10983 results for "division 1 coins fc 26 Buyfc26coins.com is FC 26 coins official site..AwVj"

in 15.64 milliseconds.

• 10x Genomics Single Cell Gene Expression for SA1049AX1XB01417

  10x Genomics Single Cell Gene Expression for High grade serous ovarian carcinoma patient-derived xenograft SA1049 passage 1

  Dataset EGAD00001009121

• 10x Genomics Single Cell Gene Expression for SA1096AX1XB02034

  10x Genomics Single Cell Gene Expression for High grade serous ovarian carcinoma patient-derived xenograft SA1096 passage 1

  Dataset EGAD00001009132

• 10x Genomics Single Cell Gene Expression for SA1052BX1XB01516

  10x Genomics Single Cell Gene Expression for High grade serous ovarian carcinoma patient-derived xenograft SA1052 passage 1

  Dataset EGAD00001009127

• 10x Genomics Single Cell Gene Expression for SA1091AX1XB01790

  10x Genomics Single Cell Gene Expression for High grade serous ovarian carcinoma patient-derived xenograft SA1091 passage 1

  Dataset EGAD00001009130

• Changes in Oral and Gut Microbiota and Incidence and Severity of Patient-Reported Symptoms in Pre- and Post-Kidney Transplant Patients

  This novel prospective cohort explores the relationships between oral and fecal microbiome features (alpha and beta diversity, differential relative abundances of bacterial taxa, and functional genes) and the incidence and severity of psychoneurological symptoms (e.g., pain, fatigue, depression, anxiety, and sleep disturbance) before and after patients receive a kidney transplant from a live donor. Thirty-five subjects provided fecal and saliva specimens for shotgun metagenomic sequencing of gut and oral microbiomes at 3 timepoints: 1) within 4 weeks prior to the transplant surgery (at end-stage kidney disease), 2) 1-3 weeks after the transplant surgery, and 3) at 3 months after the transplant (after restoration of kidney function). Subjects were enrolled between October, 2018, to November, 2021, and all study visits were completed by March, 2022. Data collected includes: Demographic (age, biological sex at birth, race/ethnicity, marital status); clinical data (body mass index, dialysis status, type of dialysis, high vs. low risk immune-suppression protocol, antibiotics during study period); laboratory data (serum creatinine; estimated glomerular filtration rate; serum blood urea nitrogen; immunosuppression trough levels), and outcome data (symptoms such as pain interference, pain intensity, fatigue, anxiety, depression, sleep disturbance, acute rejection, delayed graft failure, graft loss, post-transplant infections, and health-related quality of life). Incidence and severity of symptoms, including pain interference, pain intensity, fatigue, sleep dysfunction, and anxiety/depression-like symptoms, were measured using the Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Systems (PROMIS) 57 v2.1. Health related quality of life was assessed using the Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form (KDQOL-SF v1.3). The objective of this longitudinal study is to characterize changes in microbial features at baseline, before restoration of kidney function, and over time, after restoration of kidney function via kidney transplantation, and to identify relationships between microbiome features and transplant outcomes (rejection, infection, delayed graft function, graft failure), symptom burden, and health-related quality of life. Shotgun metagenomic sequencing of the oral and gut microbiomes will allow a higher-resolution examination of the gut microbiome compared to 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing, and will provide direct evidence of metabolic capabilities of the microbiota. This approach will allow us to explore the dynamic nature of symptom burden, and the effects of demographic and clinical variables on the oral and gut microbiomes before and after restoration of kidney function.

  Study phs002199

• The HLA-DQβ1 insertion is a strong achalasia risk factor and displays a geospatial north-south gradient among Europeans

  Idiopathic achalasia is a severe motility disorder of the esophagus and is characterized by a failure of the lower esophageal sphincter to relax due to a loss of neurons in the myenteric plexus. Most recently, we identified an 8 amino acid insertion in the cytoplasmic tail of HLA-DQβ1 as strong achalasia risk factor in a sample set from Central Europe, Italy, and Spain. Here, we tested whether the HLA-DQβ1 insertion also confers achalasia risk in the Polish and Swedish population. We could replicate the initial findings and the insertion shows strong achalasia association in both samples (Poland P = 1.84×10-04, Sweden P = 7.44×10-05). Combining all five European data sets – Central Europe, Italy, Spain, Poland, and Sweden – the insertion is achalasia associated with Pcombined = 1.67×10-35. In addition, we observe that the frequency of the insertion shows a geospatial north-south gradient. The insertion is less common in northern (around 6-7% in patients and 2% in controls from Sweden and Poland) compared to southern Europeans (around 16% in patients and 8% in controls from Italy) and shows a stronger attributable risk (AR) in the southern European population. Our study provides evidence that the prevalence of achalasia may differ between populations.

  Study EGAS00001001515

• 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

• Anthropological dataset 1 for The admixture histories of Cabo Verde

  Datasets used in the article "The genetic and linguistic admixture histories of the islands of Cabo Verde" by Laurent R et al. eLife 2023 (DOI: https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.79827 - URL: https://elifesciences.org/articles/79827) File name "eGAdeposit_233CaboVerde_SampleInfo_FINAL_01062022.txt" Column 1 corresponds to individual alphanumeric codes as in the "eGAdeposit_233CaboVerde_GenotypeFile_FINAL_01062022.vcf" genotype file Column 2 corresponds to individual's biological sex as per genetic inference Column 3 corresponds to individual's self-reported age in years Column 4 corresponds to individual's self-reported cumulated number of years spent in academic or professional education

  Dataset EGAD00001008976

• Kids First: Congenital Heart Defects and Laterality Birth Defects

  Laterality defects occur in approximately 1:10,000 newborns and are associated with a range of structural birth defects and abnormalities of organ positioning. Gut malrotation, biliary atresia, asplenia or polysplenia, complex cardiovascular malformations, and midline defects such as neural tube defects, vertebral anomalies and rib fusions are found in various combinations in patients with laterality defects. In addition, a subset of laterality defects caused by abnormalities of cilia position or function are associated with additional medical problems such as chronic sinusitis and bronchiectasis that require specific preventive care; however these patients frequently are undiagnosed until late in disease course. The goal of this project is to elucidate the genetic architecture of laterality disorders in order to inform medical management and risk stratification and to prevent complications. Laterality disorders are genetically heterogeneous and we and others have previously identified single nucleotide variants inherited in an X-linked or autosomal recessive manner as explanations for a minority of cases. In addition, we have demonstrated copy number variants (CNVs) as a mechanism of disease that requires additional investigation. We hypothesize that the majority of cases result from complex genetic inheritance. We propose to investigate this hypothesis using a multifaceted analysis approach in our extremely well phenotyped cohort of 538 probands with laterality disorders. Nested within this cohort are 105 trios who have not had previous sequencing, probands who have had exome sequencing and are excellent candidates for gene discovery via whole genome sequencing (WGS), and families with multiple affected family members for family-based analysis. All trios will be analyzed by transmission disequilibrium test (TDT) including rare variant TDT. De novo mutations will also be identified from trios for potential gene discovery. Using all probands, we will identify the prevalence of pathogenic CNVs. In addition, we will perform burden analyses to identify genes, gene interactions, and pathways important for susceptibility to laterality disorders. Finally, our rare families with multiple affected members will be studied using family based segregation analysis. This comprehensive genetic analysis in patients with laterality disorders is necessary to identify the appropriate clinical diagnostic testing for risk stratification, to elucidate underlying genetic architecture and facilitate novel gene discovery, and to provide essential knowledge about genes and pathways impacting the development of laterality disorders.

  Study phs002589

• Transcriptomic Profile of Whole Blood Cells from Elderly Subjects fed Probiotic Bacteria Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG ATCC 53103 (LGG) in a Phase I Open Label Study

  Open label study to evaluate the safety of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG ATCC 53103 (LGG) in elderly subjects. Fifteen healthy elderly volunteers, ages 65-80 were enrolled in a study in which they received LGG capsules containing 1 x 1010 CFU, twice daily for 28 days and were followed through day 56. The study subjects completed a daily diary, a telephone call on study days 3, 7 and 14 and study visits at the Massachusetts General Hospital Clinical Research Center at baseline, day 28 and day 56. During each visit, the subject diary, interim history, potential adverse effects and concomitant medications were reviewed and vital signs and a physical examination were performed. Routine blood tests were obtained to monitor for safety during visits and nasopharyngeal and stool samples were collected for microbiome analysis. Volunteers interested in participating in the effect of LGG probiotic on the Human whole Blood Transcriptome substudy also had blood drawn for DNA and RNA extraction, after signing the substudy consent form. The main objective of the study was to assess the safety and tolerability of 2 x 1010 CFU LGG administered orally to elderly subjects for 28 days. Secondary objectives were to evaluate the richness and microbial diversity in nasopharyngeal and stool specimens using pyrosequencing, and to compare cytokine production in response to bacterial stimulation by following the kinetics of mRNA expression of pro and anti-inflammatory genes and different signaling pathways, in relation to changes in stool Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus spp. The study was reviewed and approved by the Partners Human Research Committee (IRB # 2010P001695) and was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01274598). The main results regarding the clinical signs and safety of intervention is published in PLoS One. 2014 Dec 1;9(12):e113456. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0113456. eCollection 2014. PMID: 25438151. RNA sequencing for transcriptome analysis was only done in 11 of the 15 subjects as RNA integrity and quantity had to be optimal for the three times where blood was collected in order for a subject to be included in the study. The information regarding the microbiome data associated with this study is presented in a separate paper, which can be found at dbGaP study accession, phs000896, and PMID: 25873374.

  Study phs000928