20311 results for "Fc coins Buyfc26coins.com is EA Sports official for FC 26 coins They are efficient and quick always..Z2Xg"

in 23.51 milliseconds.

• MutWP1__CRUK_Grand_Challenge_Mutographs_of_Cancer__head___neck

  The Mutographs project aims to advance our understanding of the causes of cancer through studies of mutational signatures. Led by Mike Stratton, together with Paul Brennan, Ludmil Alexandrov, Allan Balmain, David Phillips and Peter Campbell, this large-scale international research endeavour was awarded a Cancer Research UK Grand Challenge. Different patterns of somatic mutation are generated by the different environmental, lifestyle and genetic factors that cause cancer, many of them are still unknown. Within Mutographs, the International Agency for Research on Cancer is coordinating the recruitment of 5000 individuals with cancer (colorectal, renal, pancreatic, oesophageal adenocarcinoma or oesophageal squamous cancers) across 5 continents to explore whether different mutational signatures explain marked variation in incidence. In brief, through an international network of collaborators around the world, biological materials are collected, along with demographic, histological, clinical and questionnaire data. Whole genome sequences of tumour-germline DNA pairs are generated at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute. Non-tumour DNA is also studied for some cancer types. Somatic mutational signatures are subsequently extracted by non-negative matrix factorisation methods and correlated with risk factors data. Through an enhanced understanding of cancer aetiology, Mutographs unprecedented effort is anticipated to outline modifiable risk factors, lead to new approaches to prevent cancer, and provide opportunities to empower early detection, refine high-risk groups and contribute to further therapeutic development.

  Study EGAS00001005450

• Submission FAQ

  Submission FAQ Before Submission Is the EGA the right archive for my data? The most suitable archive for your data is dependent on the type of data you are wishing to submit and whether the data require public or controlled access. Public access is defined as complete and open access to all submitted data. On the contrary, controlled access, exerted by the EGA, requires formal applications to be made to access the submitted data files and metadata. EGA only accepts human-derived data subject to controlled access. If your submission contains other types of data, please choose the appropriate repository for it (see image below): ENA, EVA, ArrayExpress, BioSD and GWAS catalog.  Should your submission be subjected to controlled access? Data access conditions are normally defined in the original informed consent agreements signed by the participants involved in your study. All data submitted to the EGA is subject to controlled access. These consents prevent the derived data files, potentially identifiable, from being dispersed by open and public access. Controlled access data often refers to human data derived from medical research and consortium projects. If in doubt, consult the informed consent agreements that apply to your study The EGA enables you to hold a submission before publication. What data types can be submitted to the EGA? Data types accepted by the EGA can be split into three categories: Sequences: both in generic and platform-specific formats. Array-based: from raw signal files to processed matrices. Phenotypes: all possible phenotype formats are accepted. All manufacturer-specific raw data formats derived from major next generation sequencing platforms are accepted. Also generic sequence formats: flat reads in a FASTQ file, aligned sequences (BAM or CRAM files) as well as sequence variation files in VCF format. All array-based technologies are accepted, including raw data, intensity and analysis files, without any restriction on data formats accepted. We also accept and distribute phenotype data (associated to the samples) in almost any format: from an image to a README file. How long does a submission take? Submissions to EGA come in a variety of formats and sizes, thus it is difficult for us to exactly predict how long a submission will take. We, therefore, advise all of our submitters to allow as much time as possible to make a submission. Based on previous records, we anticipate that the submission process may take at least one month. The submitter’s familiarity with the procedures, possible technical issues that may arise during submission and the amount of data that is being submitted are the main factors that will affect the length of the submission process. However, each step of a regular submission should be considered when estimating the time it would take: Encryption of the files Upload of the files Metadata submission Archival of the files Release of the study and datasets to EGA webpage For example, the upload of the files depends on the submission size, while metadata submission mainly relies on each submitter’s expertise. Further, some steps (e.g. answering to inquiries) depend on the EGA Helpdesk team, which may take some days to be processed during busy times Is data deposited in the EGA secure? The EGA set-up consists of a secure computing facility for data processing, a shared EBI set-up for data submissions and distribution of data via data requests made through the EGA website. Data is also copied in the Barcelona Supercomputing Center (BSC) infrastructure, where all stored and distributed data is encrypted Data is encrypted along the submission process and stored securely, granting its access to authorised users exclusively. During the download process, through our Python Client or Aspera, all requested data is downloaded over secure https connections. All data at the EGA is encrypted, and only accessible (for log-in and download) through secure protocols. For further information please, visit our security overview. What documentation do I need to provide? All submissions require policy’s documentation: 'Data Access Agreement (DAA)', 'Data Processing Agreement (DPA)' and 'Authorized Submitters Formulary'. The data processors (EGA) and the data owners will also sign the DPA. Will all metadata be public? Among the submitted metadata we need to make the distinction between identifiable and unidentifiable metadata: (1) the former may allow the identification of the human the sample derived from (e.g. detailed geographical providence, personal name, family ancestry…); (2) while the latter can be used to interpret the data without compromising the anonymity of the patients. The majority of the metadata submitted to the EGA corresponds to the unidentifiable category (e.g. sequencer's model). This type of metadata is publicly available on the EGA website and other EBI resources/partners’ websites. On the other hand, some parts samples’ metadata are subject to being identifiable, and thus only accessible by authorized data requesters, with the exception of: 5 submitter-defined attributes of the sample: alias, title, subject_id, gender and phenotype. It is the submitter’s responsibility not to submit sensitive metadata in these public fields. 3 anonymised fields that pinpoint the sample record in archivals: sample’s EGA stable ID (EGAN…), BioSample ID (SAMEA…) and submitter’s center name. During Submission Are there any sample specific requirements for EGA? All samples submitted to the EGA must include the attributes of biological sex, subject ID (anonymised individual identifier) and phenotype information. These are critical for data findability and its analysis, and we highly recommend using controlled ontology terms where applicable. For example: defining tumour and non-tumour samples and/or defining disease state. The EGA recommends using the Experimental Factor Ontology Database to find ontologized terms that describe your sample phenotypes. How do I get an accession number to use in my publication? You will receive your study accession number (EGAS…) upon complete your submission, either: Programmatically. As soon as the metadata is submitted and validated your study will be assigned an accession number that will be given in the submission’s response. Manually registering your study and relevant metadata using the online metadata submission tool: the EGA submitter Portal. How are files uploaded to the EGA? Data files are uploaded into private submission drop boxes (i.e. environments to which you are granted access and where you can transfer your files) using INBOX or FTP. These spaces are provided as part of the submission procedure. Before uploading any file, you must encrypt your files, . Only encrypted files shall be uploaded to the drop boxes. Why does data need to to encrypted for my submitted files? It is one of the security steps the EGA has implemented. In case of a security breach, people without the proper encryption key will not be able to read or use the information that could have been leaked. This measure is essential when working with sensitive data, such as controlled access human data. All submitters must use crypt4gh to create EGA compliant files prior to uploading them. This encryption is GPG-based, using EGA’s public key. Why are my files not available if I see them in the INBOX? There exists a time window between the data upload and the availability of such files via the Submitter Portal. For this reason, some metadata (run and analysis objects) cannot be registered until at least 24 hours after the files have been uploaded to your box. Why are MD5 sum values generated for my submitted files? We require pre- and post- encryption MD5 (message-digest) checksum values to be provided for all submitted files. These 128-bit values are computed using the content of each file, creating unique sequences that allow us to ensure that file integrity has been maintained during the transfer process. In other words, if the MD5 checksums we generate and those you generated match, we infer that the content of the transferred files is correct (i.e. files are not corrupted or truncated). MD5 checksums are computed automatically using the crypt4gh tool provided. Your submission will not be accepted and may be significantly delayed if you do not provide MD5 checksum values for all data files in the required format. How can I check if my files are correctly uploaded to the inbox? It is important to check the status pf your file so you know whether your files are in the inbox, being processed, or if there is any issue with one of them. In order to check this, you should: Look for the file locally. Drag and drop it to the file table. Then bars will appear on the table, which means that we are processing it. Green: The files checksum are correct and your file will move to “ingested files”. No further actions are needed from your end.. Red: The files checksum does not match and your file needs to be re-uploaded. Please re-upload relevant files to your inbox using the same path. How can I add my dataset to the cBioPortal instance? In order to link your data to the cBioPortal, you must register it as a normal dataset in the Submitter Portal. For more information, please refer to the cBioPortal documentation. After Submission How do I use my accession number in my publication? We suggest the use of the below template, using your study accession ID (EGAS…) : 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 at https://ega-archive.org and "The European Genome-phenome Archive of human data consented for biomedical research" Your study ID will be the one that groups your whole submission, and thus its usage is recommended as such. Nevertheless, all metadata submitted to EGA hold a unique and persistent identifier (starting with EGA…) that can be used to identify specific records. For example, you could reference a specific dataset (EGAD…) or sample (EGAN…) in your publications (see full list of identifiers). How do I make my data searchable? Once you have finalized your submission, you can schedule the data release. Please take into account that the release process needs time for the files to be archived in our system, and for the Helpdesk team to validate your submission. Can I withdraw (meta)data from the EGA? We have methods in place for the secure removal of deposited (meta)data. Contact EGA-helpdesk for further details. EGA complies with FAIRness of (meta)data, and thus, even when the data is removed we keep an entry for their identifiers in our system. In other words, we execute a soft delete on canceled objects (e.g. a study): metadata is still stored in our systems, but it loses all links, cannot be queried and data files cannot be retrieved anymore. The reason behind this behaviour is so that queries using withdrawn data properly respond back (see example of a canceled study). What happens to the data once it has been submitted to the EGA? When the data is submitted, the submitter can choose either keep their data private or schedule the release of their data.

  Documentation submission/metadata/submission/FAQ

• Ecological Stressors, PTSD, and Drug Use in Detroit: The Detroit Neighborhood Health Study (DNHS)

  The Detroit Neighborhood Health Study (DNHS) is a prospective, representative longitudinal cohort study of predominantly African American adults living in Detroit, Michigan. The overall goal of the DNHS is to identify how genetic variation, lifetime experience of stressful and traumatic events, and features of the neighborhood environment predict psychopathology and behavior. Cohort participants were selected with a dual-frame probability design, using telephone numbers obtained from the U.S. Postal Service Delivery Sequence Files as well as a listed-assisted random-digit-dial frame. Individuals without listed landlines or telephones and individuals with only a cell phone listed were invited to participate through a postal mail effort. Participants completed a 40 minute, structured telephone interview annually between 2008-2012 to assess perceptions of participants' neighborhoods, mental and physical health status, social support, exposure to traumatic events, and alcohol and tobacco use; each participant was compensated $25USD. All survey participants were offered the opportunity to provide a specimen (venipuncture, blood spot, or saliva) for immune and inflammatory marker testing as well as genetic testing of DNA. Participants received an additional $25USD if they elected to give a sample. Informed consent was obtained at the beginning of each interview and again at specimen collection. The Institutional Review Board of the University of Michigan reviewed and approved the study protocol. The DNHS submission to dbGaP includes phenotype data from all five survey waves (n=856), all available GWAS data for participants who completed wave 4 (n=507), and methylation data for wave 1, wave 2, wave 4, and wave 5 participants (n = 456).

  Study phs000560

• Anti-myeloperoxidase IgM B cells in anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis

  Anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV) is a prototypic autoimmune disease, with a subset of AAV patients manifesting anti-myeloperoxidase (MPO) IgG. Patients with AAV respond positively to B cell-targeting and complement-targeting therapies, but disease flares are not uncommon. Here, by comparing samples from healthy individuals and MPO+ AVV patients, we show that B cell autoreactivity against MPO in the circulation of patients is dominated by CD27+IgM+ B cells whereas MPO-specific IgG+ cells are infrequent. Additionally, while naive anti-MPO-IgM B cells are present in both patients and controls and produce anti-MPO IgM upon stimulation, anti-MPO-IgM memory B cells and serum anti-MPO IgM are features of patients. Our results thus hint that defective elimination of B cell reactivity to MPO in the human repertoire, the presence of activated IgM+ anti-MPO B cells in disease, and a dominant role for anti-MPO IgM in complement activation, may all contribute to MPO+ AAV etiology and thereby serve as potential target for therapy.

  Study EGAS50000000753

• Phenotype Risk Scores Identify Patients with Unrecognized Mendelian Disease Patterns

  This study was designed to assess the phenotypic effects of rare variants. Rare variants are difficult to study in a high-throughput manner because most cohorts are underpowered to detect associations. In order to gain power to test rare variants, we use Phenotype Risk Scores (PheRS) based on features of Mendelian diseases. PheRS is calculated using claims data from an EHR that is mapped to clinical features from OMIM's clinical descriptions of Mendelian disease. We calculated PheRS for 1,204 Mendelians diseases in a cohort of 21,701 individuals genotyped on the HumanExome BeadChip. We then tested for association between these diseases and rare variants in causal genes. A phenotype risk score is calculated as the weighted sum of features for a given disease. The features are defined as a set of phecodes (consolidated ICD codes) associated with a particular Mendelian disease as described in OMIM. The weights for each phecode are calculated as the log inverse prevalence of the phecode in our cohort. For an individual, their score equals the sum of the weights for each phecode that is present in their medical record. Our study was based on a cohort of individuals with genotype data linked to de-identified electronic health records (EHR) from Vanderbilt's BioVU resource. We hope that this method will help generate phenotype-genotype correlation data on rare variants which in turn may inform rare variant interpretations use for diagnostics.

  Study phs001516

• Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT-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. ObjectivesHypertension Study: To determine whether treatment with a calcium channel blocker or an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor lowers the incidence of coronary heart disease (CHD) or other cardiovascular disease (CVD) events vs treatment with a diuretic.Lipid Study: To determine whether pravastatin compared with usual care reduces all-cause mortality in older, moderately hypercholesterolemic, hypertensive participants with at least an additional CHD risk factor. BackgroundHypertension Study: Antihypertensive therapy is well established to reduce hypertension-related morbidity and mortality, but the optimal first-step therapy is unknown.Lipid Study: Studies have demonstrated that statins administered to individuals with risk factors for coronary heart disease (CHD) reduce CHD events. However, many of these studies were too small to assess all-cause mortality or outcomes in important subgroups.ParticipantsHypertension Study: A total of 33,357 participants. Lipid Study: A total of 10,355 participants. Baseline mean total cholesterol was 224 mg/dL; LDL-C, 146 mg/dL; high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, 48 mg/dL; and triglycerides, 152 mg/dL. Mean age was 66 years; 49% were women, 38% black and 23% Hispanic, 14% had a history of CHD, and 35% had type 2 diabetes. DesignHypertension Study: A randomized, double-blind, active-controlled clinical trial conducted from February 1994 through March 2002. Participants were randomly assigned to receive chlorthalidone, 12.5 to 25 mg/d (n = 15,255); amlodipine, 2.5 to 10 mg/d (n = 9048); or lisinopril, 10 to 40 mg/d (n = 9054) for planned follow-up of approximately 4 to 8 years. The primary outcome was combined fatal CHD or nonfatal myocardial infarction, analyzed by intent-to-treat. Secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, stroke, combined CHD (primary outcome, coronary revascularization, or angina with hospitalization), and combined CVD (combined CHD, stroke, treated angina without hospitalization, heart failure (HF), and peripheral arterial disease).Lipid Study: Multicenter (513 primarily community-based North American clinical centers), randomized, non-blinded trial conducted from 1994 through March 2002 in a subset of participants from the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). The interventions in the trial were pravastatin, 40 mg/d, vs usual care. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, with follow-up for up to 8 years. Secondary outcomes included non-fatal myocardial infarction or fatal CHD (CHD events) combined, cause-specific mortality, and cancer.ConclusionsHypertension Study: Thiazide-type diuretics are superior in preventing one or more major forms of CVD and are less expensive. They should be preferred for first-step antihypertensive therapy.Lipid Study: Pravastatin did not reduce either all-cause mortality or CHD significantly when compared with usual care in older participants with well-controlled hypertension and moderately elevated LDL-C. The results may be due to the modest differential in total cholesterol (9.6%) and LDL-C (16.7%) between pravastatin and usual care compared with prior statin trials supporting cardiovascular disease prevention.

  Study phs004021

• DIPG WES and RNA-Seq

  We characterised H3K27M-mutant diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (DIPG, n=21) and RNA-Seq (n=26 DIPG, 12 normal brain)

  Dataset EGAD00001006450

• Hematopoietic Cell Transplant for Sickle Cell Disease (HCT for SCD)

  The Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) is a hematopoietic cell transplant registry that was established in 1972 at the Medical College of Wisconsin. The overarching goal of the registry is to study trends in transplantations and to advance the understanding and application of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for malignant and non-malignant diseases. Included in this dataset are children, adolescents and young adults with severe sickle cell disease who received an allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant in the United States and provided written informed consent for research.Hematopoietic cell transplant for sickle cell disease is curative. Offering this treatment for patients with severe disease is challenging as only about 20-25% of patients expected to benefit have an HLA-matched sibling. Consequently, several transplantations have utilized an HLA-matched or mismatched unrelated adult donor and HLA-mismatched relative. Transplantation strategies have also evolved over time that has included transplant conditioning regimens of varying intensity, grafts other than bone marrow and novel approaches to overcome the donor-recipient histocompatibility barrier and limit graft-versus-host disease. The data that is available for sickle cell disease transplants have been utilized to report on outcomes after transplantation and compare outcomes after transplantation of grafts HLA-matched related, HLA-mismatched related, HLA-matched and HLA-mismatched unrelated donors. Collectively, these data have advanced our knowledge and understanding of hematopoietic cell transplant for this disease. These data can also serve as "contemporaneous controls" for comparison with other more recent curative treatments like gene therapy and gene editing.Data available for request include allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplants for sickle cell disease (Hb SS and Hb Sβ thalassemia) in the United States from 1991 to 2019. Follow-up data through December 2020 are available.Instructions for requesting individual-level data are available on BioData Catalyst at https://biodatacatalyst.nhlbi.nih.gov/resources/data/. Apply for data access in dbGaP. Upon approval, users may begin accessing requested data in BioData Catalyst. For questions about availability, you may contact the BioData Catalyst team at https://biodatacatalyst.nhlbi.nih.gov/contact.

  Study phs002385

• Immune Responses in Checkpoint Myocarditis Across Heart, Blood, and Tumor

  Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are widely used in anti-cancer therapies, but they can cause morbid and potentially fatal immune-related adverse events (irAEs), such as ICI-related myocarditis (irMyocarditis). The pathogenesis of irMyocarditis and its relationship to anti-tumor immunity remain poorly understood. We sought to define immune responses in heart, tumor, and blood in irMyocarditis patients and controls by leveraging single‐cell RNA sequencing (scRNA‐seq) coupled with T-cell Receptor Sequencing (TCR-Seq). Our analysis demonstrated increased frequencies of cytotoxic T cells, inflammatory mononuclear phagocytes (MNPs), conventional dendritic cells (cDCs), and inflammatory fibroblasts in irMyocarditis heart tissue. Additionally, we revealed decreased frequencies of plasmacytoid dendritic cells, cDCs, and B lineage cells but an increased frequency of MNPs in the blood of irMyocarditis patients. Raw data for heart and blood can be found in dbGaP. All processed data and raw TCRseq data from heart tissue and tumor samples for this study can be found in GEO (Accession number GSE228597).Subject IDs with the prefix "SIC" were collected by the Severe Immunotherapy Complications (SIC) service at MGH due to suspicion of immune-related adverse events. Subject IDs with the prefix "donor" were collected by the MGH Melanoma Biobank at scheduled timepoints; this biobank systematically collects samples from patients at MGH at clinically relevant timepoints.

  Study phs003413

• Genomic consequences of aberrant DNA repair mechanisms stratify ovarian cancer histotypes

  Aberrant DNA repair processes are a hallmark of human tumours. How these deficiencies variously impact the genomes of ovarian cancer between and within histotypes remains unknown. We studied the whole genome pointmutation and structural variation patterns of 133 tumours (59 high grade serous (HGSC), 35 clear cell (CCOC), 29 endometrioid (ENOC), and 10 adult granulosa cell tumours (GCT)) as a substrate for class discovery in ovarian cancer. Ab-initio clustering of integrated point mutation and structural variation signatures revealed seven novel subgroups, comprising between and within histotype stratification. Prevalence of fold-back inversions (FBI) co-localised with high level amplification events divided HGSC into two prognostically significant subgroups. This finding was recapitulated in two additional independent cohorts (total n=576 cases), and transcended gene based mutation status and gene expression as prognostically relevant features of HGSC. CCOC were divided into one group harbouring a signature reflective of active genome editing via APOBEC enzymes (26%) and a complementary group with an age-relatedmutational signature. ENOC were divided intomicrosatellite instable (MSI) cases (28%) with a distinctmismatch repairmutation signature and an outlying mutation rate, with the remainder of cases distributed amongst the remaining six groups. We suggest the FBI, MSI, and APOBEC groups represent biologic strata that could direct treatment strategies. Taken together, our work establishes the efficacy of the somatic genome as a biomarker to stratify ovarian cancers, simultaneously identifying patients that may benefit from emerging therapeutics and distinct subgroups within classic ovarian cancer histotypes.

  Study EGAS00001002390

• Development and Validation of Organoids from Fibrolamellar Carcinoma Human Cells

  Fibrolamellar hepatocellular carcinoma (FL-HCC) is a rare liver tumor affecting adolescents and young adults with no history of primary liver disease or cirrhosis. We collected fibrolamellar tumor tissue and the adjacent non-tumor liver from patients at the time of surgery. We only used tumor tissue that was validated as fibrolamellar by the presence of the DNAJB1-PRKACA fusion gene. The freshly resected tissue was dissociated and grown as organoids. This yielded 21 patient-derived organoid lines. From the tumor tissue we developed twelve organoids from metastases and three from the liver tumor. Additionally, we generated six organoid lines from the adjacent non-tumor liver. The tumor organoids were all shown to recapitulate the histologic morphology, immunohistochemistry, and transcriptome of the tumor tissue from which they were derived.

  Study phs002439

• Mapping Genotypes to Chromatin Accessibility Profiles in Single Cells

  In somatic tissue differentiation, chromatin accessibility changes govern priming and precursor commitment towards cellular fates1–3. Therefore, somatic mutations likely alter chromatin accessibility patterns, as they disrupt differentiation topologies leading to abnormal clonal outgrowth. However, defining the impact of somatic mutations on the epigenome in human samples is challenging due to admixed mutated and wild-type cells. To chart how somatic mutations disrupt epigenetic landscapes in human clonal outgrowths, we developed Genotyping of Targeted loci with single-cell Chromatin Accessibility (GoT-ChA). This high-throughput platform links genotypes to chromatin accessibility at single-cell resolution, across thousands of cells within a single assay. We applied GoT-ChA to CD34+ cells from myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) patients with JAK2V617F-mutated hematopoiesis.

  Study EGAS50000000164

• DEMENTIA-SEQ: WGS in Lewy Body Dementia and Frontotemporal Dementia

  Lewy body dementia, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/frontotemporal dementia, and multiple system atrophy are age-related, neurodegenerative syndromes that are poorly understood. Delineating the genetic risk that is driving the pathophysiology of these neurological diseases is fundamental for understanding disease mechanisms and for developing disease-modifying treatments. In version 1 of the study/dbGaP deposition, we performed a whole-genome sequencing study consisting of 7,403 total samples, including 2,633 genomes from patients with Lewy body dementia, 2,641 frontotemporal dementia patients, and 1,980 neurologically healthy controls. Of these, 6,907 were uploaded to dbGaP as the basis of the DementiaSeq, phs001963 dataset. The data relating to these samples are available on dbGaP. In version 2 of this study/dbGaP deposition, we made much of these data available on Anvil. More specifically, data for 6,254 of these samples were also uploaded to the ALS Compute platform on AnVIL. The data for the remaining 653 samples are only available on dbGaP. The dbGaP/AnVIL Table lists the availability of dbGaP and AnVIL for each individual sample: phd008475.In version 3 of the study/dbGaP deposition, we added whole-genome sequence data generated using DNA samples obtained from 683 patients diagnosed with multiple system atrophy.

  Study phs001963

• Genetic Epidemiology of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

  Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is a subtype of B-cell lymphoproliferative disorders (LPD), and is the most common form of adult leukemia in Caucasians in the United States. Small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) is also a B-cell LPD and is typically considered to be the same disease as CLL, based on pathology. We consider CLL and SLL as the same disease entity, and hereafter refer to both simply as "CLL". Using genealogical databases and cancer records, the familial clustering for CLL is one of the strongest for all cancer sites, strongly implicating germline genetic risk. We ascertained CLL cases and controls for a genomewide association study (GWAS) that was undertaken as part of the International Lymphoma Epidemiology (InterLymph) consortium GWAS. Some CLL cases are also part of extended high-risk CLLpedigrees.

  Study phs001568

• CAGE analysis for non-small cell lung carcinoma

  Targeted therapies based on the molecular and histological features of cancer types are becoming standard practice. The most effective regimen in lung cancers is different between squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma (AD). Therefore a precise diagnosis is crucial, but this has been difficult, particularly for poorly differentiated SCC (PDSCC) and AD without a lepidic growth component (non-lepidic AD). Biomarkers enabling a precise diagnosis are therefore urgently needed. To achieve this goal, we performed CAGE (Cap Analysis of Gene Expression) to quantify promoter activities on 97 frozen tissues from surgically resected lung cancers (22 SCC and 75 AD). The result was followed up by by immunohistochemical analysis (IHC) in an independent group.

  Study JGAS000070

• Paired-end Whole Exome-seq analysis of the 3D evolution of glioma cell populations. Part 2.

  Dataset contains paired-end Whole Exome sequencing data from 257 glioma samples from 28 patients. 26 normal blood samples are also included.

  Dataset EGAD00001009496

• Dataset for Sarcoma-WGS linked from study EGAS00001004813

  Sequencing data of 77 sarcoma tumor and control runs, which were uploaded to EGAS00001004813. The sequencing was always paired.

  Dataset EGAD00001010257

• MASQ targeted amplicon sequencing data of AML samples at presentation, remission, and relapse, and MASQ data demonstrating performance ranges of the method.

  MASQ targeted amplicon sequencing of AML blood or bone marrow at presentation, and relapse, when available, for 5 patients. Remission samples of both blood and bone marrow are included for 5 patients. Multiple batches (b1,b2) are used for 2 patients. There are 25 assays of AML data. MASQ data demonstrating sensitivity, input range, and batch size are also included, as 12 assays. All data is provided in paired FASTQ files.

  Dataset EGAD00001005121

• 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

• Exome sequencing of UK Birth Cohorts - Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children

  Birth cohort studies involve repeated surveys of large numbers of individuals from birth and throughout their lives. They collect information useful for a wide range of life course research domains, and biological samples which can be used to derive data from an increasing collection of omic technologies. This rich source of longitudinal data, when combined with genomic data, offers the scientific community valuable insights from population genetics to rare disease associations. Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC)recruited 14,775 babies of predominantly White ethnicity in the Avon county of south-west England between 1991 and 1992. Born in Bradford (BiB) is similarly focused on a particular local area, the city of Bradford in the north of England, and recruited 13,858 babies between 2007 and 2011, of whom ~41% self-report as white British and ~59% as other ethnicities, predominantly Pakistani. Millennium Cohort Study (MCS) is a national cohort that recruited 18,827 children born between 2000 and 2002, intentionally over-sampling areas with high child poverty, large ethnic minority populations, and smaller UK nations (Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland) Available here is a subset of exome-sequenced parents and children from these studies (CRAMS and post-QC VCFs) as detailed in https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.22697 [doi.org]. Phenotypic data is also available by submitting an application to the corresponding cohort: https://www.bristol.ac.uk/alspac/researchers/our-data/[bristol.ac.uk]

  Dataset EGAD00001015371

• T2D-GENES Project 2: San Antonio Mexican American Family Studies

  The Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) Genetic Exploration by Next-generation sequencing in Ethnic Samples (T2D-GENES) Consortium is a collaborative international effort to identify genes influencing susceptibility to T2D in multiple ethnic groups using next generation sequencing. T2D-GENES Project 2 is a complex pedigree-based study designed to identify low frequency or rare variants influencing susceptibility to T2D, using whole genome sequence (WGS) information from 1,043 individuals in 20 Mexican American T2D-enriched pedigrees from San Antonio, Texas. The major objectives of this study are to identify low frequency or rare variants in and around known common variant signals for T2D, as well as to find novel low frequency or rare variants influencing susceptibility to T2D. The sampled individuals are obtained from two studies: the San Antonio Family Heart Study (SAFHS) and the San Antonio Family Diabetes/Gallbladder Study (SAFDGS), collectively referred to as the San Antonio Mexican American Family Studies (SAMAFS). The strategy is to sequence approximately 600 individuals at an average of 50x coverage across the entire genome, then impute genome wide genotypes for about 440 additional family members. The 600 sequenced individuals are specifically chosen for their value in imputing sequence information into other family members. By studying large pedigrees, we expect to find multiple individuals carrying each genetic variant, even if this variant is very rare in the population at large. Thus, a pedigree-based approach provides an excellent opportunity for identifying rare novel variants influencing risk of T2D and quantitative variation in T2D-related phenotypes. The whole genome sequencing has been done commercially by Complete Genomics, Inc. (CGI). The final data set includes whole genome sequence data for 607 individuals. After quality control, 585 sequenced individuals provide data for family based imputation, using Merlin linkage analysis software, into approximately 440 additional family members for whom chip based genotypes are available to indicate which parental haplotype is transmitted. Extensive phenotype data is provided for 1048 individuals. These include 5 sequenced individuals who do not belong to any of the 20 large pedigrees. Phenotype information was collected between 1991 and 2011 in the two contributing longitudinal studies. SAFHS participants may have information from up to 5 visits, and SAFDGS participants may have up to 4 visits. The clinical variables reported are coordinated with T2D-GENES Project 1 (multi-ethnic exome sequencing) and include T2D status and age at diagnosis, glycemic traits (fasting and 2 hour glucose and insulin), blood pressure, blood lipids (total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, calculated LDL cholesterol and triglycerides), clinical chemistry (cystatin c, glutamic acid decarboxylase antibody titer (GadAb), creatinine, adiponectin and leptin). Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) was not measured for these individuals and insulin C-peptide is not included in this data set. Additional phenotype data include the medication status at each visit, classified in four categories as any current use of diabetes, hypertension or lipid-lowering medications, and, for females, current use of female hormones. Anthropometric measurements include age, sex, height, weight, hip circumference, waist circumference and derived ratios. Each phenotype variable has an initial summary column containing the most recent non-missing measurement for each individual, followed by the five potential time points for each individual, the number of non-missing measurements, and the age and year for the most recent non-missing measurement. For historical reasons, the order in which variables are presented on the dbGaP web site differs from their order in the data download file. When reading the comment fields for each variable, please note that commas are omitted to support data exchange in .csv format.

  Study phs000462

• Whole Exome sequencing of Gingivo-buccal Cancer : ICGC-India Project_Batch04

  Whole Exome Sequencing of Gingivo-buccal Cancer: ICGC-India ProjectAs a part of the ICGC, India has undertaken genomic studies on gingivobuccal cancer of the oral cavity, which is the most prevalent form of cancer among men in India. There are various known environmental (life-style) correlates of this cancer, the most important of which are tobacco chewing and HPV infection. Exome of paired DNA samples – isolated from the tumor tissue and from the blood of 47 patients – have been performed to catalog germline and somatic mutations. Association between each observed genomic alteration and exposure to environmental risk factors is being explored. Detailed clinical characterization of the patients, collection of data on demographic and environmental exposures, and isolation of DNA samples from blood and tumor tissues collected from each patient are being done at the Advanced Centre for Research, Treatment and Education on Cancer, Mumbai. Whole exome sequencing is being performed at the National Institute of Biomedical Genomics, Kalyani.

  Study EGAS00001002852

• Colorectal advanced adenomas NKI-AvL TGO COCOS series

  Colorectal cancer (CRC) develops from normal epithelium, through a benign precursor lesion called adenoma, by accumulation of genetic alterations affecting oncogenes and tumour suppressor genes. About 5% of colorectal adenomas are estimated to progress to CRC. However, it is important to identify which adenomas actually carry a high-risk of progression, because these serve as intermediate endpoints for e.g. screening programs. In clinical practice, adenomas with a size of ≥10 mm, villous component and/or high-grade dysplasia, called advanced adenomas, are considered high-risk, although solid evidence for this classification is lacking. Specific DNA copy number changes are associated with adenoma-to-carcinoma progression.For this tissue dataset, we applied low-pass whole genome sequencing to 96 advanced adenomas. Advanced adenomas were classified as lesions with low-risk or high-risk of progression, according to the presence of specific DNA copy number changes (Carvalho et al, CancerPrevRes, 2018).

  Study EGAS00001002952

• Exome sequencing of UK Birth Cohorts - Millennium Cohort Study

  Birth cohort studies involve repeated surveys of large numbers of individuals from birth and throughout their lives. They collect information useful for a wide range of life course research domains, and biological samples which can be used to derive data from an increasing collection of omic technologies. This rich source of longitudinal data, when combined with genomic data, offers the scientific community valuable insights from population genetics to rare disease associations. Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC)recruited 14,775 babies of predominantly White ethnicity in the Avon county of south-west England between 1991 and 1992. Born in Bradford (BiB) is similarly focused on a particular local area, the city of Bradford in the north of England, and recruited 13,858 babies between 2007 and 2011, of whom ~41% self-report as white British and ~59% as other ethnicities, predominantly Pakistani. Millennium Cohort Study (MCS) is a national cohort that recruited 18,827 children born between 2000 and 2002, intentionally over-sampling areas with high child poverty, large ethnic minority populations, and smaller UK nations (Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland) Available here is a subset of exome-sequenced parents and children from these studies (CRAMS and post-QC VCFs) as detailed in https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.22697 [doi.org]. Phenotypic data is also available by submitting an application to the corresponding cohort: https://cls.ucl.ac.uk/cls-studies/millennium-cohort-study/ [cls.ucl.ac.uk]

  Dataset EGAD00001015372

• WES dataset of a TIL-ACT metastatic melanoma cohort

  Whole-exome sequencing (WES) data from 13 patients with metastatic melanoma in a TIL-ACT cohort, generated to characterize tumor genomics and neoantigen landscapes relevant to adoptive T cell therapy.

  Dataset EGAD50000001731