13856 results for "Buy fc coins Buyfc26coins.com is EA Sports official for FC 26 coins I received very good service today..GnKh"

in 199.57 milliseconds.

• Exome Sequencing of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

  The incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) has risen 600% over the last 30 years. When coupled to the five-year survival rate of only 15% for this disease, identification of new therapeutic targets for EAC is of great importance. Here, we analyze the mutational spectra identified from the whole genome sequencing of 16 EACs and complete exome sequencing of 149 EAC tumors and matched germline samples. We identify a novel mutation signature marked by high prevalence of A to C transversions at AA*(N) trinucleotides. Notably, the development of EAC is preceded by pathologic intestinal metaplasia of the lower esophagus, Barrett's esophagus, itself a response to injury from gastric-esophageal reflux disease (GERD). Thus, we hypothesize to represent these AA*(N) mutations to a novel signature of GERD-induced mutagenesis. Analysis of the exome data identified 26 genes subject to statistically significant recurrent mutation. Of these 26 genes, only TP53, CDKN2A, SMAD4, and PIK3CA had been previously implicated in EAC. Novel mutations include those targeting chromatin modifying factors and novel candidate contributors to EAC: SPG20, TLR4, ELMO1 and DOCK2. Of these, ELMO1 and DOCK2 are notably direct dimerization partners that act to activate Rac1 to enhance cellular invasiveness, thus generating new hypotheses about the potential for the Rac1 pathway to be a novel target for therapy of EAC. "Reprinted from 'Unraveling the mutational complexity of esophageal adenocarcinoma', with permission from Nature Genetics."

  Study phs000598

• Whole-exome sequencing and microRNA profiling predicted relapse risk of stage I lung adenocarcinomas

  Despite the advance in precision therapy, about 20% of stage I non-small cell lung cancer patients suffer a relapse after surgical resection. To develop molecular signatures for relapse prediction of stage I lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD), we conduct comprehensive analyses of multiplatform molecular profiling from 113 treatment-naïve stage I Taiwanese LUAD patients. We identify 16 nonsynonymous non-sporadic point mutations (NSPOPMs) harbored at EGFR, KRAS, TP53, CTNNB1 and 6 other genes, and find that the Non-EGFR NSPOPMs were associated with early relapse in a dose-dependent manner via variant allele fraction (VAF). We define a score, maxVAF, to aggregate the VAFs of these NSPOPMs by the maximum value. MicroRNA expression analysis shows a strong correlation between miR-31 and maxVAF. Combining maxVAF with miR-31 led to a powerful risk prediction for surgically resected stage I patients (hazard ratio = 8.65, P = 0.001). Our study opens up more options for precision management of stage I LUAD patients.

  Study EGAS00001004461

• Oral Immunotherapy for Induction of Tolerance and Desensitization in Peanut-Allergic Children (IMPACT)

  Brief Summary:This is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center study comparing peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) to placebo in the induction of tolerance and desensitization in peanut-allergic children. Eligible participants with peanut allergy will be randomly assigned to receive either peanut OIT or placebo for 134 weeks followed by peanut avoidance for 26 weeks.Detailed Description:An initial oral food challenge (OFC) to 1 g of peanut flour (500 mg peanut protein) will be conducted. Participants must have a clinical reaction during this OFC to initiate study dosing. After the initial OFC, the study design includes four phases:Initial dose escalation (1 day): Peanut or placebo dosing will be given incrementally and increase every 20 minutes until a dose of 12 mg peanut flour (6 mg peanut protein) or placebo flour is given. Build-up (30 weeks): Initial observed dose administration of highest tolerated dose, followed by daily OIT at home with return visit every 2 weeks for dose escalation. Maintenance (104 weeks):The participant will continue on daily OIT with return visits every 13 weeks. At the end of this phase the participant will undergo a blinded OFC to 10 g peanut flour (5 g peanut protein). Avoidance (26 weeks): In this final phase participants will be seen every 13 weeks. At the completion of this phase participants will have a final blinded OFC to 10g peanut flour (5 g peanut protein)

  Study phs003109

• Combining a Universal Telomerase Based Cancer Vaccine with Ipilimumab in Patients with Metastatic Melanoma - Five-year Follow up of a Phase I/IIa Trial

  Background Ipilimumab improves survival for patients with metastatic malignant melanoma. Combining a therapeutic cancer vaccine with ipilimumab may increase efficacy by providing enhanced anti-tumor immune responses. UV1 consists of three synthetic long peptides from human telomerase reverse transcriptase (hTERT). These peptides comprise epitopes recognized by T cells from cancer patients experiencing long-term survival following treatment with a first-generation hTERT vaccine, and generate long-lasting immune responses in cancer patients when used as monotherapy. The objective of this trial was to investigate the safety and efficacy of combining UV1 with ipilimumab in metastatic melanoma. Patients and methods In this phase I/IIa, single center trial [NCT02275416], patients with metastatic melanoma received repeated UV1 vaccinations, with GM-CSF as an adjuvant, in combination with ipilimumab. Patients were evaluated for safety, efficacy and immune response. Immune responses against vaccine peptides were monitored in peripheral blood by measuring antigen-specific proliferation and IFN-γ production. Results Twelve patients were recruited. Adverse events were mainly diarrhea, injection site reaction, pruritus, rash, nausea and fatigue. Ten patients showed a Th1 immune response to UV1 peptides, occurring early and after few vaccinations. Three patients obtained a partial response and one patient a complete response. Overall survival was 50% at 5 years. Conclusion Treatment was well tolerated. The rapid expansion of UV1-specific Th1 cells in the majority of patients indicates synergy between UV1 vaccine and CTLA-4 blockade. This may have translated into clinical benefit, encouraging the combination of UV1 vaccination with standard of care treatment regimes containing ipilimumab/CTLA-4 blocking antibodies.

  Study EGAS00001005253

• 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

• Effects of Metformin on Transcriptomic and Metabolomic Profiles in Breast Cancer Survivors Enrolled in the Randomized Placebo-Controlled MetBreCS Trial

  RNA from snap-frozen breast tissue biopsies were purified after lysing by tissuelyser (Qiagen) and using RNA Purification Plus Kit (Norgen biotek CORP, 47700) with additional on-column DNase-I treatment (Qiagen, 79254) at 27 °C. RNA purity and integrity (RIN) were quantified using RNA 6000 Nano kit (Agilent Technologies, 5067-1511) on the 4200 TapeStation (Agilent, Santa Clara, USA). Library preparation and 2x75bp paired-end of 160 ng total RNA input was performed using Illumina Stranded Total RNA Prep Ligation kit and Illumina HiSeq4000 system (Illumina, Sand Diego, CA, USA). RNA sequencing data from HiSeq4000 were quality checked and aligned to GRCh38 (GCA_000001405.15) reference genome using HISAT2 2.0.5 and submitted to subread v.1.5.2 for feature counts calculation. Finally, 36 paired biopsies samples (metformin n=26 and placebo n=12) were sequenced and included in the final analyses.

  Dataset EGAD50000001274

• GCAT| ICD Disease Diagnoses

  Disease diagnoses of GCAT Cohort participants obtained from electronic health records (EHR), mainly including the time period from 2012 to 2017. Disease diagnoses are codified in ICD-9, and the position of diagnosis refers to primary/secondary diagnoses (up to 14 secondary diagnoses per visit). The date and origin of the visit are also specified (AP: primary care, UGR: emergency, AH: hospital care, SMA: outpatient medical service, SMH: hospital medical service).

  Dataset EGAD00001007731

• NHLBI GO-ESP: Lung Cohorts Exome Sequencing Project (Lung Health Study of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease)

  The NHLBI "Grand Opportunity" Exome Sequencing Project (GO-ESP), a signature project of the NHLBI Recovery Act investment, was designed to identify genetic variants in coding regions (exons) of the human genome (the "exome") that are associated with heart, lung and blood diseases. These and related diseases that are of high impact to public health and individuals from diverse racial and ethnic groups will be studied. These data may help researchers understand the causes of disease, contributing to better ways to prevent, diagnose, and treat diseases, as well as determine whether to tailor prevention and treatments to specific populations. This could lead to more effective treatments and reduce the likelihood of side effects. GO-ESP is comprised of five collaborative components: 3 cohort consortia - HeartGO, LungGO, and WHISP - and 2 sequencing centers - BroadGO and SeattleGO. The Lung Health Study I was a randomized multicenter clinical trial with 5887 participants carried out from October 1986 to April 1994, designed to test the effectiveness of smoking cessation and bronchodilator administration in smokers aged 35 to 60 with mild lung function impairment. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups: usual care, who received no intervention smoking intervention with the inhaled bronchodilator ipratroprium bromide smoking intervention with an inhaled placebo The effect of intervention was evaluated by the rate of decline of forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1).

  Study phs000291

• The Genetic Landscape of Ocular Adnexa MALT Lymphoma Reveals Frequent Aberrations in NFAT and MEF2B Signaling Pathways

  A comprehensive constellation of somatic non-silent mutations and copy number (CN) variations in ocular adnexa marginal zone lymphoma (OAMZL) is unknown. By utilizing whole-exome sequencing in 69 tumors we define the genetic landscape of OAMZL. Mutations and CN changes in CABIN1 (30%), RHOA (26%), TBL1XR1 (22%), and CREBBP (17%) and inactivation of TNFAIP3 (26%) were among the most common aberrations. Candidate cancer driver genes cluster in the B-cell receptor (BCR), NFkB, NOTCH and NFAT signaling pathways. One of the most commonly altered genes is CABIN1, a calcineurin inhibitor acting as a negative regulator of the NFAT and MEF2B transcriptional activity. CABIN1 deletions enhance BCR-stimulated NFAT and MEF2B transcriptional activity, while CABIN1 mutations enhance only MEF2B transcriptional activity by impairing binding of mSin3a to CABIN1. Our data provide an unbiased identification of genetically altered genes that may play a role in the molecular pathogenesis of OAMZL and serve as therapeutic targets.

  Study EGAS00001006631

• Immune Checkpoint Blockade for Relapsed Hematologic Malignancy Post-HSCT

  Relapse after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is characterized by poor outcomes and novel therapeutic options are urgently needed. Immune checkpoint blockade using CTLA-4 and PD-1 blocking antibodies are a potential concept for reinstating a dormant graft-versus-leukemia (Gvl) effect. This study investigated transcriptomic changes in biopsies obtained from patients who received immune checkpoint blockade for relapsed hematologic malignancy post-HSCT and elucidated transcriptional programs associated with successful reinvigoration of GvL. Differential gene expression analysis showed evidence of increased T cell infiltration in biopsies of responders to ipilimumab treatment and demonstrated shared gene programs between GvL and GvHD.

  Study phs003291