20313 results for "Fc coins Buyfc26coins.com is EA Sports official for FC 26 coins They are efficient and quick always..Z2Xg"

in 24.08 milliseconds.

• PDAC Prognosis Biomarkers in Genomic and Transcriptomic Molecular Data

  Our study was designed to identify biomarkers related to the prognosis of Pancreatic Ductal AdenoCarcinoma (PDAC) patients using genomic variants and gene expression in coding regions of the human genome (exome). PDAC is the 7th cause of cancer deaths and is among types of cancer having the poorest prognosis. To improve treatment outcomes of PDAC, biomarkers related to PDAC prognosis are needed. The goals of our study are to find genomic and transcriptomic biomarkers, which can classify prognosis subtype of PDAC patients, and eventually to predict subtypes or prognosis for each patient. In this study, we generated Whole Exome Sequencing (WES) and exome capture RNA sequencing data of 450 tumor and matched normal samples from 150 PDAC patients. Our data may be useful for understanding genomic and transcriptomic features, prognosis prediction, and precision medicine for PDAC.

  Study phs002347

• MutWP1__CRUK_Grand_Challenge__normal_kidney_Nanoseq

  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 EGAS00001005451

• MutWP1__CRUK_Grand_Challenge__matched_blood_Nanoseq

  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 EGAS00001006774

• 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

• 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

• 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

• 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

• scRNAseq of colonic organoids derived from biopsies taken from healthy human individuals treated with IL22

  scRNAseq dataset of colonic organoids derived from epithelium from biopsies taken from three healthy human individuals. The organoids have either been grown in standard conditions (control) or treated with IL22 (treated). Includes 6 samples in total, one control from each individual (ctrl1, ctrl2, ctrl3) and one treated from each (treat1, treat2, treat3). The samples have been multiplexed using the antibody hashing technique. The 6 samples have been pooled into the one organoids sample. In order to analyse the raw files, they have to be demultiplexed first. Information necessary for demultiplexing, as well as which files belong to which sample, can be found in the map_file.csv, attached to each sample. Dataset includes raw Fastq files and processed csv count matrices. Fastq files are divided into HTO (hashtag) and RNA (transcriptome) files. HTO has one index (I1) and two read (R1, R2) files and RNA has two index (I1, I2) and two read (R1, R2) files. The fastq files are for the pooled (organoids) sample and need to be demultiplexed. Count matrices contain comma-separated values with cell barcodes as column names and gene names as row names. Since count matrices have been created after the demultiplexing step, there’s one matrix for each of the 6 individual samples. scRNA-seq data from human colon organoids was analysed in the same manner as for the Colitis dataset, apart from the following changes. Data was generated with the Cell Hashing technique, which uses oligo-tagged antibodies against surface proteins to barcode single cells. This allows for samples to be multiplexed together and run in a single experiment. The data was demultiplexed using the HTODemux() function from Seurat (Hao et al., 2021).

  Dataset EGAD00001010168

• 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

• 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