21026 results for "fc 26 coins Buyfc26coins.com is EA Sports official for FC 26 coins The service is affordable and quick..JIZq"

in 57.73 milliseconds.

• DIPG WES and RNA-Seq

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

  Dataset EGAD00001006450

• Recurrent somatic DICER1 mutations in non-epithelial ovarian tumors

  Background: Germline truncating mutations in DICER1, an RNase III-type endoribonuclease essential for processing of microRNAs, are seen in families with the pleuropulmonary blastoma-family tumor and dysplasia syndrome; these individuals have a propensity to develop non-epithelial ovarian tumors (i.e. sex-cord stromal and germ cell tumors). Methods: We sequenced the whole transcriptomes or exomes of 14 non-epithelial ovarian tumors and noted closely clustered mutations in the RNase IIIb domain of DICER1 in four cases. Using Sanger sequencing, we then analyzed additional ovarian tumors for mutations in this region. The impact of the mutations on the enzymatic activity of Dicer1 was determined using in vitro RNA cleavage assays. Results: RNase IIIb domain DICER1 mutations were found in 30/102 non-epithelial ovarian tumors (29%), predominantly Sertoli-Leydig cell tumors (26/43, 60%), including 4/4 from individuals with germline DICER1 mutations. The mutations were restricted to metal binding sites within the RNase IIIb catalytic centres critical for miRNA interaction and cleavage, and were somatic in all 14 cases where germline DNA was available for testing. Of 266 epithelial ovarian and endometrial cancers tested, one case, an ovarian carcinosarcoma, had a hotspot mutation. In vitro, the mutant DICER proteins showed reduced RNase IIIb activity but retained RNase IIIa activity. Conclusions: Somatic missense mutations of the RNase IIIb domain of DICER1 are common in non-epithelial ovarian tumors. Genetic, pathologic, and functional evidence suggest that these mutations do not obliterate DICER1 function, rather, they alter it in specific cell types, a novel mechanism through which perturbed microRNA expression is oncogenic.

  Study EGAS00001000135

• Substance Dependence GWAS in European- and African - Americans

  This study includes SSADDA (Semi Structured Assessment for Drug Dependence and Alcoholism) assessed subjects (mostly unrelated, but including some affected sibling pairs) recruited in the course of several substance dependence genetics projects. The sample includes 1,531 self-reported African-American (AA) subjects, 1,339 self-reported European-American (EA) subjects, and 2 who reported race as "unknown" or "missing".

  Study phs000952

• Whole exome sequencing of 184 unrelated subjects with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome (DiGeorge syndrome/velo-cardio-facial syndrome)

  Our goal is to find genetic modifiers of major phenotypes in patients with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome, also known as DiGeorge syndrome or velo-cardio-facial syndrome. Whole exome sequencing was performed as part of a contract to the NHLBI, Resequencing and Genotyping Service. We have obtained cardiac phenotype information from the de-identified subjects enrolled in the study, either by echocardiography report or medical doctor report. All of the subjects have a 3 million base pair 22q11.2 deletion flanked by low copy repeats, LCR22, A-D.

  Study phs000987

• single cell RNA-seq of peripheral blood from analysis in infants with MLL-rearranged Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia

  This dataset contains two experiments. 1) Single cell RNA-seq of peripheral blood diagnostic samples from patients with MLL-rearranged infant ALL that underwent relapse or not (samples ending in R relapsed, samples ending in N did not), sequenced with SORT-seq (see cell systems, 2016, doi:10.1016/j.cels.2016.09.002). For some of the patients, multiple indipendent plates were produced (each plate is a sample). Barcode-well correspondence can be found here: https://bitbucket.org/princessmaximacenter/sharq/src/master/data/celseq2_bc384-v4.csv . 2) Single cell RNA-seq of peripheral blood diagnostic samples from patients with MLL-rearranged infant ALL that underwent relapse or not (samples ending in R relapsed, samples ending in N did not), sequenced with10x Genomics Version 2.

  Dataset EGAD00001007752

• COVID-19-Induced Immune Alterations in Infants

  Although previous studies have described some overlap between COVID-19-induced immune alterations in adults and children, no systematic immune profiling studies have been reported in infants. We applied a multidimensional approach to decipher the immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 infected infants (n=26; 10 mild, 11 moderate and 5 severe) and healthy matched controls (n=14). Single-cell RNA-seq profiling (scRNA-seq) of PBMCs revealed alterations in cell composition upon infection, with most cell types demonstrating an interferon-stimulated gene (ISGhi) state. Our findings shed insight into the immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 in the first year of life.

  Study phs002655

• Drug screening of patient-derived organoids from colorectal peritoneal metastases

  Colorectal cancer (CRC) patients with peritoneal metastases (CRPM) have limited treatment options and the lowest CRC survival rates. We trialed the possibility of organoid directed precision treatment for CRPM patients. CRPM organoids (peritonoids) isolated from patients underwent next-generation sequencing and medium-throughput drug panel testing ex vivo to identify specific drug sensitivities for each patient. We measured the utility of such a service including: success of peritonoid generation, time to cultivate peritonoids, reproducibility of the medium-throughput drug testing, and documented changes to clinical therapy as a result of the testing. Peritonoids were successfully generated and validated from 68% (19/28) of patients undergoing standard care. Genomic and drug profiling was completed within 8 weeks and a formal report ranking drug sensitivities was provided to the medical oncology team upon failure of standard care treatment. This resulted in a treatment change for 2 patients, one of whom had a partial response despite previously progressing on multiple rounds of standard care chemotherapy. The barrier to implementing this technology in Australia is the need for drug access and funding for off-label indications. In conclusion, our approach is feasible, reproducible and can guide novel therapeutic choices in this poor prognosis cohort, where new treatment options are urgently needed. This platform is relevant to many solid organ malignancies.

  Study phs002023

• Low mutation burden and frequent loss of CDKN2A/B and SMARCA2, but not PRC2, define pre-malignant neurofibromatosis type 1-associated atypical neurofibromas

  Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is a tumor-predisposition disorder caused by germline mutations in NF1. NF1 patients have an 8-16% lifetime risk of developing a malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST), a highly aggressive soft-tissue sarcoma, often arising from pre-existing benign plexiform neurofibromas (PN) and atypical neurofibromas (ANF). ANF are distinct from both PN and MPNST, representing an intermediate step in malignant transformation. In the first comprehensive genomic analysis of ANF, we performed tumor/normal exome sequencing (ES) of 16 ANFs. In addition, we conducted ES of three MPNSTs, copy-number meta-analysis of 26 ANF and 28 MPNST, and whole transcriptome RNA-seq analysis of five ANF and five MPNST. We identified low mutation burden (median 1, range 0-5) in the exomes of ANF (only NF1 somatic mutations were recurrent), and frequent deletions of CDKN2A/CDKN2B (69%) and SMARCA2(42%) loci. We determined that polycomb repressor complex 2 (PRC2) genes EED or SUZ12 were frequently mutated, deleted or downregulated in MPNST but not in ANF. Our gene expression study revealed upregulated NRAS, MDM2, CCND1/CCND2/CCND3 and CDK4/CDK6 in both ANF and MPNST, and overexpression of EZH2 in MPNST only. We conclude that the PN-ANF transition is primarily driven by the deletion of CDKN2A/CDKN2B in addition to already present inactivated NF1. Further progression from ANF to MPNST likely involves broad chromosomal rearrangements and frequent inactivation of the PRC2 genes, loss of the DNA repair genes, and copy-number increase of signal transduction, cell cycle and pluripotency self-renewal genes.

  Study phs001993

• Discovery and Characterization of Genetic Risk Loci in Sjogren's Syndrome

  The Sjögren's Genetics Network (SGENE) is an international collaboration focused on identifying and understanding the genetic variations that influence Sjögren’s pathology. Collectively, SGENE collaborators from 26 different sites (5 in the United States; 21 in foreign countries) have recruited a large cohort of geographically diverse participants of European ancestry. Recruitment, sample collection, and genotyping were performed at unique SGENE sites in compliance with local institutional review board approval. High-density SNP genotyping data were collated by the Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation (OMRF) and used to perform a GWAS of Sjögren's of European ancestry. Participants underwent extensive medical assessment for Sjögren's Syndrome using internationally accepted American-European Consensus Group (AECG) classification criteria or the American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria. Data quality control, GWAS imputation using the Haplotype Reference Consortium, panel version 1.1, and dbGaP preparation/posting were performed at the OMRF. To facilitate research focused on understanding the genetics of Sjögren's syndrome, the Genomic Summary Results from this GWAS are being made available herein using a total of n=3232 Sjögren's cases and n=17,481 controls. A total of n=8962 controls were obtained from our SGENE collaborators or from our previous study (Lessard, et al. Nature Genetics 2013. PMID: 24097067). To achieve adequate case-to-control ratios for the GWAS analyses, population-based control GWAS data were also obtained from dbGaP (phs000428.v2.p2; phs000672.v1.p1; phs000196.v3.p1; phs000187.v1.p1). In accordance with IRB approval, subject consents, and data sharing restrictions, we are also making available the individual-level genotyping data for a subset of Sjögren's cases (n=1,199) that were genotyped at the OMRF.

  Study phs002723

• Peripheral blood DNA transcriptomics of ustekinumab treatment response in patients with Crohn's disease

  Data pertains longitudinal transcriptomic data measured from blood obtained from patients with Crohn's disease that were starting treatment with ustekinumab. Samples were obtained prior to treatment and approximately 26 weeks into treatment during response assessment. At response assessment, patients were classified as responders (R) or non-responders (NR) based on a strict combination of endoscopic, biochemical and clinical criteria: ≥50% reduction in the endoscopic SES-CD score, corticosteroid-free clinical remission (≥3 point drop98 in HBI or HBI ≤4 and no systemic steroids) and/or biochemical response (C-reactive protein (CRP) and fecal calprotectin reduction ≥50% or ≤5 mg/L and fecal calprotectin ≤250 µg/g). Modified response was defined as a combination of corticosteroid-free clinical- (HBI ≤4) and biochemical (CRP ≤5 mg/L and/or fecal calprotectin ≤250 µg/g) remission between week 26-52 without treatment change through week 52. Transcriptomic analyses was conducted through RNA sequencing, wherein mRNA was extracted utilizing the QIAsymphony system, converted into cDNA and sequenced in a paired-end format on the Illumina NovaSeq6000 at the Amsterdam UMC Core Facility Genomics, generating a dataset comprising 40 million 150 bp-reads.

  Dataset EGAD50000000386

• Peripheral blood DNA transcriptomics of vedolizumab treatment response in patients with Crohn's disease

  Data pertains longitudinal transcriptomic data measured from blood obtained from patients with Crohn's disease that were starting treatment with vedolizumab. Samples were obtained prior to treatment and approximately 26 weeks into treatment during response assessment. At response assessment, patients were classified as responders (R) or non-responders (NR) based on a strict combination of endoscopic, biochemical and clinical criteria: ≥50% reduction in the endoscopic SES-CD score, corticosteroid-free clinical remission (≥3 point drop98 in HBI or HBI ≤4 and no systemic steroids) and/or biochemical response (C-reactive protein (CRP) and fecal calprotectin reduction ≥50% or ≤5 mg/L and fecal calprotectin ≤250 µg/g). Modified response was defined as a combination of corticosteroid-free clinical- (HBI ≤4) and biochemical (CRP ≤5 mg/L and/or fecal calprotectin ≤250 µg/g) remission between week 26-52 without treatment change through week 52. Transcriptomic analyses was conducted through RNA sequencing, wherein mRNA was extracted utilizing the QIAsymphony system, converted into cDNA and sequenced in a paired-end format on the Illumina NovaSeq6000 at the Amsterdam UMC Core Facility Genomics, generating a dataset comprising 40 million 150 bp-reads.

  Dataset EGAD50000000385

• Tools

  EGA Tools This page provides details of the applications available at the EGA. Submission Tool Description EgaCryptor Encrypt and create md5sum values. Crypt4gh Encrypt, decrypt or re-encrypt files. INBOX Upload your files once encrypted. FTP Upload your files once encrypted. Submitter Portal Submit and manage your submission metadata online (SEQUENCING AND PHENOTYPE ONLY) Submitter Portal API Submit and manage your submission metadata programmatically. Webin Submit and manage your submission metadata online (array data) Webin API Submit metadata using XML files. Aimed to array-based submissions. Star2xml Format conversion tool to transform tabular formats (e.g. spreadsheets) into EGA's XMLs. Used for large programmatic submissions. Data Access Tool Description DAC Portal Manage and control data access request. Download Tool Description PyEGA3 Download and decrypt datasets requested through your EGA web account. Live Outbox Download and decrypt datasets requested through your EGA web account. Fuse Client A quick and convenient way to browse through EGA files without the need for complete downloads. EGA QuickView A quick and convenient way to browse through EGA files without the need for complete downloads.

  Documentation tools

• NHLBI TOPMed - NHGRI CCDG: The BioMe Biobank at Mount Sinai

  The IPM BioMe Biobank, founded in September 2007, is an ongoing, broadly-consented electronic health record (EHR)-linked clinical care biobank that enrolls participants non-selectively from the Mount Sinai Medical Center patient population. BioMe currently comprises >42,000 participants from diverse ancestries, characterized by a broad spectrum of longitudinal biomedical traits. Participants are enrolled through an opt-in process and consent to be followed throughout their clinical care (past, present, and future) in real-time, allowing us to integrate their genomic information with their EHRs for discovery research and clinical care implementation. BioMe participants consent for recall, based on their genotype and/or phenotype, permitting in-depth follow-up and functional studies for selected participants at any time. Phenotypic and genomic data are stored in a secure database and made available to investigators, contingent on approval by the BioMe Governing Board. BioMe uses a "data-broker" system to protect confidentiality. Ancestral diversity - BioMe participants represent a broad racial, ethnic and socioeconomic diversity with a distinct and population-specific disease burden. Specifically, BioMe participants are of African (AA), Hispanic/Latino (HL), European (EA) and other/mixed ancestry. BioMe participants are predominantly of African (AA, 24%), Hispanic/Latino (HL, 35%), European (EA, 32%), and other ancestry (OA, 10%). Participants who self-identify as Hispanic/Latino further report to be of Puerto Rican (39%), Dominican (23%), Central/South American (17%), Mexican (5%) or other Hispanic (16%) ancestry. More than 40% of European ancestry participants are genetically determined to be of Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry. With this broad ancestral diversity, BioMe is uniquely positioned to examine the impact of demographic and evolutionary forces that have shaped common disease risk. Phenotypes available in BioMe - BioMe has a high-quality and validated set of fully implemented clinical phenotype data that has been culled by a multi-disciplinary team of experienced investigators, clinicians, information technologists, data-managers, and programmers who apply advanced medical informatics and data mining tools to extract and harmonize EHRs. BioMe, as a cohort, offers a great versatility for designing nested case-control sample-sets, particularly for studying longitudinal traits and co-morbidity in disease burden. Biomedical and clinical outcomes: The BioMe Biobank is linked to Mount Sinai's system-wide Epic EHR, which captures a full spectrum of biomedical phenotypes, including clinical outcomes, covariate and exposure data from past, present and future health care encounters. As such, the BioMe Biobank has a longitudinal design as participants consent to make all of their EHR data from past (dating back as far as 2003), present and future inpatient or outpatient encounters available for research, without restriction. The median number of outpatient encounters is 21 per participant, reflecting predominant enrollment of participants with common chronic conditions from primary care facilities. Environmental data: The clinical and EHR information is complemented by detailed demographic and lifestyle information, including ancestry, residence history, country of origin, personal and familial medical history, education, socio-economic status, physical activity, smoking, dietary habits, alcohol intake, and body weight history, which is collected in a systematic manner by interview-based questionnaire at time of enrollment. The IPM BioMe Biobank contributed ~10,600 DNA samples for whole genome sequencing to the TOPMed program. Samples were selected for the Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) and the Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) working groups. Using a Case-Definition-Algorithm (CDA), we identified ~4,100 individuals with CAD (~50% women) and ~3,000 individuals as controls (65% women). In addition, we identified ~800 individuals with COPD (62% women) and 1800 individuals as controls (72% women). Another 600 BioMe participants with Atrial Fibrillation, all of African ancestry, were included.

  Study phs001644

• Everything you need to know about Federated EGA Affiliates: Q&A

  Addressing common questions about Federated EGA (FEGA) Affiliates and providing answers. FEGA Affiliates have recently been defined as the third tier within the newly approved “Federated EGA Structure and Organisation” document, alongside Central EGA (CEGA) and the FEGA Nodes. In this blog post, we aim to answer the questions that may arise on this topic. For more general information about FEGA Affiliates, you can refer to this blog post. Let's now start with the questions and answers! What is the difference between a FEGA Affiliate and a FEGA Node? FEGA Nodes A FEGA Node is a national-level service that accepts submissions and provides archiving and access services within a single country's jurisdiction. Nodes provide end-to-end services for submitters in that jurisdiction, including submission support, processing, permissions management, and distribution. FEGA Affiliates A FEGA Affiliate is not a national submission service. Instead, it archives data from its own legal entity and/or selected partner institutions (for example, consortium partners). Affiliates are designed for organisations and consortia that need to keep data stewardship and access decisions within their own governance model, while still enabling discovery through the broader FEGA ecosystem. What do Affiliates commit to? Here is a practical checklist of the core expectations for a FEGA Affiliate. FEGA Affiliate checklist Discovery and metadata Submit non-personal metadata to CEGA to obtain EGA accessions and enable discovery (with metadata validation handled by the CEGA Helpdesk). Operations and resilience Maintain a data storage system and a defined backup/recovery approach. Ensure operational capacity (personnel and infrastructure) to deliver Affiliate services. Maintain systems and practices that support local data security and align with EGA best-practices. Access and user support Provide data distribution or access (e.g in a trusted research environment) to authorised users to datasets hosted at the Affiliate. Provide permissions management for datasets archived by the Affiliate (the CEGA DAC (Data Access Committee) Portal is always at your disposal to use). Provide a minimal helpdesk with sufficient capacity to support relevant DACs and approved users. Membership term Commit to a minimum membership term of four years. Governance and participation (lightweight by design) Affiliates integrate into the FEGA network operationally, but without the committee obligations associated with Nodes. When is becoming an Affiliate the right fit? Consider the Affiliate tier if: You host (or plan to host) controlled-access datasets that must be managed under your organisation’s or consortium’s governance, you want studies to be discoverable through EGA, but need access control and/or distribution to remain local, and you are not aiming to operate a national submission service tier.. What if a FEGA Node already exists in my jurisdiction? We encourage any potential Affiliate to reach out to their national FEGA Node to explore collaboration at the national level. Why? Federated models within a country already exist in FEGA, where a national Node operates like a Central EGA for their country. FEGA Nodes can also represent the interests of any Affiliates within their jurisdiction at the FEGA Committees. FEGA Nodes have experience and can support you on your FEGA journey. Ready to join as a FEGA Affiliate? We’re excited to open this formally defined pathway for organisations and consortia to participate in the federation. If you think the FEGA Affiliate tier fits your needs, start by assessing: Your scope (organisation/consortium-held data rather than public external submissions), Your ability to provide the core services (permissions, distribution/access, helpdesk, monitoring), and Your readiness to submit non-personal metadata to CEGA for accessioning and discovery. To express interest, please contact us here, and we'll help you understand the onboarding steps and how Affiliates integrate into the FEGA network.

  Blog fega-affiliates-q&a

• Genetic analysis of HLA and immune escape genes in Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma

  Fifty percent of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) cases lack cell-surface expression of the class-I major histocompatibility complex (MHC-I), thereby escaping immune recognition by cytotoxic T cells. In order to comprehensively identify the mechanisms involved in MHC-I loss, we first performed immunophenotypic analysis of both MHC class-I and -II in 657 cases across the spectrum of B-NHL, revealing that loss of MHC-I, but not MHC-II, is preferentially restricted to DLBCL. We then used whole exome and targeted deep-sequencing to examine genes involved in MHC-I expression in 74 DLBCL samples representative of MHC-I positive and negative cases. We show here that somatic biallelic or monoallelic inactivation of B2M and/or HLA-I is present in 80.9% (34/42) of MHC-I negative tumors. Furthermore, 68.8% (22/32) of MHC-I positive DLBCLs also harbored monoallelic HLA-I genetic alterations (MHC-I positivemono) that lead to allelic imbalance, suggesting allele-specific inactivation. Both MHC-I negative and MHC-I positivemono cases showed a significantly higher mutational burden as well as a higher number of inferred neo-antigens, suggesting co-selection of HLA-I loss and sustained neo-antigen production. Interestingly, the analysis of > 500.000 individuals in two databases revealed homozygosity of germline HLA-I genes in 26-38% of DLBCL patients, a frequency significantly higher than that observed in any other cancer type. In mice, germinal-center B cells lacking HLA-I expression did not progress to lymphoma and were counterselected in the context of oncogene-driven lymphomagenesis, suggesting that additional events are needed to license immune evasion. These results suggest a multi-step process of HLA-I loss including both germ-line and somatic events in DLBCL development, and have direct implications for the pathogenesis and immunotherapeutic targeting of this disease.

  Study EGAS00001005054

• The Sea Islands Genetic Network (SIGNET): Identifying genetic contributors to diabetes and dyslipidemia in African Americans

  Recent genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have successfully identified genetic variants that influence diabetes risk in European populations, however most do not have a major impact on diabetes risk in populations of African descent. The African American (AA) population from the Sea Islands of coastal South Carolina and Georgia has high rates of type 2 diabetes, low levels of admixture, and in general, consume a diet rich in saturated fats. We postulate that this unique combination of ancestral and environmental factors results in a more consistent penetrance of diabetes risk alleles, as well as enrichment of risk alleles of African origin. The existing DNA samples and rich phenotypic data from the Sea Island Families Project comprise a unique resource for genetic studies of type 2 diabetes and related metabolic traits such as dyslipidemia. Our central hypothesis is that the increased risk for T2DM in AA compared with European American (EA) is due, in part, to susceptibility alleles of African origin, and that these alleles can be identified using a GWAS. The Specific Aims are to: 1) Identify genetic risk factors for type 2 diabetes utilizing DNA samples and data from the Sea Island Families Project, Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) Study recruited from SC, GA, NC, and AL; and a GWAS approach; 2) Identify genetic contributors to lipoprotein subclasses in African Americans using the lipoprotein subclass profile (particle size and concentration for multiple subclasses of VLDL, LDL, and HDL) assessed by NMR at LipoScience, Inc., and the GWAS data from Aim 1. The rationale for this project is that identification and validation of novel pathophysiological pathways and informed selection of candidate genes for diabetes risk will inform development of new, targeted prevention and treatment strategies in this underserved, high risk population.

  Study phs000433

• Somatic Genome Dynamics of Barrett's Esophagus Patients with Non-Cancer and Cancer Outcomes

  A case-control study was designed with 80 participants diagnosed with Barrett's Esophagus (BE) selected from a larger case-cohort study (Li et al., 2014, PMID: 24253313) within the Seattle Barrett's Esophagus Program (SBEP) at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center. The study included 40 cases with BE with non-cancer outcomes, "NCO", who did not progress to esophageal adenocarcinoma (EA), and 40 controls who progressed to an endoscopically detected, incident EA (cancer outcome, "CO"). For each patient, two timepoints were evaluated (T1 and T2). NCO were matched to CO based on age at T1 (T1=first endoscopy with sufficient sample availability), and time between T1 and T2 (T2 in CO=time of diagnosis of incident EA). In 10 NCO, a third time point (T3), a mean of 13.2 years after T1, was also sequenced. Mapped endoscopic biopsies, at 1/3 and 2/3 annotated distances from the gastroesophageal junction within the Barrett's segment, were sampled per patient at each timepoint. Each biopsy was purified to separate BE epithelium from stroma, and DNA was extracted from purified epithelium for 60X WGS and 2.5M SNP array; normal control blood (N=62) or normal gastric sample (N=18) were analyzed by 30X WGS and 2.5M SNP array. An additional seven normal gastric biopsy samples in seven patients with normal control blood were also sequenced at 60X as controls. All research participants contributing clinical data and esophageal samples to this study provided written informed consent, subject to oversight by the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center IRB Committee D (Reg ID 5619).

  Study phs001912

• WES of melanoma tumours prior to combined immune checkpoint blockade treatment.

  Paired melanoma tumor and normal (PBMC) WES data from a cohort of 26 patients subsequently treated with combined immune checkpoint blockade.

  Dataset EGAD00001005941

• Prostate Cancer Upgrading Reference Set

  This study aimed to investigate clinical, demographic, and molecular features of men diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer [ISUP Grade Group 1 (GG1)] at biopsy who underwent radical prostatectomy, and for whom an increased tumor grade (ISUP Grade Group 2 or above) was subsequently detected in the resected prostate. This phenomenon is termed upgrading. In collaboration with the Early Detection Research Network (EDRN), a blinded reference set was established to facilitate upgrading biomarker detection and validation. A prospective, multi-institutional, cohort of men with the GG1 prostate cancer and intention to undergo prostatectomy was recruited. Biospecimens (blood, urine) were collected and this biorepository comprises the official EDRN Upgrading Reference Set (URS). Recording of case-control status (case = upgrading at prostatectomy, control = no upgrading at prostatectomy) was coordinated by the Data Management and Coordinating Center (DMCC) of the EDRN, who ensured blinding of all participating researchers. A subset of the reference set (n = 192) was chosen to undergo whole genome sequencing (WGS) for the investigation of a germline genomic biomarker of upgrading. Variant calls from all sequenced URS whole genomes are available through dbGaP, with the exception of one sample for which sequencing was not successful. Among investigated clinical features, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density and percent of cancer in pre-prostatectomy positive biopsy cores were significantly associated with upgrading. Two polygenic risk score-based biomarkers were computed in the genetic sub-cohort and tested against case-control status. Neither was predictive of upgrading.

  Study phs003670

• Verification of BCR reconstruction from single-cell RNA-seq using BraCeR

  This dataset was made to verify the computational reconstruction of B cell reseptors from single-cell RNA-seq using BraCeR. The dataset contains BCR-derived reads from single-cell RNA-seq from 13 cells using the Smart-seq2 protocol, as well as targeted BCR-sequencing data from the same cells.

  Dataset EGAD00001004199

• PYDP Papuan Y chromosome Diversity Panel

  The PYDP dataset includes 26 bam files of Y chromosome sequences for Papua New Guinean individuals from different locations, extracted from whole genome sequences. DNA was extrated from saliva samples (Oragen kit). Sequencing libraries were prepared using the TruSeq DNA PCR-Free HT kit. 150 bp paired-end sequencing was performed on the Illumina HiSeq X5 sequencer.

  Dataset EGAD00001008572

• Feasibility and safety of a multi-cancer blood test for screening and intervention

  We evaluated the feasibility and safety of blood testing for cancer in an interventional study of 10,006 women. Positive tests for DNA or protein were independently confirmed and diagnostic PET-CT imaging was used to localize disease. During the study, 26 cancers were first detected by blood testing, 24 more by standard-of-care screening, and 46 by neither approach. Surgicalexcision of the primary tumors was performed on 12 cancers first detected by blood testing.1.0% of participants underwent PET-CT imaging based on false positive blood tests, and 0.22% underwent a futile invasive diagnostic procedure. These data demonstrate that multi-cancer blood testing, when followed by PET-CT localization, can be safely incorporated into routineclinical care, in some cases leading to surgery with intent to cure. Further studies will be required to determine the clinical validity and utility of multi-cancer blood testing.

  Study EGAS00001004372

• IMCISION DNAseq

  Standard-of-care (SOC) surgery for locoregionally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is intensive and results in 30‒50% five-year overall survival. Anti-PD1 immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) durably improves survival rates in recurrent/metastatic HNSCC. We report on the non-randomized phase Ib/IIa IMCISION trial (NCT03003637) of 32 HNSCC patients treated with two doses neoadjuvant nivolumab (NIVO MONO, n=6, phase Ib arm A) or two doses of nivolumab plus a single dose of ipilimumab (COMBO, n=26, 6 in phase Ib arm B and 20 in phase IIa) prior to surgery and, if indicated, adjuvant radiotherapy. Neoadjuvant ICB was feasible in all phase Ib patients, meeting the phase Ib primary feasibility endpoint. One phase IIa patient had progressive disease precluding surgery. Primary tumor pathological response (phase IIa primary endpoint), defined as the % change in viable tumor cells from baseline biopsy to on-treatment resection, was evaluable in 29 patients. . We observed a major pathological response (MPR, 90‒100% response) in 8/23 (35%) evaluable COMBO and 1/6 (17%) NIVO MONO patients. None of the patients with MPR after NIVO MONO or COMBO developed a tumor relapse after 24.0 months median follow-up. FDG-PET-based total lesion glycolysis identified MPR patients prior to surgery. A baseline AID/APOBEC-associated mutational profile and an on-treatment decrease in hypoxia signature expression were observed in MPR patients. Our data indicate that neoadjuvant NIVO MONO and COMBO are safe in HNSCC, and that particularly COMBO ICB shows encouraging effectivity. IMCISION provides rationales for future HNSCC trials aiming to pre-operatively select patients with a likely MPR after neoadjuvant ICB for de-escalation of SOC.

  Study EGAS00001005466

• 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

• Integrative Age-Related Changes in Genome and Epigenome in Human Lung in Relation to Smoking

  The Integrative Age-Related Changes in Genome and Epigenome in Human Lung in Relation to Smoking study was designed to assess DNA methylation and gene expression profiles in cytologically normal bronchial progenitor "basal" cells. The cells were collected from 54 consented bronchoscopy specimen donors at standard airway locations during clinically indicated bronchoscopy, and then outgrown in primary cultures. DNA methylation profiles were assessed using Enzymatic-Methyl sequencing (EM-seq: 96% genomic coverage, 7.5x depth) in all 54 donors' samples. The gene expression profile was evaluated by bulk RNA-Seq in 39 donors' samples. The study participants were at the ages of 33 - 81 years old at enrollment. Of the 54 donors, 31 were newly diagnosed with lung cancer. As for tobacco smoke exposure, there were 19 current, 18, former, and 17 never smokers. There are 26 subjects whose specimens were used for single cell whole-genome sequencing study phs002758.

  Study phs003317

• 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

• 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

• 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

• 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

• 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

• 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

• 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

• 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

• 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

• 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

• 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

• National Institute on Aging Genetics of Alzheimer's Disease Data Storage Site (NIAGADS)

  NIAGADS is an NIH controlled-access data repository that collaborates with researchers around the world to facilitate data access and sharing for genomic and associated omics data related to Alzheimer's Disease (AD), Alzheimer's Disease Related Dementias (ADRD), as well as healthy aging. Serving as the data coordinating center for the Alzheimer's Disease Sequencing Project (ADSP), NIAGADS hosts all ADSP-generated whole-exome, whole-genome and associated phenotypes. Other data types hosted by NIAGADS include genotype SNP arrays, functional omics, fluid biomarkers, aggregated imaging data (such as volumetric data for brain regions of interest), and summary statistics. In adherence with NIH security best practices and genome data sharing policies, NIAGADS supports data access requests through review by an NIH-appointed and registered Data Access Committee. Data stored within NIAGADS cannot be requested via dbGaP. Data requests must go through the NIAGADS Data Sharing Service (DSS) via the following NIAGADS url: https://dss.niagads.org/. Questions related to the request of data should be directed to the NIAGADS admin team at: niagads@pennmedicine.upenn.edu. DSS is a FISMA certified platform built by a team of data scientists at the University of Pennsylvania to support the request and access of AD/ADRD data by qualified researchers internationally. Questions related to the use of data hosted in the DSS should be directed to the Portal admin team at: help@niagads.org.

  Study phs004180

• Whole exome and Transcriptome sequencing of treatment-naïve esophageal adenocarcinoma biopsies and matched peripheral blood mononuclear cells

  Exome sequencing was performed on n=28 treatment-naïve esophageal adenocarcinoma (EACs). Three to four biopsies sampling different areas of each tumor were pooled before nucleic acid extractions to mitigate the elevated heterogeneity described for EAC. WES was performed on EAC biopsies at 120X average coverage, with autologous PBMCs used as germline controls at 80X average coverage. Libraries were prepared from 30 ng of input DNA using the SureSelect QXT Human All Exon V7 kit (Agilent Technologies) and sequenced on the NextSeq 550 (Illumina), 2x150 bp. BCL files were demultiplexed to FastQ files using bcl2fastq2 software (Illumina). Three paired end sequencing batches were analyzed independently (Batch1: samples 8, 10, 11, 12, 15, 17, 18; Batch2: samples 20, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34 ; Batch3: samples 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 48, 54, 55, 57). RNA sequencing was performed on n=26 treatment-naïve esophageal adenocarcinoma (EACs). Three to four biopsies sampling different areas of each tumor were pooled before nucleic acid extractions to mitigate the elevated heterogeneity described for EAC. RNAseq libraries were prepared on 50 ng of total RNA (with RNA integrity index RIN &gt;=7) with the TruSeq Stranded mRNA library preparation kit (Illumina) in accordance with low-throughput protocol. After PCR enrichment (15 cycles) and purification of adapter-ligated fragments, the concentration and length of DNA fragments were measured using D1000 Screen Tape System (Agilent), obtaining a median insert size of 311 nucleotides. Then, RNAseq libraries were sequenced using the Illumina NovaSeq platform, 1x100 bp, obtaining on average 100 million single reads per sample.

  Dataset EGAD00001010876