21130 results for "fc 26 coins Buyfc26coins.com is EA Sports official for FC 26 coins The service is affordable and quick..6Xgd"

in 80.29 milliseconds.

• Title: Divergent levels of CD112 and INKA1 define a distinct subset of human long-term hematopoietic stem cells

  The data provided here was critical in establishing that human long-term hematopoietic stem cells (LT-HSC), previously described as the most primitive HSC population, is actually composed of distinct subsets that can be prospectively isolated. Via mechanistic studies centering around the Rho-GTPase effector kinase PAK4 and its inhibitor INKA1, we identified the immune checkpoint ligand CD112 as a marker for hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells, that is highest expressed on LT-HSC. More importantly, CD112 can be used to stratify functionally distinct subsets within LT-HSC: In response to regeneration-mediated stress, the CD112low subset exhibits a transient restraint (termed latency) before contributing to hematopoietic reconstitution, while the CD112high subset is primed to respond rapidly. High resolution RNA-seq of the CD112 surface expression spectrum within rare LT-HSC subsets (human umbilical cord blood) demonstrated that more genes are differentially upregulated in the deeper quiescent and less metabolic active subset. Genes enriched in this subset centre around cell adhesion and Rho-GTPase signaling. This is in agreement with the scRNAseq data from human G-CSF mobilized peripheral blood (mPB) generated here that was used as an model of in vivo activation/priming revealing via RNA-velocity and pseudo-time analysis that INKA1high versus PAK4high, CDK6high and CD112high enrichment are either detected early or late in diffusion pseudotime indicative of quiescent versus primed cell status, respectively. RNAseq following INKA1 overexpression in LT-HSC and ST-HSC revealed by GSEA an overall stemness preserving phenotype and particularly in LT-HSC, but not in short-term HSC (ST-HSC), suppression of transcriptional programs linked to activation. Collectively, our data decipher the molecular intricacies underlying HSC heterogeneity and self-renewal regulation and point to latency as an orchestrated physiological response that integrates quiescence control with HSC fate choices to preserve a stem cell reservoir.

  Dataset EGAD00001006541

• OpACIN-neo – A Multicenter Phase 2 Study to identify the Optimal neo-Adjuvant Combination scheme of Ipilimumab and Nivolumab – Whole exome sequencing

  The outcome of patients with macroscopic stage III melanoma is poor. Neoadjuvant treatment with ipilimumab plus nivolumab at the standard dosing schedule induced pathological responses in a high proportion of patients in two small independent early-phase trials. However, toxicity of the standard ipilimumab plus nivolumab dosing schedule was high, preventing its broader clinical use. The aim of the OpACIN-neo study (NCT02977052) to identify a dosing schedule of ipilimumab plus nivolumab that is less toxic but equally effective. 86 patients with macroscopic stage III melanoma were randomised to one of three dosing schedules: arm A, two cycles of ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus nivolumab 1 mg/kg once every 3 weeks; arm B, two cycles of ipilimumab 1 mg/kg plus nivolumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks; or arm C, two cycles of ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks directly followed by two cycles of nivolumab 3mg/kg once every 2 weeks. Within the first 12 weeks, grade 3–4 immune-related adverse events were observed in 12 (40%) of 30 patients in group A, six (20%) of 30 in group B, and 13 (50%) of 26 in group C. Pathological responses occurred in 24 (80%) patients in group A, 23 (77%) in group B, and 17 (65%) in group C. The 2-year estimated relapse-free survival was 84% for all patients, 97% for patients achieving a pathologic response and 36% for nonresponders (p<0.001). High tumor mutational burden (TMB) and high interferon-gamma-related gene expression signature score (IFN-γ score) were associated with pathologic response and low risk of relapse; pathologic response rate (pRR) was 100% in patients with high IFN-γ score/high TMB, patients with high IFN-γ score/low TMB or low IFN-γ score/high TMB had pRRs of 91% and 88%; while patients with low IFN-γ score/low TMB had a pRR of only 39%. These data demonstrate long-term benefit in patients with a pathologic response and show the predictive potential of TMB and IFN-γ score.

  Study EGAS00001004832

• OpACIN-neo – A Multicenter Phase 2 Study to identify the Optimal neo-Adjuvant Combination scheme of Ipilimumab and Nivolumab – RNA sequencing

  The outcome of patients with macroscopic stage III melanoma is poor. Neoadjuvant treatment with ipilimumab plus nivolumab at the standard dosing schedule induced pathological responses in a high proportion of patients in two small independent early-phase trials. However, toxicity of the standard ipilimumab plus nivolumab dosing schedule was high, preventing its broader clinical use. The aim of the OpACIN-neo study (NCT02977052) to identify a dosing schedule of ipilimumab plus nivolumab that is less toxic but equally effective. 86 patients with macroscopic stage III melanoma were randomised to one of three dosing schedules: arm A, two cycles of ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus nivolumab 1 mg/kg once every 3 weeks; arm B, two cycles of ipilimumab 1 mg/kg plus nivolumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks; or arm C, two cycles of ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks directly followed by two cycles of nivolumab 3mg/kg once every 2 weeks. Within the first 12 weeks, grade 3–4 immune-related adverse events were observed in 12 (40%) of 30 patients in group A, six (20%) of 30 in group B, and 13 (50%) of 26 in group C. Pathological responses occurred in 24 (80%) patients in group A, 23 (77%) in group B, and 17 (65%) in group C. The 2-year estimated relapse-free survival was 84% for all patients, 97% for patients achieving a pathologic response and 36% for nonresponders (p<0.001). High tumor mutational burden (TMB) and high interferon-gamma-related gene expression signature score (IFN-γ score) were associated with pathologic response and low risk of relapse; pathologic response rate (pRR) was 100% in patients with high IFN-γ score/high TMB, patients with high IFN-γ score/low TMB or low IFN-γ score/high TMB had pRRs of 91% and 88%; while patients with low IFN-γ score/low TMB had a pRR of only 39%. These data demonstrate long-term benefit in patients with a pathologic response and show the predictive potential of TMB and IFN-γ score.

  Study EGAS00001004833

• med-pchic-dac

  The data are accessible under the terms of the following Data Access Agreement that needs to be filled in, signed (by yourself and your institution’s official contact) and returned by email to med-pchic-dac@lists.cam.ac.uk

  Dac EGAC00001000523

• Genomic Predictors of Combat Stress Vulnerability and Resilience

  The Genomic Predictors of Combat Stress Vulnerability and Resilience Study was designed to probe the likely hereditary basis for risk or resilience to develop PTSD and other trauma spectrum disorders. The overall guiding hypothesis was that genomic variation gives rise to risk/susceptibility traits that, when actuated by traumatic environmental stimuli, such as combat, give rise to PTSD and other stress-related phenotypes. Two studies designed to identify risk and resilience factors for combat-induced, stress-related symptoms are being conducted by our group: The Marine Resiliency Study (MRS) is a prospective PTSD study with longitudinal follow-up (pre- and post-exposure to combat stress) of US Marines bound for deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan. Extensive phenotyping includes 3 domains: Psychosocial, Psychophysiologic, and Biophysiologic. The biological and physiological measures collected were chosen in part due to their potential to serve as intermediate phenotypes for stress-related disorders. A second, cross-sectional study involves a cohort of combat-exposed active duty or previously deployed service members (CAVC), including PTSD cases and controls with comparable psychosocial and clinical phenotypes. Little information is available about the factors that explain why some trauma survivors develop stress disorders and some do not. It is hoped that the insights gained from this approach will improve understanding of the genetic contributors to PTSD, and potentially provide novel diagnostic tests and therapeutic approaches to this currently enigmatic and difficult-to-manage condition.

  Study phs000864

• Longitudinal sampling in relapsed and refractory Hodgkin lymphoma

  Ultra-deep next-generation panel-sequencing on 59 FFPE-samples (20 LTR, 26 relapsed (rHL: 11 initial-diagnosis, 15 relapse) and 13 primary-refractory (prHL: 8 initial-diagnosis, 5 progression) from 44 cHL-patients applying a hybrid-capture approach. Data was processed as described in the publication and mark duplicated bam files were uploaded.

  Dataset EGAD50000000210

• Chromatin accessibility in human monocyte differentiation

  This dataset consists of ATAC-seq data from human monocytes, monocyte-derived dendritic cells or monocyte-derived macrophages as well as monocyte-derived cells that were subjected to siRNA treatment targeting TET2, IRF4 and EGR2. In total, it includes 26 samples.

  Dataset EGAD00001006601

• Mitochondrial DNA sequencing of iPSC, parental cells, and iPSC derived cardiomyocytes

  The aim of this work was to analyze to which extent mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) variants in human induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC) originate from their parental cells or from de novo mutagenesis, and whether dynamics in variant heteroplasmy levels during prolonged expansion culture of iPSC are caused by inter- or intra-cellular selection or genetic drift. Hence, mtDNA of 26 early passage iPSC clones from, in total, 10 donors and the corresponding parental cell populations (here endothelial cells) were sequenced. Furthermore, 7 iPSC clones were expanded up to passage 50 and the change in variant heteroplasmy levels was monitored. Lastly, the effect of differentiation on the variant heteroplasmy levels was investigated during directed cardiomyocyte differentiation of 4 iPSC clones.

  Study EGAS00001005560

• ICR96 exon CNV validation series

  A resource for assessment of exon CNV calling methods in targeted NGS data, we here present the ICR96 exon CNV validation series. The dataset includes high-quality sequencing data from a targeted NGS assay (the TruSight Cancer Panel) together with Multiplex Ligation-dependent Probe Amplification (MLPA) results for 96 independent samples. 66 samples contain at least one validated exon CNV and 30 samples have validated negative results for exon CNVs in 26 genes. The dataset includes 46 exon CNVs in BRCA1, BRCA2, TP53, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2, EPCAM and PTEN, giving excellent representation of the cancer predisposition genes most frequently tested in clinical practice. Moreover, the validated exon CNVs include 25 single exon CNVs the most difficult exon CNV to detect.

  Dataset EGAD00001003335

• Mutation analysis of 17 genes in plasma DNA of CRC patients using the AVENIO ctDNA Targeted Kit

  Mutation analysis of 17 genes (ALK, APC, BRAF, BRCA1, BRCA2, DPYD, EGFR, ERBB2, KIT, KRAS, MET, NRAS, PDGFRA, RET, ROS1, TP53, UGT1A1) in plasma DNA of CRC patients using the AVENIO ctDNA Targeted Kit.

  Dataset EGAD00001006103

• RNA-seq of atypical 3q26 samples

  RNA was isolated using phenol-chloroform extraction followed by DNase digestion or using the Qiagen Allprep DNA/RNA kit and protocol (Qiagen, #80204). cDNA synthesis was done using the SuperScript II Reverse Transcriptase kit (Invitrogen). Quantitative real-time PCR was performed by using primers as described previously13,21 on the 7500 Fast Real-time PCR System (Applied Biosystems). Relative levels of gene expression were calculated using the ΔΔCt method

  Dataset EGAD00001006106

• A fast, affordable and minimally-invasive diagnostic test for Cancer of Unknown Primary (CUP) using DNA methylation profiling

  CUP diagnosis on FFPE tissue and liquid biopsies (blood, pleural and peritoneal effusions) using cfRRBS (cell-free reduced representation bisulfite sequencing), a technique that allows for identification of the methylation profile starting from minimal amounts of highly fragmented DNA.

  Study EGAS50000000257

• Transcriptomic Analysis of Human Hematopoietic Progenitors from Healthy Donors and Bone Marrow Failure Patients

  The purpose of this study was to define transcriptional changes that occur in the rare and heterogeneous bone marrow progenitors that are affected in Shwachman-Diamond Syndrome. Data are reported for four genetically confirmed SDS patients ranging from 11-26 years old, 3 male and 1 female, and four healthy donors ranging from 25-29 years old, 2 male and 2 female. Subjects provided written, informed consent in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki's Ethical Principles of Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. Single CD34+ cells were purified from fresh bone marrow and cDNA libraries were prepared using the SMARTer Ultra Low RNA Kit (Clontech; pre-2015) or SMART-Seq v4 Ultra Low RNA Kit (Clontech; post-2015). Libraries were sequenced on a HiSeq 2500 Instrument (Illumina, San Diego, CA) to a read depth of ~3 M paired-end, 25 bp reads per single cell. Paired-end reads were mapped to the hg38 human transcriptome (Gencode v24) using STAR v2.4.2a.

  Study phs001845

• Whole Exome Sequencing of paired gDNAs and PPGL tumor DNA from patients with cyanotic congenital heart disease

  Fastq files from Whole Exome Sequencing of 12 paired germline DNA (from blood/saliva) and 14 PPGL tumor DNA (from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) blocks from surgery) from patients with cyanotic congenital heart disease (CCHD) and pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma (PPGL). Sequencing was performed using the Illumina HiSeq4000.

  Dataset EGAD50000001201

• MEC/SEF RNA-seq

  RNA transcript expression sequencing of 27 MEC/SEF tumor samples. Samples were sequenced at Beijing Genomics Institute. Prior to sequencing, rRNA removal library preparation was done for any samples that had degraded. Samples were sequenced on a DNBseq platform sequencer with a read length of 100PE, producing approximately ~40M raw reads (~8GB) raw data per sample.

  Dataset EGAD50000000761

• WTCCC case-control study for Hypertension

  WTCCC genome-wide case-control association study for Hypertension (HT) using the 1958 British Birth Cohort and the UK National Blood Service collections as controls.

  Study EGAS00000000009

• alopecia areata

  exome sequencing files from 25 alopecia areata samples from spain.

  Dataset EGAD00001006370

• Whole genome sequencing data of high-grade serous ovarian cancer samples (set 8a)

  Whole genome sequencing data of 26 high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC) patients (87 samples) sequenced with MGISEQ-2000 and HiSeq X Ten.

  Dataset EGAD00001011304

• Whole Genome Sequencing of Therapy-Related Myeloid Neoplasms

  The dataset consists of: 51 paired tumor/normal WGS samples (26 tumors and 25 normals), and 13 normal targeted samples.

  Dataset EGAD00001010026

• 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

• WTCCC case-control study for Rheumatoid Arthritis

  WTCCC genome-wide case-control association study for Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) using the 1958 British Birth Cohort and the UK National Blood Service collections as controls.

  Study EGAS00000000011

• WTCCC case-control study for Type 1 Diabetes

  WTCCC genome-wide case-control association study for Type 1 Diabetes (T1D) using the 1958 British Birth Cohort and the UK National Blood Service collections as controls.

  Study EGAS00000000014

• WTCCC case-control study for Type 2 Diabetes

  WTCCC genome-wide case-control association study for Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) using the 1958 British Birth Cohort and the UK National Blood Service collections as controls.

  Study EGAS00000000016

• WTCCC case-control study for Coronary Artery Disease

  WTCCC genome-wide case-control association study for Bipolar disorder (CAD) using the 1958 British Birth Cohort and the UK National Blood Service collections as controls.

  Study EGAS00000000003

• Longitudinal snRNAseq and DNAseq of IDHmutant glioma

  We collected longitudinal glioma samples from 35 patients with an IDH-mutant oligodendroglioma (n = 13) or IDH-mutant astrocytoma (n = 22) diagnosis based on 2021 WHO glioma classification at two or three time points (n = 75 samples). For each patient, we designated the two earliest samples as the initial and recurrence for longitudinal analyses. In 17 of 35 longitudinal pairs, the initial sample was obtained at primary diagnosis, whereas the remaining 18 cases the initial samples were collected at a subsequent surgery. Between the initial and recurrence samples, 26 of 35 patients received radiotherapy and/or alkylating chemotherapy, whereas no adjuvant treatment was reported for the remaining patients. To comprehensively investigate IDH-mutant glioma evolution, we used snRNAseq and bulk DNA/RNA sequencing from the same resected glioma samples. A subset of these samples was profiled with simultaneous snRNA-ATAC sequencing (48 out of 75), including 21 matched longitudinal pairs,

  Dac EGAC50000000973