14983 results for "cancer studies using rna-seq"

in 21.49 milliseconds.

• RNA Sequencing of human fetal brain (FBSeq)

  FastQ files with paired-end RNAseq data for human fetal brain homogenate from 120 samples (12-19 post-conception weeks).

  Dataset EGAD00001004363

• Presence of bacterial infection in brains of patients with Huntington's disease (HD)

  Bacterial isolation in infected brains in patients with Huntington's disease. Here we used next generation sequencing of 16S ribosomal RNA gene PCR amplicons (NGS 16S amplicon analysis)

  Dataset EGAD00001005996

• Genomic profiling identified ERCC2 helicase domain mutations respond to platinum-based neoadjuvant therapy in urothelial bladder cancer

  Genomic profiling of tumours enables therapeutic decisions, and identifying drug-matched mutations will prolong survival and prognosis. Here, we generated a custom panel for detecting genetic alterations in 19 patients with urothelial bladder cancer. This panel targeted 71 genes associated with urological cancer. Targeted sequencing was performed on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumour tissues. In this study, we revealed genome profiles and actionable mutations in patients with urothelial bladder cancer.

  Study JGAS000241

• Broad utility of ultrasensitive analysis of ctDNA dynamics across solid tumors treated with immunotherapy

  Plasma ctDNA sequencing data from samples collected from a pan-cancer cohort of patients with advanced-stage disease treated with IO therapies. This study highlights the broader applicability of ultrasensitive ctDNA as a biomarker across cancer types and immunotherapy modalities. Here, we applied a whole-genome, tumor-informed approach to study ctDNA in 202 advanced-stage cancer patients treated at VHIO. This study captures the plasma sequencing data from the project.

  Study EGAS50000001271

• Comparative genomics research for Chinese colorectal cancer

  In order to clarify the mechanisms of genesis and development of colorectal carcinoma, in this study, we performed comparative genomics research in Chinese colorectal cancer at various clinical stage via whole exon sequencing or whole genome sequencing. Comparative bioinformatical analysis was perform to find the difference on somatic single-nucleotide variants, short insert/deletion variants, genomic structural variants, and copy number variants between cancer tissue and normal tissue, or among cancer tissues at various clinical stages.

  Study EGAS00001002576

• Comparative genomics research for Chinese colorectal cancer

  In order to clarify the mechanisms of genesis and development of colorectal carcinoma, in this study, we performed comparative genomics research in Chinese colorectal cancer at various clinical stage via whole exon sequencing or whole genome sequencing. Comparative bioinformatical analysis was perform to find the difference on somatic single-nucleotide variants, short insert/deletion variants, genomic structural variants, and copy number variants between cancer tissue and normal tissue, or among cancer tissues at various clinical stages.

  Study EGAS00001002607

• Studies in the Pathogenesis of Systemic Capillary Leak Syndrome (SCLS, Clarkson Disease)

  Systemic capillary leak syndrome (Clarkson disease) is an ultra-rare disease of unknown etiology. Patients experienced transient and recurrent episodes of hypotensive shock and massive peripheral edema due to plasma extravasation, often precipitated by minor viral infections. Disease onset occurs most frequently in middle age, and there is no family history. More than 90% of patients with the disease have monoclonal gammopathy of unknown significance (MGUS). The goal of the study is to determine pathogenic mechanisms and identify genetic underpinnings of the disease. Toward this end, we performed whole genome sequencing (WGS).

  Study phs003261

• A genome-wide CRISPR screen identifies CALCOCO2 as a regulator of beta cell function influencing type 2 diabetes risk

  Identification of the genes and processes mediating genetic association signals for complex diseases represents a major challenge. As many of the genetic signals for type 2 diabetes (T2D) exert their effects through pancreatic islet-cell dysfunction, we performed a genome-wide pooled CRISPR loss-of-function screen in a human pancreatic beta cell line. We assessed the regulation of insulin content as a disease-relevant readout of beta cell function and identified 580 genes influencing this phenotype. Integration with genetic and genomic data provided experimental support for 20 candidate T2D effector transcripts including the autophagy receptor CALCOCO2. Loss of CALCOCO2 was associated with distorted mitochondria, less proinsulin-containing immature granules and accumulation of autophagosomes upon inhibition of late-stage autophagy. Carriers of T2D-associated variants at the CALCOCO2 locus further displayed altered insulin secretion. Our study highlights how cellular screens can augment existing multi-omic efforts to support mechanistic understanding and provide evidence for causal effects at genome-wide association studies loci.

  Dataset EGAD50000000518

• Transcriptomic profiles studies CAREs group - IDIBGI

  The purpose of this DAC document is to outline the principles and procedures governing access to the transcriptomic data generated from endothelial progenitor cells, or any biological origin from patients. Data Access Policy: 1) Access to this dataset is restricted and subject to approval by the DAC to ensure ethical and legal compliance. 2) The DAC reserves the right to evaluate all applications for access based on: 2.1) The scientific validity and merit of the proposed research. 2.2) The ethical considerations and adherence to data protection regulations, including GDPR. 2.3) The qualifications and affiliations of the applicants. 3) Applicants must submit a detailed research proposal, including objectives, methods, and anticipated outcomes. 4) Data usage is limited to the specified research project approved by the DAC. Any secondary use of the data requires additional approval. Confidentiality: All applicants must agree to maintain the confidentiality of the dataset. Personal identifiers have been pseudonymized to protect patient privacy. Application Process: 1) Researchers must complete the application form provided by the DAC. 2) Submit proof of ethical approval and relevant certifications for their research project. 3) Provide a signed agreement affirming adherence to the DAC's terms and conditions.

  Dac EGAC50000000607

• INVADE cohort

  Cohort of bulk RNAseq data from DCIS, invasive and microinvasive breast cancer at diagnosis. This dataset covers 18 DCIS cases, 17 microinvasive and 20 primary invasive breast cancer.

  Study EGAS50000000219

• DAC for "Cancer-associated fibroblasts promote drug resistance in ALK-driven lung adenocarcinoma cells by upregulating lipid biosynthesis"

  DAC for the data of "Cancer-associated fibroblasts promote drug resistance in ALK-driven lung adenocarcinoma cells by upregulating lipid biosynthesis" with: • Holger Sültmann • h.sueltmann@dkfz.de • German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) • Ann-Kathrin Daum • a.daum@dkfz.de • German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ)

  Dac EGAC50000000076

• Organoid_Derivation_Project___GRCh38___WGS

  Generation of normal and cancer organoids for sequencing as part of the WTSI-CRUK international collaboration with NCI (in HCMI) to generate the next generation of cancer cell lines

  Study EGAS00001004712

• Organoid_Derivation_Project___GRCh38___RNAseq

  Generation of normal and cancer organoids for sequencing as part of the WTSI-CRUK international collaboration with NCI (in HCMI) to generate the next generation of cancer cell lines.

  Study EGAS00001004677

• Organoid_Derivation_Project___GRCh38___TGS

  Generation of normal and cancer organoids for sequencing as part of the WTSI-CRUK international collaboration with NCI (in HCMI) to generate the next generation of cancer cell lines.

  Study EGAS00001007349

• The whole blood of female volunteers and sperm from the male volunteer were used to extract genomic DNA to do whole genome sequencing. Distinguished SNPs between parental genomes were retained to analyze parental allele-specific DNA methylation and chromatin accessibility in scCOOL-seq data.

  DNA methylation, chromatin states, and their interrelationships represent critical epigenetic information, but those are largely unknown in human early embryos. Here, we apply scCOOL-seq (Chromatin Overall Omic-scale Landscape Sequencing) to generate a genome-wide map of DNA methylation and chromatin accessibility at single-cell resolution during human preimplantation development. Unlike in mice, the chromatin of paternal genome is already more open than that of maternal genome at the mid-zygote stage in humans, and this state is maintained until the 4-cell stage. After fertilization, genes with high variations in DNA methylation and those with high variations in chromatin accessibility tend to be two different sets. Furthermore, 1,797 (35%) out of 5,155 widely open chromatin regions in promoters closed when transcription activity was inhibited, indicating a feedback mechanism between transcription and open chromatin maintenance. Our work paves the way for dissecting the complex, yet highly coordinated, epigenetic reprogramming during human preimplantation development.

  Study EGAS00001002987

• Orphan_Tumour_Study_NB_sNuc_WGS

  The aim of this study is to investigate the genomic landscape of human cancer.

  Study EGAS00001006837

• Enrichment of homologous recombination repair alteration in prostate cancer brain metastases

  Whole-exome sequencing profiling of prostate cancer brain metastases

  Study EGAS00001005091

• EGAD00010000389

  Cambridge control samples using a 24k expression array from Illumina

  Dataset EGAD00010000389

• EGAD00010000482

  ccRCC case samples using methylation array

  Dataset EGAD00010000482

• EGAD00010000484

  ccRCC control samples using 250K Nsp

  Dataset EGAD00010000484

• MethylationEPIC_JMML_tech_Schoenung

  DNA methylation analysis of JMML patients from Europe, Japan and USA using EPIC arrays

  Dataset EGAD00010001998

• MethylationEPIC_JMML_valid_Schoenung

  DNA methylation analysis of JMML patients from Europe, Japan and USA using EPIC arrays

  Dataset EGAD00010002000

• Methylation450k_JMML_meta_Schoenung

  DNA methylation analysis of JMML patients from Europe, Japan and USA using 450k arrays

  Dataset EGAD00010001999

• Genetic investigation of 12q-amplified osteosarcomas

  Genetic investigation of 12q-amplified osteosarcomas using both whole genome short- and longread and transcriptome sequencing.

  Dac EGAC50000000340

• MiRNA_Validation

  Rounded Log2 CPM well-expressed miRNA levels in plasma; determined using the HTG EdgeSeq miRNA Whole Transcriptome Assay

  Dataset EGAD00010002752

• MiRNA_TrainTest

  Rounded Log2 CPM well-expressed miRNA levels in plasma; determined using the HTG EdgeSeq miRNA Whole Transcriptome Assay

  Dataset EGAD00010002754

• Heart Failure Network - Xanthine Oxidase Inhibition for Hyperuricemic Heart Failure Patients (HFN EXACT-BioLINCC)

  ObjectivesTo determine the effect of allopurinol after 24 weeks on a composite clinical endpoint that classifies subject's clinical status (improved, worsened, unchanged) in patients with heart failure and high uric acid levels.BackgroundMorbidity and mortality rates for patients with heart failure are high, despite guideline-recommended therapy. Heart failure is characterized by an imbalance between left ventricular (LV) performance and myocardial energy consumption. There is a growing body of evidence that suggests oxidative stress contributes to ventricular and vascular remodeling, and disease progression in heart failure. Targeting potential source(s) of oxidative stress, e.g. Xanthine oxidase (XO), was the focus of recent clinical trials and epidemiological studies. Increased XO activity has been shown to lead to production of superoxide and uric acid (UA). Serum uric acid levels are included in heart failure risk scores, and hyperuricemia is present in about 25% of patients with heart failure. Hyperuricemia is associated with exercise intolerance, reduced survival, and worsening symptoms. The EXACT-HF trial tested allopurinol, an inhibitor of XO, as a potential target therapy for hyperuricemic heart failure patients.Subjects253 subjects were enrolled in the EXACT-HF study. 128 participants were randomized to the allopurinol arm, and of those participants, 119 completed the trial and 9 did not. 125 participants were randomized to the placebo arm, and of those participants, 116 completed the trial and 9 did not.DesignEXACT-HF was a multi-center, double-blind, placebo controlled, 24-week trial of allopurinol. Eligible participants had to be receiving a stable regimen for at least two weeks (3 months for beta-blockers) prior to randomization. Participants were randomized by an automated system to either the allopurinol or placebo arm, and started treatment within 12 hours of completing the baseline visit. During the first week, participants in both treatment arms received 300mg daily of the respective medications. For the following 23 weeks, participants in both treatment arms received 600mg daily of the respective medications. Patients unable to tolerate 600 mg were maintained on 300 mg.The primary endpoint was a composite clinical endpoint (CCE) that classified a subject's clinical status as improved, worsened, or unchanged at 24 weeks. The CCE was determined based on the following: death; hospitalization, emergency room visit or emergent clinic visit for worsening HF; medication change for worsening HF; and Patient Global Assessment using a 7-point scale. Secondary endpoints at 12 and 24 weeks included changes in quality of life as assessed by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, and submaximal exercise capacity as assessed by a 6-minute walk test.ConclusionsParticipants who received allopurinol had significantly less serum uric acid laboratory levels after 24 weeks; however, no significant difference was observed in the primary and secondary endpoints between the allopurinol and placebo-treated patients. Therefore, in high-risk HF patients with reduced ejection fraction and elevated uric acid levels, xanthine oxidase inhibition with allopurinol failed to improve clinical status, exercise capacity, quality of life, or LVEF at 24 weeks (Circulation. 2015 May 19; 131(20):1763-71).

  Study phs003533

• HeartShare - Extant Datasets - Harmonized Clinical Trials Collection

  Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) prevalence is rising with an aging population and contributing comorbidities, such as obesity and diabetes. The Get With The Guidelines - Heart Failure (GWTG-HF) study showed that the proportion of hospitalized HFpEF patients rose from 2005 to 2010, and this trajectory continued to increase through 2020. HFpEF patients have a poor 5-year outcome with a 75% mortality rate. Taken together, these data suggest that HFpEF may be the dominant HF subtype in the future, affecting approximately 1 in 10 adults during their lifetime.In addition to its increasing prevalence, HFpEF is a heterogeneous syndrome with multiple pathophysiological processes and varied clinical presentations. There is an urgent need to improve understanding of different HFpEF phenotypes to match patients with interventions based on their unique subtype. Phenomapping studies have identified between two and six HFpEF clusters/phenogroups with shared features. Of these, three overlapping phenotypes repeatedly arise: an 'older, vascular aging' phenotype, 'metabolic, obese' phenotype, and 'relatively younger, natriuretic peptide (NP) deficiency' phenotype. Continued refinement of these HFpEF subtypes is needed to identify distinct characteristics and underlying biologic and molecular mechanisms towards therapeutic development and future precision trials with improved diagnostic criteria and treatment including prevention.The HeartShare extant datasets collection consists of selected completed trials on HFpEF which have been harmonized for the purpose identifying and defining subtypes. The goal is to identify HFpEF subtypes that have a common pathophysiology. Through the HeartShare extant datasets collection, users can request access to both the harmonized data and the individual trial datasets.To request access to this study collection, select phs003989 in the dbGaP when submitting a data access request. The following clinical trials and harmonized data is available through this collection:Study NameHandleAccessionConsent GroupsSurgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart FailureBioLINCC_STICHphs003493.v1.p1GRUHeart Failure Network Aldosterone Targeted Neurohormonal Combined with Natriuresis TherapyBioLINCC_HFN_ATHENAphs003506.v1.p1GRUHeart Failure Network - Effectiveness of Ultrafiltration in Treating People With Acute Decompensated Heart Failure and Cardiorenal SyndromeBioLINCC_HFN_CARRESSphs003510.v1.p1GRUHeart Failure Network: Diuretic Optimization Strategies Evaluation in Acute Heart FailureBioLINCC_HFN_DOSEphs003524.v1.p1GRUHeart Failure Network - Xanthine Oxidase Inhibition for Hyperuricemic Heart Failure PatientsBioLINCC_EXACT_HFphs003533.v1.p1GRUHeart Failure Network: Functional Impact of GLP-1 for Heart Failure TreatmentBioLINCC_HFN_FIGHTphs003542.v1.p1GRUHeart Failure Network - Nitrate's Effect on Activity Tolerance in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection FractionBioLINCC_HFN_NEATphs003548.v1.p1GRUHeart Failure Network - Phosphodiesterase-5 Inhibition to Improve Clinical Status and Exercise Capacity in Diastolic Heart FailureBioLINCC_HFN_RELAXphs003565.v1.p1GRUHeart Failure Network - Renal Optimization Strategies Evaluation in Acute Heart Failure and Reliable Evaluation of DyspneaBioLINCC_HFN_ROSEphs003589.v1.p1GRUHeart Failure: A Controlled Trial Investigating Outcomes of Exercise TrainingBioLINCC_HF_ACTIONphs003599.v1.p1HMBHeart Failure: A Controlled Trial Investigating Outcomes of Exercise TrainingBioLINCC_HF_ACTIONphs003599.v1.p1HMB-NPUGuiding Evidence Based Therapy Using Biomarker Intensified Treatment in Heart FailureBioLINCC_GUIDE_ITphs003621.v1.p1GRUSudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure TrialBioLINCC_SCD_HeFTphs003654.v1.p1GRUTreatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure With an Aldosterone AntagonistBioLINCC_TOPCATphs003665.v1.p1HMB-MDSHeart Failure Network - Inorganic Nitrite Delivery to Improve Exercise Capacity in HFpEFBioLINCC_HFN_INDIEphs003667.v1.p1GRUStudies of Left Ventricular DysfunctionBioLINCC_SOLVDphs003668.v1.p1GRUEvaluation Study of Congestive Heart Failure and Pulmonary Artery Catheterization EffectivenessBioLINCC_ESCAPEphs003782.v1.p1GRU

  Study phs003989

• Programmatic submission based on XML

  Programmatic submissions (XML based) For further information please check our Submission FAQs, submission quickguide as well as submission terms! Introduction Besides the Submitter Portal tool, EGA supports programmatic sequence and clinical data metadata submissions. If you are not sure what this means, you may want to explore our brief metadata introduction. Programmatic submissions are recommended for array-based submission. Moreove, it may be of help if your submission is recurrent or it is difficult to manage manually due to its sheer size. Otherwise, we highly recommend using the Submitter Portal to perform submissions. In this page we will guide you through the required steps to programmatically submit data to the EGA. Programmatic submissions require your metadata to be structured for an easy and straightforward validation and archival. It basically consists in formatting your metadata as Extensible markup language (XML) files and submitting them to the EGA using the WEBIN Before submitting metadata to the EGA, it is important to ensure that the information in your XML files is compliant with our standards. You can see further details on how these standards are maintained at EGA at our EGA Schemas documentation page. Using WEBIN, you can validate your XML files against EGA's schemas to ensure that your metadata is compliant before submission. WEBIN services WEBIN production service WEBIN test service We advise you to submit your metadata to the test service when submitting to the production service for the first time. The test service is identical to the production service except that all submissions will be discarded in the following 24 hours. This allows you to learn about the submission process without having to worry about data being submitted. Authentication Authentication is required each time a submission is made. The submission service uses HTTPS protocol for metadata encryption and identification to provide a secure submission environment. Data file upload Both Runs and Analyses reference files (e.g. FASTQ need to be uploaded to the EGA before these metadata objects are submitted. In other words, if you submit a Run that references a file that we cannot find associated with your account, the metadata submission will fail. See further details on how to upload your files in our File Upload documentation. Metadata model of the EGA Our metadata model is formed by multiple metadata objects. Check further details in our documentation at our EGA Schema documentation page. Working with EGA XMLs files Now that the basic concepts of the EGA metadata have been described, you can start preparing your programmatic submission through XML. Here you will find the guidance on how to prepare the XML files. Programmatic Submission Tutorial Video Take a look at the Programmatic Submission Tutorial Video, which explains the workflow of a programmatic submission and goes over an example metadata submission. Programmatic Submission Tutorial Video. When building your XML files, we recommend using text editors (e.g.Sublime Text or VisualStudio) that allow you to visualise the structure of the XML with ease. Furthermore, these editors constantly check the consistency of the XML structure. Alternatively, and if the submission consists of a big number of objects (specially analyses), you may find the tool star2xml handy. This tool allows for a direct conversion between metadata in a tabular format (e.g. a spreadsheet) into XMLs. Identifying objects: Aliases and center names Every EGA object must be uniquely identified within the submission account using their alias attribute. The aliases can be used in submissions to make references between EGA objects. Let us dig into EGA's use of aliases and center names: alias: every object should have a name that is unique within your submission account. Once submitted successfully, every alias will be assigned a unique and permanent accession (EGA ID). refname: when an object references another by its alias, the alias of the referenced object goes into the "refname" attribute of the referencing object. For example, if a sample has the alias "sample1", and an experiment uses this sample, then the experiment's "EXPERIMENT/SAMPLE/refname" attribute should be "sample1". center_name: The "center_name" attribute is required within the submission XML and, if not provided when the object is submitted, it will be automatically filled using your default EGA account center_name. This element is the "controlled vocabulary acronym or abbreviation that is provided to the account holder when the account is first generated". If the submitter is brokering a submission for another institute, the submitter should use their special broker account name in broker_name while the data centre acronym remains in center_name. Log-in details should have been provided when you requested a submission account. Please contact our Helpdesk team if you have any questions. run_center: Many submitting centers contract out the actual sample sequencing to another center. In these cases, the sequencing center should be acknowledged in the run_center attribute. Again, this is controlled vocabulary and the acronym should be sought from EGA helpdesk before submitting. Please contact our Helpdesk team if you have any questions. Prepare your XMLs The goal of this section is to provide sufficient information to be able to create the metadata XML documents required for programmatic submissions. Please note, the EGA utilises the XML schemas maintained at the European Nucleotide Archive (ENA). It is important due to the fact that by using a similar system, some pieces of documentation from the ENA's programmatic submission can also help you with your programmatic submission to the EGA. For example, you can submit programmatically without using a Submission XML by following the steps at Submission actions without submission XML. A submission does not have to contain all different types of XMLs. For example, it is possible to submit only a few samples; or a study that is later to be referenced. You can submit each object one by one, or submit all in a batch: you choose what method of submission works best for you. We do recommend, nevertheless, that you submit the objects to be referenced (e.g. samples or studies) first, and the objects that reference these (e.g. experiments or datasets) afterwards. You can see a graphical view of these objects and their relationships at our EGA Schemas page. Independently of the submission scenario, you will always require a Dataset XML. The entity of a dataset is what is used to control access to the given data, in the form of runs or analyses. In other words, when a requester is granted access, it is through the dataset and the objects (e.g. runs or analyses) that the dataset contains, granting access to them in one go. Given the nature of the EGA, a dataset XML will always be required for the data access. First, we will differentiate between submissions of "raw" and "processed" data: Runs and Analyses, respectively. Run data submissions Raw data derives from instruments "as is". For example, a plain sequence file (e.g. FASTQ or unaligned BAM files) would be considered raw data. A typical raw (unaligned) sequence read submission consists of 8 XMLs: Submission Study Sample Experiment Run DAC Policy Dataset When technical reads (e.g. barcodes, adaptors or linkers) are included in the submitted raw sequences, a spot descriptor must be submitted to describe the position of the technical reads so that they can be removed. The following data files can be submitted without providing spot descriptor information in the experiment/run XML: BAM files (single reads) SFF files (single reads without barcodes) FastQ files (single reads without any technical reads) Complete Genomics files Analysis data submissions Processed data is, in some way, refined raw data. This includes raw data that has been processed by some form of analysis method (e.g. alignment, noise reduction, etc.). For example, an aligned sequence (e.g. BAM file), that was created using raw FASTQ files, would be a processed file. This category includes most types of data: sequence alignment files (e.g. BAM or CRAM), clinical data (e.g. phenopackets), sequence variation files (e.g. VCF), sequence annotation, etc. A typical EGA analysis data submission consists of 7 EGA XML: Submission Study Sample Analysis DAC Policy Dataset We accept three different types of analysis data submissions: BAM files (for multiple read alignments) VCF files (for sequence variations) Phenotype files (in any format) In anycase, keep in mind that samples must be created in order to be referenced in the analyses. In other words, the provenance of the information within the BAM, VCF and phenotype files Example XMLs Below you can find a non-extensive list of example XMLs with descriptive fields (i.e. explaining what to provide in each field). Furthermore, you can also find real examples (i.e. the true value of the provided fields) in our GitHub repository. Submission XML The submission XML is used to validate, submit or update any number of other objects. The submission XML refers to other XMLs. New submissions use the ADD action to submit new objects. Object updates are done using the MODIFY action and objects can be validated using the VERIFY action. Descriptive submission XML example True values submission XML example Study XML The study XML is used to describe the study containing a title, a study type and abstract as it would appear in a publication. Descriptive study XML example True values study XML example Please use the following notation within the property "STUDY_LINKS" when including PubMed citations in the Study XML: <STUDY_LINKS> <STUDY_LINK> <XREF_LINK> <DB>PUBMED</DB> <ID>18987735</ID> </XREF_LINK> </STUDY_LINK> </STUDY_LINKS> Sample XML The sample XML is used to describe the samples used to obtain the data, whether they were sequenced, measured in any other way, or have an associated phenotype. The mandatory fields include information about the taxonomy of the sample, sex, subject ID and phenotype. For example, the mandatory attribute fields for each sample would look like these, within the array of "SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES": <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES> <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <TAG>subject_id</TAG> <VALUE>free text!</VALUE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <TAG>sex</TAG> <VALUE>female/male/unknown</VALUE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <TAG>phenotype</TAG> <VALUE>Free text, EFO terms (e.g. EFO:0000574) are recommended</VALUE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES> Sample is one of the most important objects to be described biologically, it is highly recommended that “TAG-VALUE” pairs are generated as SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES to describe the sample in as much detail as possible. For example, were we to give the population ancestry of the sample, we could add a new attribute to the array, in which, for example, we would indicate that the sample derives from an individual of "Mende in Sierra Leone" (MSL), with an african ancestry: <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <TAG>Population</TAG> <VALUE>MSL</VALUE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> Given that VALUE and TAG are free text, the combinations are limitless in order to give you full flexibility on the information you want to provide. We recommend you use the Experimental Factor Ontology (EFO) to describe the phenotypes of your samples. You can provide more than one phenotype by adding more items to the array of SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES. Phenotypes considered essential for understanding the data submission should be provided. Each phenotype described should be listed as a separate sample attribute <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE>. There is no limit to the number of phenotypes that can be submitted. If a suitable EFO accession cannot be found for your phenotype attribute, please consider using another controlled ontology database (e.g. HPO, MONDO, etc.) before using free text. Descriptive sample XML example True values sample XML example Experiment XML The experiment XML is used to describe the experimental setup, including instrument platform and model details, library preparation details, and any additional information required to correctly interpret the submitted data. Where any of these values differ between runs, a new experiment object must exist, since runs are grouped by experiments. Each experiment references a study and a sample by alias, or if previously-submitted, by accession. Pooled data must be demultiplexed by barcode for submission. Descriptive experiment ( Illumina paired read ) XML example True values experiment ( Illumina paired read ) XML example Run XML The run XML is used to associate data files with experiments and typically comprises a single data file (e.g. a FASTQ file). Please note that pooled samples should be de-multiplexed prior submission and submitted as different runs. Descriptive run XML example True values run XML example Analysis XML Given that an analysis can be used to submit any type of processed data to the EGA, we will list below an example of each of the three most common types of analysis XMLs submitted to the EGA: sequence alignments (e.g. BAM files); sequence variation (e.g. VCF files); and clinical metadata or phenotypes (e.g. phenopackets). Regardless of the type of processed data submitted in the analysis, the analysis must be associated with a Study and can reference multiple types of other objects, from samples to experiments, if they are available at the EGA. Just like with Runs, whenever a file is submitted to the EGA through an analysis object, the file MD5 checksums must be present, in order for the EGA to validate file integrity upon transfer. This also includes index files when applicable (e.g. .bai.md5 files). Ideally, any analysis that uses a reference sequence for some kind of alignment (e.g. BAM, CRAM or VCF files), would contain metadata about the alignment, such as INSDC reference assemblies and sequences, by either using accessions (e.g. CM000663.1) or common labels (e.g. GRCh37). Read alignment (BAM) Analysis XML The Analysis can be used to submit BAM alignments to EGA. Only one BAM file can be submitted in each analysis and the samples used within the BAM read groups must be associated with Samples. Descriptive bam alignments XML example True values bam alignments XML example Sequence variation (VCF) Analysis XML The Analysis can be used to submit VCF files to EGA. Only one VCF file can be submitted in each analysis and the samples used within the VCF files must be associated with Samples. Download analysis XML (VCF) Phenotype files The Analysis XML can be used to submit phenotype files to the EGA. Only one phenotype file can be submitted in each analysis and the samples used within the phenotype files must be associated with EGA Samples. Download analysis XML (Phenotype) DAC XML The DAC XML describes the Data Access Committee (DAC) affiliated to the data submission. The DAC may consist of a group or a single individual and is responsible for the data access decisions based on the application procedure described in the POLICY.XML. As with any other object, if it was already submitted to the EGA, there is no need to submit it again: you can reference an existing object within the EGA. Hence, A DAC XML does not need to be provided if your submission is affiliated to an existing EGA DAC.. Further information on DACs can be found here, and you can always contact our Helpdesk team if you have further inquiries. Descriptive dac XML example True values dac XML example Policy XML The Policy XML describes the Data Access Agreement (DAA) to be affiliated to the named Data Access Committee. Descriptive policy XML example True values study XML example Dataset XML The dataset XML describes the data files, defined by the Run.XML and Analysis.XML, that make up the dataset and links the collection of data files to a specified Policy. The dataset xml is commonly the last metadata object to be submitted, since it references multiple other entities. Please consider the number of datasets that your submission consists of. For example, a case-control study is likely to consist of at least two datasets. In addition, we suggest that multiple datasets should be described for studies using the same samples but different sequence technologies. Descriptive dataset XML example True values dataset XML example Validating and submitting your EGA Validating EGA's XMLs through Webin After you have ensured that the XMLs are properly formatted and contain all the required information. You can proceed to validate and submit your data. Use the curl command to validate your XML file: Once you have prepared your XML file and asserted you have access to Webin, you can validate your XML file programmatically against EGA's schemas using the curl command. There are multiple ways in which you can validate your XMLs. This variety has to do with the fact that: (1) there are 2 instances of Webin (test and production); and (2) that validation is a default step during submission. In other words, any time that you submit your data through Webin, it will be validated automatically before being accepted. This allows for 4 possible routes of validation, all having the same validation result: validating or submitting to either the production service or the test service of Webin. For example, directly validating a "study" object XML in the testing service (wwwdev…) would look like the following: curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=VALIDATE" "https://wwwdev.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" In this command, you would need to replace <USERNAME> and <PASSWORD> with your EGA account username and password, respectively. You would also replace <INPUT_FILE> with the path to your XML file. A mock example would look like the following: curl -u ega-test-data@ebi.ac.uk:egarocks -F "ACTION=VALIDATE" "https://wwwdev.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" The validation attempt can have different results depending on the given arguments: If your XML file is valid according to EGA's schemas, you will see a message indicating that your XML file is compliant. For example, see below for our mock example, where the "success" was "true" (i.e. no validation errors found). Nevertheless, notice how the "<STUDY accession=" is empty: it is because we were simply validating, so the study did not get an accession or ID. <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="receipt.xsl"?> <RECEIPT receiptDate="2023-04-11T15:19:28.850+01:00" submissionFile="submission-EBI-TEST_1681222768850.xml" success="true"> <STUDY accession="" alias="Mock example" status="PRIVATE"/> <SUBMISSION accession="" alias="SUBMISSION-11-04-2023-15:19:28:840"/> <MESSAGES> <INFO>VALIDATE action has been specified.</INFO> <INFO>Submission has been rolled back.</INFO> <INFO>This submission is a TEST submission and will be discarded within 24 hours</INFO> </MESSAGES> <ACTIONS>VALIDATE</ACTIONS> <ACTIONS>PROTECT</ACTIONS> If there are any errors or warnings, the tool will display them, allowing you to correct them before submitting your data to EGA. For example, in the following response, it is said that the object we were trying to submit was already existing, and therefore the "success" was "false". <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="receipt.xsl"?> <RECEIPT receiptDate="2023-04-11T15:12:35.609+01:00" submissionFile="submission-EBI-TEST_1681222355609.xml" success="false"> <STUDY alias="Example!_Human Microbiome Project SP56J" status="PRIVATE" holdUntilDate="2023-03-11Z"/> <SUBMISSION alias="SUBMISSION-11-04-2023-15:12:35:576"/> <MESSAGES> <ERROR>In study, alias: "Example!_Human Microbiome Project SP56J". The object being added already exists in the submission account with accession: "ERP127584".</ERROR> <INFO>VALIDATE action has been specified.</INFO> <INFO>Submission has been rolled back.</INFO> <INFO>This submission is a TEST submission and will be discarded within 24 hours</INFO> </MESSAGES> <ACTIONS>VALIDATE</ACTIONS> <ACTIONS>PROTECT</ACTIONS> If the curl command retrieves no response at all, please double check if your username and password are correctly provided. Also notice the "ACTION=..." argument passed to the Curl command. This specifies the action to take during the call to Webin, so we do not need a "Submission" XML just for a validation attempt. See more at submission actions without submission XML. Furthermore, validation of multiple files or objects (e.g. sample, experiment, study…) can be done in a single command by adding more arguments (i.e. '-F'). For example: curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=VALIDATE" "https://wwwdev.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" -F "SAMPLE=@sample.xml" -F "DATASET=@dataset.xml" As mentioned above, beside "validate" action in the test environment, you can also validate your metadata by three other methods: "Validate" in the production server. From our example above, you simply need to take the "dev" away from the URL. curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=VALIDATE" "https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" "Add" in the development server. From our example above, you would simply need to replace the action: from "validate" to "add". Whatever is submitted to this service will be discarded in 24h, so whether something gets submitted or not would not matter in the long run. curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=ADD" "https://wwwdev.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" "Add" in the productionserver. A combination of the previous two methods, which would render this attempt into a submission. This path is just to be taken when you are sure your metadata is compliant and what you want to submit. curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=ADD" "https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" What happens after the submission of a dataset XML? Once you have completed the registration of your dataset/s please contact our Helpdesk Team to provide a release date for your study. Please note that all datasets affiliated to unreleased studies are automatically placed on hold until the authorised submitter or DAC contact contact the EGA Helpdesk for the study to be released. We strongly advise you not to delete your data until EGA Helpdesk confirms that your data has been successfully archived.

  Documentation submission/metadata/submission/programmatic-submission-xml

• Study on longer adjuvant chemotherapy in Women with Early Breast Cancer

  The Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 40101 trial compared four and six cycles of AC or single-agent paclitaxel in early breast cancer. The study was a 2X2 factorial design trial that also examined the effects of AC vs singleagent paclitaxel.

  Study phs000807