finally, the EGA will enable recovery of the service to normal operation and confirm that all services are functioning normally.

  Documentation access/data-access-committee/what-is-dac

• After the completion of CINECA, EUCANCan, and euCanSHare. What's next?

  CINECA, EUCANCan, and euCanSHare were part of the EUCAN Cluster, made up of six projects that received funding under the same Horizon 2020 call. All EUCAN projects (CINECA, EUCANCan, EUCAN-Connect, euCanSHare, Receptor Plus, and ReCoDID) were aimed at facilitating data reuse and knowledge discovery by enhancing data exchange and long-term collaboration in the health field. Here are some highlights about EGA’s contribution to these projects. CINECA: advances in Federated discovery and infrastructure for cohorts CINECA (Common Infrastructure for National Cohorts in Europe, Canada, and Africa) developed a federated cloud-based infrastructure for making genomic and biomolecular data accessible. The project has assembled a virtual cohort of 1.4 million individuals from sources such as the EGA, CanDIG and H3Africa. The EGA–CRG co-leaded a work package Work Package 1 on Federated Data Discovery and Querying. Beacon v2, championed by Jordi Rambla and Lauren Fromont, has been one of the central elements for the discovery of human genetic and phenotypic data. The EGA-CRG contributed to the development of a model for cohort discovery inside the Beacon v2 model. The team also delivered a Discovery Portal was implemented to explore cohorts and individuals of synthetic data. It is a UI that gathers a network of Beacons, a service for query expansion, and a visualisation tool. Have a look at the Discovery Portal UI, gathering a network of Beacons. You will find entities such as the Barcelona Supercomputing Center (BSC), BioData.pt and the European Genomic Data Infrastructure (GDI), among others. euCanSHare: facilitation of data access management This joint EU-Canada project aimed to build a European and Canadian FAIR platform for cardiovascular data sharing and analysis. The EGA’s tasks contributed to the development of the data management plan and data flows, main web-portal and interoperability protocols. An important part of the EuCanShare platform is the data access manager, a tool for the data owners to control the access to their sensitive datasets. We built a user-friendly interface for data access committees (data owners) to easily manage their data requests and access credentials. The data access portal facilitates the creation and internal organization of the data access committees as well as the linkage of data usage conditions to specific datasets. The interface includes filters for browsing requests and page to visualize the request history helping with the handling of data access requests. EUCANCan: toward a federation of clinical institutions in oncology The EUropean-CAnadian CANcer Network worked towards building a federated network to advance personalized medicine in oncology, by promoting the standard analysis, management and sharing of harmonized genomic and phenotypic data. The EGA led tasks on defining data flows and preparing an adapted infrastructure for long-term data storage and sharing. One of the key contributions was the conception of the EGA communities, offering standard and interoperable solutions for data discovery, processing, and sharing to projects and institutions that would like to manage and share data in the context of the EGA ecosystem. What's Next? The participation in projects such as CINECA, EUCANCan, and euCanSHare provide us with experience for future projects. We are happy to enhance data sharing and reuse, vital for advancing clinical and genomic research. The Discovery Portal is a wonderful proof of concept for the Beacon network. Next, we will finalise both the network and the user interface, and make sure it can be applied to more clinically-centred settings like hospitals. Most data hosted at the EGA are about cancer research. Currently, we contribute to building tools and infrastructure to empower oncology research in several European projects such as EUCAIM, EUCANIMAGE and EOSC4Cancer. We also do not lose sight of initiatives in the field such as the International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC) with the project ARGO, whose data model was adopted in EUCanCan.

  Blog cineca-eucancan-and-eucanshare-were-concluded-in-june

• The African American Breast Cancer Epidemiology and Risk (AMBER) Consortium Study

  The AMBER Consortium Study was formed to pool interview data, questionnaire data, and biological samples from epidemiological studies of breast cancer in African-American women to discover the potential causes of early-onset and aggressive breast cancer in African-American women. AMBER is funded through a Program Project grant from the National Cancer Institute. Genetic data submitted to dbGaP come from participants in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study, Women&#39;s Circle of Health Study, and Black Women&#39;s Health Study. The P01 consists of four scientific projects; the aims include follow-up on previous GWAS findings for breast cancer susceptibility in AA women as well as investigation of SNPs in candidate genes in biologically plausible pathways. These SNPs were genotyped using DNA from 3130 African-American women with breast cancer and 3700 controls. Descriptions of the original studies that provided the data and samples for this collaborative study are given below. The Carolina Breast Cancer Study (CBCS): a North Carolina population-based case-control study of breast cancer, conducted in three phases. The current study phase, phase 3 (years 2008-2014), includes women residents in 44 counties. CBCS phases 1 and 2 were conducted in 24 counties. Breast cancer cases are identified using Rapid Case Ascertainment in cooperation with the NC Central Cancer Registry. Controls were identified for phases 1 and 2 only (1993-1996 and 1996-2001), using Division of Motor Vehicles lists for women under age 65 and Health Care Financing Administration lists for women 65 and older. Randomized recruitment was used to oversample AA women and women under age 50. In-depth interviews are conducted by study nurses in participants&#39; homes to obtain information on potential risk factors for breast cancer. DNA samples have been obtained from most participants. Overall response rates for Phases 1 and 2 were 74% for AA cases and 54% for AA controls. Phase 3, conducted in 44 counties from 2008-2014, includes cases only. The response rate for AA cases in Phase 3 was 70.5%. The Women&#39;s Circle of Health Study (WCHS): a multi-site case-control study in New York City (NYC) and New Jersey (NJ) aimed at evaluating risk factors for early and aggressive breast cancer in women of AA and EA ancestry. Recruitment in NYC took place between January 2002 and December 2008 and involved hospital-based ascertainment of cases, while controls were identified through random digit dialing (RDD). Recruitment at the NJ site started in March 2006 and is ongoing. Phase I of the study ended in April 2012 and covered seven counties in NJ. WCHS2 includes two additional counties. Cases in NJ were identified from 2006 to 2012 by the NJ State Cancer Registry using rapid case ascertainment. Controls were initially recruited though RDD (2006 to 2010) and later through community-based efforts (2009-2012). In-person interviews ascertained data on established and suspected risk factors for breast cancer. DNA samples were obtained. Among eligible AA women, 75% in NY and 54% in NJ completed an interview and provided a biologic specimen. Black Women&#39;s Health Study (BWHS): an ongoing prospective cohort study of health and illness among U.S. black women, with a focus on cancer. The study began in 1995 when 59,000 AA women 21-69 years of age from across the United States completed a 14-page postal health questionnaire. The median age at entry was 38, and participants were residents of 17 states in mainland U.S.: Northeast, 28%; South, 30%; Midwest, 23%; West, 19%. The baseline questionnaire elicited information on a wide range of variables, including demographic factors, use of medical care, family history of breast cancer, reproductive and medical history, cigarette and alcohol use, weight, height, waist and hip circumference, medication use, diet, and exercise. Biennial follow-up questionnaires ascertain new cases of breast cancer and other illnesses and update covariate information. Medical record and cancer registry data are sought for all participants who report a diagnosis of breast cancer. As of 2014, approximately 80% of the baseline cohort have completed follow-up. DNA samples were obtained from about 50% of participants. BWHS data for the AMBER consortium were prepared as a nested case-control study, with controls frequency-matched to cases on year of birth, geographic region, and most recent questionnaire completed prior to the end of the at-risk period.

  Study phs000669

• About

  About What's the EGA? The European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA) is a global network for permanent archiving and sharing of personally identifiable genetic, phenotypic, and clinical data generated for the purposes of biomedical research projects or in the context of research-focused healthcare systems. Jointly managed by the European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI) in Cambridge (UK) and the Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG) in Barcelona, we aim to advance biomedical research and promote personalised medicine worldwide by enabling discovery of and access to human genomic and health research data. The EGA contains data collected from individuals whose consent agreements authorise data release for specific research use to bona fide researchers. We ensure strict security measures to control access to the data and maintain patient confidentiality. With expertise in data management and technical infrastructure, we promote FAIR data reuse and enable researchers to share their data securely. By leveraging public funding and our strategic partnerships, the EGA provides a free service for permanent data storage, data discovery, and secure data access. In addition, we foster a federated network to provide transnational access to human research data in compliance with legal frameworks. For additional information about the EGA, please contact: Helen Parkinson, and Thomas Keane EMBL European Bioinformatics Institute Arcadi Navarro, Roderic Guigó, and Jordi Rambla Center for Genomic Regulation History The European Genome-phenome Archive was launched in 2008 at the European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), an outstation of the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL), to address an identified need for archiving and sharing the results of genome-wide association studies from the Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium. With the signing of a memorandum of understanding in 2013 and a formal agreement in 2016, the EGA became a joint project of EMBL-EBI and the Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG). The two institutes work together to support the EGA services, including supporting submissions, website, strategic leadership, and data infrastructure developments. In 2022, the Federated EGA was officially launched with the signature of the first five countries: Finland, Germany, Norway, Spain, and Sweden. With more than 20 additional nodes worldwide preparing to join, the Federated EGA aims to become the largest human omics data sharing initiative towards understanding human health and disease. EGA overview If you're a researcher you may need to deposit, manage, or access genomic data in a secure and regulated way. The European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA) is a platform that facilitates these processes, ensuring that sensitive data is stored and shared in accordance with legal and ethical regulations. Submission process To start a submission, you need to become an EGA submitter. For that, you’ll need to sign a Data Processing Agreement (DPA) with us, that defines the terms and conditions under which your data will be processed and shared within the EGA system. The access to each study is controlled by its Data Access Committee (DAC). The DAC is responsible for managing data access requests and ensuring that the release of data is in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Please, note that once your data is released, all public metadata related to your study and dataset(s) will be searchable on the EGA website. However, the files are only accessible under controlled access, which means that a DAC has to agree to a previous data access request. Request process It is possible to submit an access request to data stored at the EGA. The DAC assigned to the study will assess the request and, if approved, grant access to the data. Requesters must provide sufficient justification for your request and comply with the intended data usage in order to get access to it. Each dataset is covered by a Data Access Agreement (DAA) that defines the terms and conditions of use for the specified dataset/s. The DAA is created and provided by the DAC, and must be signed by the individual requesting access to the given dataset/s. Download process Once the request for access is approved, the data and metadata can be downloaded. The EGA offers various download options to fit the needs: it is possible to preview files without downloading them, download specific files of interest, or even download terabytes of data. Overall, the EGA provides a secure and regulated environment for depositing, managing, and accessing human data. Regardless of the role - submitter, DAC member, or requester - the EGA provides assistance for each while ensuring that sensitive data is managed in an ethical and responsible manner. More information on how EGA handles data is available in the EGA dataflow.

  Documentation about/ega