15420 results for "Buy fc 26 coins Buyfc26coins.com is EA Sports official for FC 26 coins All coins were delivered very promptly..EDvG"

in 94.20 milliseconds.

• Immune induction strategies to enhance the sensitivity to PD-1 blockade in metastatic triple negative breast cancer: the TONIC-trial

  The response rate in metastatic triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) to PD-1 blockade is low, highlighting an urgent clinical need for strategies that render the TNBC tumor microenvironment (TME) more sensitive to PD-1 blockade. Immunomodulatory mechanisms have been proposed for both chemotherapy and irradiation, but it has not been established whether these therapies may improve efficacy of PD-1 blockade by favorably changing the TME. In the first stage of this adaptive, non-comparative phase II trial (TONIC-trial; NCT02499367), 67 patients with metastatic TNBC were randomized to nivolumab without induction or to one of four induction treatments, consisting of irradiation of one metastatic lesion (3x8 Gy) or a two- week low-dose regimen of cyclophosphamide, cisplatin or doxorubicin, all followed by nivolumab. In the overall cohort of 66 evaluable patients, the objective response rate (ORR; iRECIST16) was 20% (95% CI: 11%-31%), with two complete responses and 11 partial responses. The majority of clinical responses were observed on nivolumab in the cisplatin (ORR 23%; 3/13) and doxorubicin (ORR 35%; 6/17) cohorts. After doxorubicin and cisplatin induction, we detected an upregulation of immune-related genes, involved in PD-1/PD-L1, and T-cell cytotoxicity pathways. This was further supported by enrichment among upregulated genes related to inflammation, JAK-STAT and TNFα-signaling after doxorubicin. In addition, we observed a trend towards increased T-cell infiltration, measured using T-cell receptor (TCR) sequencing, after doxorubicin. Together, the clinical and translational data of this study testing different immune induction strategies prior to nivolumab suggest that short-term doxorubicin and cisplatin may induce a more favorable TME and increase the likelihood of response to PD-1 blockade in TNBC. These data warrant further confirmation in TNBC and exploration of induction treatments prior to PD-1 blockade in other cancer types.

  Study EGAS00001003535

• Transcriptomic Profile of Whole Blood Cells from Elderly Subjects fed Probiotic Bacteria Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG ATCC 53103 (LGG) in a Phase I Open Label Study

  Open label study to evaluate the safety of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG ATCC 53103 (LGG) in elderly subjects. Fifteen healthy elderly volunteers, ages 65-80 were enrolled in a study in which they received LGG capsules containing 1 x 1010 CFU, twice daily for 28 days and were followed through day 56. The study subjects completed a daily diary, a telephone call on study days 3, 7 and 14 and study visits at the Massachusetts General Hospital Clinical Research Center at baseline, day 28 and day 56. During each visit, the subject diary, interim history, potential adverse effects and concomitant medications were reviewed and vital signs and a physical examination were performed. Routine blood tests were obtained to monitor for safety during visits and nasopharyngeal and stool samples were collected for microbiome analysis. Volunteers interested in participating in the effect of LGG probiotic on the Human whole Blood Transcriptome substudy also had blood drawn for DNA and RNA extraction, after signing the substudy consent form. The main objective of the study was to assess the safety and tolerability of 2 x 1010 CFU LGG administered orally to elderly subjects for 28 days. Secondary objectives were to evaluate the richness and microbial diversity in nasopharyngeal and stool specimens using pyrosequencing, and to compare cytokine production in response to bacterial stimulation by following the kinetics of mRNA expression of pro and anti-inflammatory genes and different signaling pathways, in relation to changes in stool Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus spp. The study was reviewed and approved by the Partners Human Research Committee (IRB # 2010P001695) and was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01274598). The main results regarding the clinical signs and safety of intervention is published in PLoS One. 2014 Dec 1;9(12):e113456. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0113456. eCollection 2014. PMID: 25438151. RNA sequencing for transcriptome analysis was only done in 11 of the 15 subjects as RNA integrity and quantity had to be optimal for the three times where blood was collected in order for a subject to be included in the study. The information regarding the microbiome data associated with this study is presented in a separate paper, which can be found at dbGaP study accession, phs000896, and PMID: 25873374.

  Study phs000928

• Towards standardized whole exome sequencing (WES) for cancer patients: lessons from a multicentric pilot study

  A growing number of druggable targets and national initiatives for precision oncology necessitate broader genomic profiling for many cancer patients. Whole exome sequencing (WES) offers unbiased analysis of the entire coding sequence, segmentation-based detection of copy number alterations (CNAs), and accurate determination of complex biomarkers including tumor mutational burden (TMB), homologous recombination repair deficiency (HRD), and microsatellite instability (MSI). To assess the inter-institution variability of clinical WES, we performed a comparative pilot study between German Centers of Personalized Medicine (ZPMs) from five participating institutions. Tumor and matched normal DNA from 30 patients were analyzed using custom sequencing protocols and bioinformatic pipelines. Calling of somatic variants was highly concordant with a sensitivity between 91-95% and a positive predictive value (PPV) of 82-95% compared with a three-institution consensus and full agreement for 16 of 17 druggable targets. Deviations were observed for cases with low VAF or coverage, differing annotations, and different filter protocols. CNAs showed overall agreement in 76% for the genomic sequence with high wet-lab variability. Complex biomarkers correlated strongly between institutions (HRD: 0.79-1, TMB: 0.97-0.99) and all institutions agreed on microsatellite instability. This study will contribute to the development of quality control frameworks for comprehensive genomic profiling and sheds light onto parameters that require stringent standardization.

  Study EGAS00001007363

• Myeloid cell programming in patients with non-medullary thyroid carcinoma

  This dataset contains single-cell RNA sequencing data from patients with thyroid cancer (n=7), multinodal Goiter (n=3) and healthy individuals (n=5). Mononuclear cells were taken from both the peripheral blood and the bone marrow compartments. We used a pooled single-cell design where multiple individuals were pooled in a single sample for sequencing (NextSeq 500-V2) and later demultiplexed using their genotype data. Associated metadata contains information on the phenotypes per individual, the pooling design and the linkage between the supplied files and sequenced pools. Due to limitations from EGA in uploading single-cell data, the raw fastq files were processed as follows: (i) I1/I2/R1/R2 fast files were concatenated over the different lanes. (ii) Concatenated I1 and I2 files were interleaved, as were the concatenated R1 and R2 files to generate two fastq files per pool containing all the information. To interleave the fastq files, the BBmap tool bbmap/reformat.sh was used, which can also be used to de-interleave the files.

  Dataset EGAD00001008108

• A novel orthotopic patient-derived xenograft model of radiation-induced glioma following medulloblastoma

  Radiation-induced glioma (RIG) is a highly aggressive brain cancer arising as a consequence of radiation therapy. We report a case of RIG that arose in the brain stem following treatment for paediatric medulloblastoma, and the development and characterisation of a matched orthotopic patient-derived xenograft (PDX) model (TK-RIG915). Patient and PDX tumours were analysed using DNA methylation profiling, whole genome sequencing (WGS) and RNA sequencing. While initially thought to be a diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (DIPG) based on disease location, results from methylation profiling and WGS were not consistent with this diagnosis. Furthermore, clustering analyses based on RNA expression suggested the tumours were distinct from primary DIPG. Additional gene expression analysis demonstrated concordance with a published RIG expression profile. Multiple genetic alterations that enhance PI3K/AKT and Ras/Raf/MEK/ERK signalling were discovered in TK-RIG915 including an activating mutation in PIK3CA, upregulation of PDGFRA and AKT2, inactivating mutations in NF1, and a gain-of-function mutation in PTPN11. Additionally, deletion of CDKN2A/B, increased IDH1 expression, and decreased ARID1A expression were observed. Detection of phospho-S6, -4EBP1 and -ERK via immunohistochemistry confirmed PI3K pathway and ERK activation. Here, we report one of the first PDX models for RIG, which recapitulates the patient disease and is molecularly distinct from primary brain stem glioma. Genetic interrogation of this model has enabled the identification of potential therapeutic vulnerabilities in this currently incurable disease.

  Study EGAS00001004709

• Genome-wide analysis of genetic risk factors for rheumatic heart disease in Aboriginal Australians provides support for pathogenic molecular mimicry

  Background. Rheumatic heart disease (RHD) following Group A Streptococcus (GAS) infections is heritable and prevalent in Indigenous populations. Molecular mimicry between human and GAS proteins triggers pro-inflammatory cardiac valve-reactive T-cells. Methods. Genome-wide genetic analysis was undertaken in 1263 Aboriginal Australians (398 RHD cases; 865 controls). Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were genotyped using Illumina HumanCoreExome BeadChips. Direct typing and imputation was used to fine-map the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) region. Epitope binding affinities were mapped for human cross-reactive GAS proteins, including M5 and M6. Results. The strongest genetic association was intronic to HLA-DQA1 (rs9272622; P=1.86x10-7). Conditional analyses showed rs9272622 and/or DQA1*AA16 account for the HLA signal. HLA-DQA1*0101_DQB1*0503 (OR 1.44, 95%CI 1.09-1.90, P=9.56x10-3) and HLA-DQA1*0103_DQB1*0601 (OR 1.27, 95%CI 1.07-1.52, P=7.15x10-3) were risk haplotypes; HLA_DQA1*0301-DQB1*0402 (OR 0.30, 95%CI 0.14-0.65, P=2.36x10-3) was protective. Human myosin cross-reactive N-terminal and B repeat epitopes of GAS M5/M6 bind with higher affinity to DQA1/DQB1 alpha/beta dimers for the two risk haplotypes than the protective haplotype. Conclusions. Variation at HLA_DQA1-DQB1 is the major genetic risk factor for RHD in Aboriginal Australians studied here. Cross-reactive epitopes bind with higher affinity to alpha/beta dimers formed by risk haplotypes, supporting molecular mimicry as the key mechanism of RHD pathogenesis.

  Study EGAS00001002678

• Starting Treatment with Agonist Replacement Therapies (START): A Randomized Trial of Methadone vs Buprenorphine/Naloxone for the Treatment of Opioid Dependence

  The Starting Treatment with Agonist Replacement Therapy (START) study was a 24-week, open-label, randomized trial of methadone versus Suboxone (buprenorphine/naloxone) for the treatment of opioid dependence. Patients were over the age of 18 and met DSM-IV qualifications for opioid dependence. The primary goal of the study was to determine if either medicine was associated with liver toxicity issues in this vulnerable patient population. Liver enzymes were measured at four time points. Urinalysis for opioids, cocaine, cannabis, benzodiazepines, and methamphetamine were performed on a weekly basis. A flexible dosing scheme was used during which physicians could alter medication dose based on withdrawal symptoms and urinalysis results. Neither medication was found to be associated with liver enzyme levels. In version 2 of this study, a text file containing 7704 SNPs with large allele frequency discrepancy as compared to 1000 Genomes is included. Users have the option to exlude these 7704 SNPs.

  Study phs001135

• Submitting array based metadata

  Submitting array based metadata For further information please check our Submission FAQs, submission quickguide as well as submission terms! The submission metadata required for Array-based submission must be submitted using EGA programmatic submission and by completing the Array-based format (AF) template. The guidelines for this workflow are described on this page. Please notice that all files should be encrypted and uploaded prior to the processing of your EGA Array-based-Format (AF) template. You can request a legacy EGA submission account (ega-box-XXXX) by populating this form. Please, allow two business days for our Helpdesk team to contact you after populating this form. Please notice that all files should be encrypted and uploaded prior to the processing of your EGA-Array-based-Format (AF) template. Metadata Model Registering Metadata Use the EGA programmatic submission to register your Study, Samples, Data Access Committee (DAC) and Policy. This online interface enables you to create new and edit existing submissions. Do not use the Submitter Portal to register the metadata objects for array submissions. Please, go to the EGA programmatic submission. Registering Study Go to the EGA programmatic submission Submit an study XML Take a note of your study accession number (EGASXXXXXXXXXXX) To use the study accession number in a publication, we suggest the following format: "Sequence data has been deposited at the European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA), which is hosted by the EBI and the CRG, under accession number EGASXXXXXXXXXXX. Further information about EGA can be found on https://ega-archive.org "The European Genome-phenome Archive of human data consented for biomedical research"(https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkab1059 ). Registering Samples Go to the EGA programmatic submission Submit a sample XML Save the list of accession numbers. These will be needed for the AF template. Registering Data Access Committee Further information on the role of your DAC. Go to the EGA programmatic submission Submit a DAC XML Take a note of the DAC accession number (EGACXXXXXXXXXXX) Registering Policy Your Data Access Policy provides the terms and conditions of data use. This is also referred to as the Data Access Agreement (DAA). Completion of a DAA by the applicant/s should form part of the application process to the Data Access Committee (DAA) Go to the EGA programmatic submission Submit a Policy XML Take a note of the Policy accession number (EGAPXXXXXXXXXXX) Complete the Array-based format (AF) spreadsheet Once you have completed the registration of your Study, DAC and Policy using the programmatix submission, you must then complete and return the AF spreadsheet The AF spreadsheet consists on four components: Do not use EGA IDs registered using the Submitter Portal. You can easily identify objects registered in the Submitter Portal by their EGA ID pattern: EGA[A-Z]5{10 more digits} (e.g. for a sample EGAN50000002506). For populating an AF spreadsheet, please exclusively use EGA IDs following this specific pattern: EGA[A-Z]0{10 more digits} (e.g. for a sample EGAN00001691542). Tab1) Webin accessions : Provide the accession numbers for your study, DAC and policy. Please, also add your ega-box number. Tab2) Sample & phenotypes: Please, leave this tab blank. Tab3) Dataset: Describe the dataset to be created Tab4) Data files: Define how your data is going to be organised into datasets and packets for distribution (linkage between samples and files). Should further assistance be required after going through the guide below; please do not hesitate to contact the EGA helpdesk Once the AF spreadsheet is populated, please send it to our EGA helpdesk for further validation. AF spreadsheet Should your submission require multiple DAC's or policies, use ' ; ' to separate the accession numbers. Accessions AF spreadsheet: Samples & phenotypes Samples and phenotypes AF spreadsheet: Datasets We suggest that each dataset consists of a common set of data. The example below consists of two datasets, grouped according to shared data type, technology and by case/control. We also like to capture the number of unique samples that make up the dataset and the Data Access Committee (DAC) responsible for providing the named dataset and their policy (EGAP). Datasets AF spreadsheet: Data files What follows is an example of how to map your samples to the array based files added to your upload account (4th tab). Data Files Please, find below some practical examples on how to register the linkage between samples-files Case 1) 1 sample or list of samples in different datasets: Data Files In case you have a list of samples that belong to different datasets, please, repeat the samples accession number/s in the first column and link the sample to the corresponding dataset each time (each row). Each row is one linkage between sample-file-dataset. Case 2) 1 sample links to several files: Data Files In order to add multiple files to one sample you MUST use “ ; “ between filenames. Example: file1.gpg;file2.gpg;file3.gpg In case that you want to add an extra file to the sample (phenotype or .Rdata), please use “Additional files” column. Important note: You MUST upload the encrypted and unencrypted md5sum values of all files uploaded to your submission account using the filename nomenclature (file.gpg, file.md5,file.md5.gpg). Your submission will not be processed without md5values supplied for all files in the CORRECT format. What happens after the submission of a dataset? All datasets affiliated to unreleased studies are automatically placed on hold until the authorised submitted or DAC contact instructs our EGA helpdesk for the study to be released. Finally, your data is archived within our databases and prepared for encrypted distribution upon the request of permitted EGA account holders. We strongly advise you NOT to delete your data until we confirm that your data has been successfully archived.

  Documentation submission/metadata/submission/array

• Genomic Data of Pediatric MDS

  The dataset consists of - 126 whole exome sequencings (SAMD9/9Lmut: 64; GATA2mut 24, MDS wildtype 38/471) performed using SureSelect Human All Exon V6 enrichment (Agilent, cat# 5190-8863). The generated libraries were sequenced on the Illumina Hiseq 2500 with 150bp paired-end reads. FASTQ files were processed using SeqNext platform (JSI medical system, Germany), with gene-based alignment to a virtual panel of 300 genes (including 28 MDS-associated genes, SAMD9, and SAMD9L), consisting of genes relevant to bone marrow failure, MDS predisposition, and hematological cancers as per the Pan-Cancer studies with cohorts of >10,000 cancers. The respective BAM files are provided. - Custom panel targeting SAMD9, SAMD9L, and 22 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) on chromosome 7q (allele frequency >35% in all ethnic sub-populations in gnomAD) (Ampliseq #IAD104171) were performed in 666/669 cases. And Custom panel targeting 28 MDS-associated genes (GATA2, RUNX1, HOXA9, CEBPA, GATA1, KRAS, NRAS, CBL, PTPN11, ASXL1, EZH2, SETBP1, FLT3, KIT, JAK2, JAK3, CSF3R, MPL, SH2, BCOR, BCORL1; RAD21, STAG2, CTCF, TP53, PTEN, CALR, VPS45) was performed in 544 cases (Ampliseq #IAD51150). Both custom panel libraries were prepared using NEBNext Ultra II DNA library prep kit (New England BioLabs, cat#E7645S/L) per manufacturer’s instruction and samples were sequenced on an Illumina Miseq 2000 with 2 x 150 bp reads. The respective BAM files are provided - 4 SAMD9/9L patients were subjected to MissionBio custom single-cell panel (CO-112) targeting 250 heterozygous gnomAD population polymorphisms on 7q arm and 69 amplicons in SAMD9/9L and other cancer genes. All libraries were sequenced on an Illumina NovaSeq6000 with 150 base-paired ending multiplexed runs. Fastq files were processed using the Tapestri Pipeline V2 and python-based Mosaic package (multi-omics analysis, data visualization). The derived BAM and loom files are provided.

  Dataset EGAD00001007856

• Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC) Trauma Epidemiologic Registry (Trauma Epistry) (ROC-Trauma Epistry-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.Available Data: This dataset only includes traumatic injury participants. For ROC cardiac arrest Epistry data please see: ROC-Cardiac Epistry 1 and 2 and ROC-Cardiac Epistry 3.Objectives: To build a prospective population-based registry of participants with out-of-hospital traumatic injury responded to by Emergency Medical Services (EMS). Specific aims included: to establish whether the results of Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC) trials can be generalized to the larger population of people that experience traumatic injury; to more fully establish the burden of traumatic injury; and to examine the relationships between variation in EMS structure and process, regional and periodic factors, and participant outcomes.Background: Traumatic injury is a major public health problem generating substantial morbidity, mortality, and economic burden on society. The majority of seriously injured persons are initially evaluated and cared for by prehospital providers, however the effect of EMS systems, EMS clinical care, and EMS interventions on trauma patient outcomes is largely unknown. EMS factors such as service level, number of responding providers, use of procedures or drugs in the field, training, quality assurance/feedback, and response time intervals also vary significantly by region.The Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC) was established in 2004 to conduct clinical research in the areas of cardiopulmonary arrest and life-threatening traumatic injury with the overall goal of improving resuscitation outcomes. Previous trauma registries have generally focused primarily on hospitalized patients with limited prehospital information. Registries may also exclude trauma cases at far ends of the spectrum, such as those who die in the field or in a non-trauma center and/or patients that are treated and released. These limitations do not allow for detailed, outcome-based assessments of EMS system factors necessary to define prehospital resuscitation best practices. Therefore there was a need for standardized data collection of out-of-hospital traumatic injuries matched to hospital-based outcomes in diverse geographic locations in order to identify the independent effects of prognostic or treatment factors accounting for variations in survival. Participants: The registry included 13,830 traumatic events from 264 EMS agencies transporting to 287 acute care hospitals from the following regional centers: Birmingham, Alabama; Dallas, Texas; Iowa City, Iowa; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Portland, Oregon; San Diego, California; Seattle/King County, Washington; Ottawa, Ontario; Toronto, Ontario; and Vancouver, British Columbia.Design: ROC Epistry collected standardized data regarding episode-specific factors, participant demographics, clinical information, pre-hospital interventions and disposition, hospital information, and participant outcome for all out-of-hospital traumatic injuries in the ROC regions. Cases were identified through review of emergency response system records including dispatch centers, EMS ground agencies, and air medical services. Out-of-hospital data were extracted from existing databases whenever possible and augmented with targeted review of EMS reports. Hospital data were abstracted directly from the hospital file in most cases. Sites submitted data using a web-based interface or batch uploads (Newgard, et al., 2008, PMID: 18482792).

  Study phs003809