19459 results for "Buy fc 26 coins Buyfc26coins.com is EA Sports official for FC 26 coins This is the best service ever..VBsp"

in 25.21 milliseconds.

• Cancer Research UK Manchester Institute/ Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre Data Access Committee

  Cancer Research UK Manchester Institute/Cancer Research UK National Biomarker Centre Data Access Committee is created to • Review and approve data access requests. • Ensure data security and compliance with institutional and legal obligations. • Maintain accurate records of access decisions For questions or further information, please contact: Chair of the Data Access Committee: Caroline Wilkinson Email: dac@cruk.manchester.ac.uk

  Dac EGAC50000000795

• Methylation Array data for: Three-dimensional patient-derived models of glioblastoma retain intra-tumoral heterogeneity

  3 sets of matched patient-derived-organoids (PDOs),  -neurospheres (PDNs), and parent glioblastoma tissue (9 samples total) underwent methylation array analysis. 200ng of each sample DNA extracted via a commercial kit (Qiagen) and loaded onto the Illumina EPIC v2.0 array. Data is provided as raw red and green .idat files.

  Dataset EGAD00010002745

• single-cell RNA-Seq samples of CRC patients

  The dataset contains samples of 11 CRC patients (2 samples for each patient, tumor and normal adjacent tissue site, 22 samples in total). Dataset is composed by fastq file (paired end) type from 10x single-cell RNA-Seq.

  Dataset EGAD00001009634

• RNA-Seq Dataset of Organoid drug profiling identifies methotrexate as a therapy for SCCOHT, a rare pediatric cancer

  We generated and characterized tumoroids from small cell carcinoma of the ovary, hypercalcemic type. Furthermore, we identified a drug that is selective and effective against SCCOHT tumoroids.

  Dataset EGAD00001015441

• Assessment of genetic and epigenetic variation in human IPS cells

  In order to progress human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) towards the clinic, several outstanding questions must be addressed. It is possible to reprogram different somatic cell types into hiPSCs but it is unlcear whether some cell types carry through fewer mutations through reprogramming (either due to mutations present in the primary cells, or mutations accumulated during reprogramming). Through in depth analysis of hiPSCs generated from different somatic cells, it will be possible to assess the variation in genetic stability of different cell types.

  Dataset EGAD00001000384

• cfDNA dataset from extracelular vesicles and paired non-fractionated samples

  Liquid biopsies contain multiple analytes that can be mined to improve the detection and management of cancer. Beyond cell-free DNA (cfDNA), mutations have been detected in DNA associated with extracellular vesicles (EV-DNA). The genome-wide composition and structure of EV-DNA remains poorly characterized, and whether circulating EVs are enriched in tumor signal compared to unfractionated cfDNA is still unclear. Here, using whole genome sequencing from selected lung cancer patients with a relatively high cfDNA tumor content >5%, we determined that the tumor fraction and heterogeneity are comparable between DNA associated with small (<200 nm) EVs and matched plasma cfDNA. DNA in EV fractions, obtained with standardized size-exclusion chromatography, are comprised of short ~150-180 bp fragments and long >1000 bp fragments that are poor in tumor signal. Other fractions only exhibit short fragments with similar tumor DNA content. The composition in bases at the end of EV-DNA fragments, as well as their fragmentation patterns are similar to total plasma cfDNA. Mitochondrial DNA however is relatively enriched in EV fractions. Our results suggests that cfDNA in plasma may be of dual nature, either bound to proteins (including the nucleosome) but also associated to EVs. cfDNA associated to small EV (including exosomes) is however not preferentially enriched in tumor signal.

  Study EGAS00001006848

• International Genetics of Parkinson Disease Progression (IGPP) Consortium: EPIPARK and HBS2 Cohorts

  EPIPARK and HBS2 cohorts were analyzed as part of the International Genetics of Parkinson Disease Progression (IGPP) Consortium. EPIPARK is a population-based cohort to study non-motor symptoms in parkinsonism in the city of Lübeck, Germany led by Drs. Meike Kasten and Christine Klein. HBS2 is a recently enrolled subset of participants in the Harvard Biomarkers Study led by Dr. Clemens Scherzer (www.bwhparkinsoncenter.org/biobank) of 89 participants with a diagnosis of Parkinson Disease (PD). Genotyping with Illumina Infinium Multi-Ethnic Genotyping Arrays (MEGA chip) was performed by Dr. Scherzer, Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women’s Hospital. 179 participants with a diagnosis of PD from EPIPARK and 89 participants with a diagnosis of PD from HBS2 met Q/C criteria were analyzed.

  Study phs002328

• mutational landscape of normal human breast

  The accumulation of somatic mutations in the healthy breast throughout life and pregnancy is poorly understood. Here we describe whole genome sequencing analysis of epithelial and stromal compartments from the normal breast. We aimed to study how pregnancy and age affect both the mutational burden and the clonality of the healthy breast, and the subsequent implications on breast cancer risk.

  Study EGAS00001004672

• TIRE-seq_PDN

  TIRE-seq is a novel RNA sequencing method that integrates mRNA purification directly into library preparation, eliminating separate RNA extraction. The technique demonstrated utility across three biological applications, including capturing transcriptional changes in human T cells, identifying genes driving murine dendritic cell differentiation, and analyzing the dose-response effects of temozolomide on patient-derived neurospheres. With its simplified approach and high sequencing efficiency, TIRE-seq offers a cost-effective solution for large-scale gene expression studies.

  Dataset EGAD50000001261

• Anaplastic Thyroid Cancer aligned sequence data

  Sequence data in fastq format was aligned to the GRCH38 reference genome. Aligned sequence was preprocessed with GATK for Indel Realignment and Base Quality Score Recalibration. Duplicates were marked with Picard Mark Duplicates. Aligned sequence is in bam format. Details of the alignment can be found int he bam header. In total, data generated from 174 tumour samples 102 matched blood normal controls was aligned. Tumour samples were classified as Anaplastic Thyroid, Poorly-differentiated or well-differentiated cancers.

  Dataset EGAD00001004126

• Single cell RNA sequencing of colorectal cancer

  To understand intrinsic cancer cell signatures and the surrounding microenvironemt and their interactions, we performed single-cell RNA sequencing on 63,689 cells from 23 patients with 23 primary colorectal cancer and 10 matched normal mucosa samples. Analyzing of primary colorectal cancer and normal mucosa samples show a comprehensive cellular landscape of colon cancer, which is a valuable resource for the development of therapeutic strategies.

  Dataset EGAD00001005198

• WGS of off-target analysis of base editing in organoids

  Seven clonal organoid lines and one bulk wild-type control sample were paired-end whole-genome sequenced using the Illumina Novaseq 6000 system. We sequenced four clonal intestinal organoid lines harbouring engineered TP53 and FBXW7 mutations as well as three lines targeted for oncogenic APC/TP53/PIK3CA/SMAD4 mutations. The reads were mapped to hg38 genome assembly and data is provided as BAM files.

  Dataset EGAD00001009827

• 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

• A compendium of mutational signatures due to environmental exposures

  Whole-genome-sequencing (WGS) of human tumours has revealed distinct mutation patterns that hint at the causative origins of cancer. We examined mutational-signatures in 324 WGS of human induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) following exposure to known or suspected environmental carcinogens. 79 agents were tested with or without metabolic activation at concentrations that produced measurable cytotoxicity; 41 yielded characteristic substitution mutational signatures. Some exhibit similarity with signatures found in human tumours. Additionally, 6 agents produced double-substitution signatures and 8 produced indel signatures. Investigating mutation asymmetries across genome topography reveals fully functional mismatch and transcription-coupled repair pathways in iPSCs. Primary adducts induced by environmental carcinogens can be resolved by disparate repair/replicative pathways, resulting in an assortment of signature outcomes even for a single mutagen. This compendium of experimentally-induced mutational-signatures permits further exploration of roles of environmental agents in cancer aetiology, and underscores how human stem cell DNA is directly vulnerable to environmental agents.

  Dataset EGAD00001004583

• ucfDNA workflows for molecular profiling of malignant disease

  Urinary cell-free DNA (ucfDNA) is a promising liquid biopsy analyte obtained by a non-invasive sampling method, particularly valuable in urological cancers due to the proximity of biofluids to the tumor site. However, extremely high fragmentation and low abundance of ucfDNA pose significant analytical challenges. Improper handling and storage can severely affect ucfDNA quality, necessitating optimized pre-analytical workflows for clinical applications. We evaluated multiple pre-analytical workflows, including urine stabilization approaches against unstabilized urine samples. Our results demonstrated that without stabilization, ucfDNA degraded rapidly and minimal quantities remaining after 72 hours. In contrast, urine stabilization preserved ucfDNA integrity, enabling successful downstream analyses, including digital PCR and next-generation sequencing, for mutation detection in cancer-related genes and genome wide copy number profiling. These findings underscore the critical role of stabilization for a reliable ucfDNA analysis and highlight its potential in molecular diagnostics as a complementary tool to plasma-based liquid biopsies.

  Study EGAS50000001093

• Pharmacogenomic Evaluation of Antihypertensive Responses (PEAR and PEAR-2)

  The primary aim of the Pharmacogenomic Evaluation of Antihypertensive Responses grant (funded by NIH Pharmacogenomic Research Network grant U01 GM074492) was to identify genetic determinants of blood pressure response and adverse events after antihypertensive treatments. Two different clinical trials with genomic information available were included: PEAR-1 and PEAR-2 studies. The PEAR-1 study (clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT00246519) was a randomized controlled clinical trial evaluating genetic determinants of BP responses and adverse metabolic responses to atenolol and hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) monotherapy and in combination (PMID: 19249413). Briefly, PEAR-1 recruited 768 hypertension individuals with uncomplicated hypertension who were randomized to either monotherapy of atenolol 50 mg daily or HCTZ 12.5 mg daily for 3 weeks, followed by dose titration to 100 mg and 25 mg daily, then the combination therapy. BP and metabolic responses to monotherapy and combination therapy were assessed after an average of 9 weeks of antihypertensive treatment. BP was measured using three different methods: home, office and ambulatory. For the BP analysis, a composite weighted average of the office, home, ambulatory daytime and nighttime BP responses was calculated based on the row sums of the inverse of the inter-method covariance matrices. Genomic DNA from PEAR-1 participants was genotyped using the Illumina Human Omni1MQuad BeadChip (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA). The PEAR-2 study was a multicenter sequential monotherapy clinical trial (clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01203852) evaluating genetic determinants of BP response to metoprolol monotherapy and chlorthalidone monotherapy. After a washout period (if necessary), eligible hypertensive patients with uncomplicated hypertension received metoprolol tartrate 50 mg twice daily for 3 weeks and the dose was increased to 100 mg twice daily for an additional six weeks if an inadequate response was observed (>120/70 mm Hg and heart rate >55 beats/min). After second washout period, patients received chlorthalidone monotherapy. Home and office BP measurements were collected in PEAR-2 study. We have previously demonstrated that home BP is the more informative single BP measurement compared to the office BP measurement. Therefore, home BP is the phenotype used for the genome-wide association analysis for PEAR-2. PEAR-2 samples were genotyped using the Illumina Human Omni2.5S Beadchip (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA).

  Study phs000649

• Multi-omics analysis of pediatric high-risk neuroblastoma

  Neuroblastoma is the most common extracranial solid malignancy among children originating from undifferentiated neural crest cells. Despite recent intensified treatment, high-risk patients still show a high mortality rate. To explore a new therapeutic strategy, we performed integrated analysis in 30 neuroblastoma cases.

  Study JGAS000246

• Whole-Transcriptomic Profiling of Sorted Human Renal Cell Carcinoma Immune Populations

  It is poorly understood how the tumor immune micro-environment influences disease progression in renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Here we performed whole-transcriptomic profiling of immune cell populations which were derived from RCC patients representing distinct flow-sorted immune lineages.

  Study EGAS00001006593

• Mucosal Melanoma Targeted Exome Sequencing Study (UCSF)

  Mucosal melanoma is a deadly disease that carries the worst prognosis amongst subtypes of melanoma. Like all melanomas, mucosal melanomas are frequently driven by activating mutations in the MAPK and/or PI3K pathways; however, unlike melanomas that arise on sun-exposed skin, mucosal melanomas harbor few point mutations. Instead, most somatic alterations involve structural alterations, which appear early during tumor progression. Molecular studies in mucosal melanoma generally only profile point mutations without interrogating copy number alterations, and pathogenic mutations are only found in 30% of cases. We sequenced 38 mucosal melanomas, and in addition to profiling point mutations, we looked for copy number alterations that amplify oncogenes or delete tumor suppressors.

  Study phs001594

• Amplicon sequencing of various tumors

  In our previous studies on advanced esophageal, gastric, and colorectal carcinomas, measurement of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in terms of variant allele frequency (VAF) in blood suggested: (1) patients with high VAF have a high chance of relapse; (2) VAF changes in response to treatment; and (3) ctDNA VAF elevation precedes imaging diagnosis of relapse. It is thus necessary to investigate whether these findings can be generalized in a wide cancer spectrum, types of treatment, and relapse phenotypes across cancer types. In the present study, we conduct a non-interventional observational study in a wide cancer spectrum on the basis of technical establishment for ctDNA using our unique digital PCR probe library.

  Study JGAS000366

• RNA sequencing of pretreatment, on-treatment and posttreatment gastric and gastroesophageal junction tumors treated with neoadjuvant anti-PD-L1 plus chemotherapy

  This set contains a total of 78 files cram files with RNA sequencing data from 20 patients included in the PANDA study treated with 1 cycle of monotherapy atezolizumab and 4 cycles atezolizumab plus chemotherapy (docetaxel, oxaliplatin and capecitabine). RNA was isolated from fresh frozen material and sequenced at 4 timepoints baseline, after monotherapy atezolizumab, after combination atezolizumab plus chemotherapy and at resection (due to 2 missing samples, there is a total of 78 samples).

  Dataset EGAD50000000241

• 16S sequencing data of mucosal biopsies

  This is the dataset of 16S data from mucosal biopsies.

  Dataset EGAD00001008215

• Rituximab-treated lymphoma patients show correlated deficiency in serological and T cell Spike-specific response after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination: insights from the CORSA Study.

  This study is part of the CORSA trial (NCT04345315), a prospective multicentric research project conducted by the Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori “Dino Amadori” to investigate the immunologic response to mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with hematologic malignancies (HM) and healthy individuals as controls (HC). The data in this repository refer to two subcohorts: 7 healthy controls and 10 lymphoma patients, randomly selected. Whole blood samples were collected to characterize T cell receptor (TCR) repertoire specificity against SARS-CoV-2 proteins before and after two BNT162b2 vaccination cycles, at baseline (before vaccination), 50 days after the first dose (V1), and 6 months after the first dose (V3). All participants were vaccinated under the Italian national campaign and provided informed consent following the Declaration of Helsinki. We investigated SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses through TCR repertoire profiling and examined correlations between serological and cellular responses in both patient and control groups. Using Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) to characterize the CDR3 sequences of TCR β-chains from peripheral blood, we assessed clonal expansion (depth) and diversification (breadth) of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell clonotypes over time, aiming to understand how cancer and its treatment influence vaccine-induced immunity in immunocompromised individuals.

  Study EGAS50000001205

• Cardiovascular Cell Therapy Research Network (CCTRN): A Phase II, RCT of Mesenchymal Stem Cells & Cardiac Stem Cells in Subjects With Ischemic HF (CONCERT HF-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. ObjectivesTo assess the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of autologous mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) and c-kit positive cardiac cells (CPCs), alone or in combination, in participants with ischemic heart failure.Background The prognosis of heart failure (HF) caused by chronic ischemic cardiomyopathy (coronary artery disease and prior myocardial infarction), hereby referred to as “ischemic HF”, remains poor. Many studies have explored the use of various types of stem or progenitor cells in participants with chronic ischemic HF, with encouraging results. Several clinical trials have suggested that MSCs and CPCs are both safe and beneficial in participants with ischemic HF. At the time of this study, no information was available on the efficacy of MSCs and CPCs in humans, however, both cell types have been shown to attenuate left ventricle (LV) dysfunction in animal models. Preclinical models indicate that combining MSCs and CPCs increases the therapeutic effects, but this had not yet been tested in humans. The CONCERT-HF study was initiated to assess whether autologous MSCs and CPCs, alone or in combination, can be manufactured and delivered to participants with ischemic HF; are well-tolerated; and improve LV function, quality of life, and functional capacity, and/or reduce scar size. Participants A total of 125 participants were randomized with 33 participants randomized to the MSCs and CPCs group, 29 participants to the MSCs alone group, 31 participants to the CPCs alone group, and 32 participants to the placebo group. Design The CONCERT-HF study was a multi-center Phase II, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial designed to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of MSCs alone, CPCs alone, and their combination compared with placebo as well as each other in patients with ischemic HF. In Stage 1 (open label, lead-in study) participants were randomized 1:1 to either a standard-of-care control group (i.e., they did not undergo harvest, mapping, or injection procedures) or combination therapy (MSCs + CPCs, as described for Stage 2) to complete safety assessments. Once approval was granted for Stage 2, participants were randomized (1:1:1:1) to one of four treatments: placebo, autologous MSCs (target dose, 150 × 106 cells), autologous CPCs (target dose, 5 × 106 cells), or a combination of autologous MSCs and CPCs. At the harvest visit, right ventricular endocardial biopsy (EMB) was performed in participants randomized to receive CPCs alone or a combination of MSCs and CPCs. Participants randomized to receive MSCs alone or placebo had a sham procedure (right heart catheterization without EMB). All participants underwent a bone marrow aspiration and approximately 14 weeks later had transendocardial, electromechanically-guided injections of study product. Visits occurred at 1 day, 1 week, and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after study product injection. A telephone contact took place at 24 months to assess the participant's current medications, as well as morbidity and mortality. Study endpoints included measures of safety, feasibility, and efficacy. Safety outcomes included all adverse events grade 2 and higher, including major adverse cardiac events (MACE) related to HF (death, hospitalization for worsening HF, and HF exacerbation not requiring hospitalization). Efficacy endpoints included quality of life, MRI measures of LV function and structure, functional capacity, and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels. Conclusions In patients with ischemic HF, autologous MSCs and CPCs, alone or in combination, are safe and feasible; CPCs were associated with a reduction in the incidence of MACE related to HF compared to placebo; MSCs, either alone or in combination with CPCs, were associated with improved quality of life; these seemingly beneficial effects of CPCs and MSCs on clinical outcome were not associated with changes in LV function or structure; and combination therapy with MSCs and CPCs was associated with the best clinical outcomes with respect to both MACE related to HF and quality of life.

  Study phs004055

• Shanghai Breast Cancer Genetics Study (SBCGS)

  The Shanghai Breast Cancer Genetics Study (SBCGS) includes data from four population-based studies conducted among Chinese women in urban Shanghai: the Shanghai Breast Cancer Study (SBCS), the Shanghai Breast Cancer Survival Study (SBCSS), the Shanghai Women's Health Study (SWHS), and the Shanghai Endometrial Cancer Study (SECS, contributing controls only). Shanghai Breast Cancer Study (SBCS): The SBCS is a population-based, case-control study conducted in urban Shanghai. Subject recruitment in the initial phase of the SBCS (SBCS-I) was conducted between August 1996 and March 1998. The second phase (SBCS-II) of recruitment occurred between April 2002 and February 2005. Breast cancer cases were identified through the population-based Shanghai Cancer Registry and supplemented by a rapid case-ascertainment system. Controls were randomly selected using the Shanghai Resident Registry. Approximately 3500 cases and 3500 controls were recruited in the study. Shanghai Breast Cancer Survival Study (SBCSS) and Shanghai Endometrial Cancer Study (SECS): The SBCSS also used the population-based Shanghai Cancer Registry to identify newly diagnosed breast cancer cases. A total of 5,046 breast cancer patients were recruited. In-person interviews were conducted to collect information on known breast cancer risk factors and anthropometrics by using protocols and questionnaires similar to those used in the SBCS. For genetic studies, controls for the SBCSS cases came from the SECS, which recruited healthy women between January 1997 and December 2003. With the exception of a few questions related specifically to breast or endometrial cancer risk, the questionnaires used in the SECS and the SBCS were very similar. Shanghai Women's Health Study (SWHS): The SWHS is a population-based prospective cohort study of approximately 75,000 adult women who were recruited between 1997 and 2000. The cohort has been followed by a combination of record linkage and active follow-ups. Breast cancer patients identified in the SWHS and non-cases were included in the current study.

  Study phs001088