17297 results for "fc 26 coins Buyfc26coins.com is EA Sports official for FC 26 coins They are definitely a top seller..rG5l"

in 26.67 milliseconds.

• Tumor-reactive heterotypic CD8 T cell clusters from clinical samples

  Emerging evidence suggests a correlation between CD8+ T cell-tumor cell proximity and anti-tumor immune response. However, it remains unknown whether these cells exist as functional clusters that can be isolated from clinical samples. By conventional and imaging flow cytometry, we show here that from 21/21 human melanoma metastases, we could isolate heterotypic clusters, comprising CD8+ T cells interacting with one or more tumor cells and/or antigen-presenting cells (APCs). Single-cell RNA-sequencing revealed that T cells from clusters were enriched for gene signatures associated with tumor reactivity and exhaustion. Clustered T cells exhibited increased TCR clonality indicative of expansion, while TCR-matched T cells showed more exhaustion and co-modulation when conjugated to APCs than to tumor cells. T cells that were expanded from clusters ex vivo exerted on average 9-fold increased killing activity towards autologous melanomas, which was accompanied by enhanced cytokine production. Upon adoptive cell transfer into mice, T cells from clusters showed improved patient-derived melanoma control, which was associated with increased T cell infiltration and activation. Together, these results demonstrate that tumor-reactive CD8+ T cells are enriched in functional clusters with tumor cells and/or APCs and that they can be isolated and expanded from clinical samples. Typically excluded by single cell gating in flow cytometry, these distinct heterotypic T cell clusters serve as a valuable source to decipher functional tumor-immune cell interactions, while they may also be therapeutically explored.

  Study EGAS50000000785

• How to use EGA Webin?

  EGA Webin EGA Webin serves as a platform for registering metadata for array based submissions, large scale sequence submission as well as for legacy EGA submission accounts (ega-box-XXXX). For large scale submitters of sequence data you have also the option to submit metadata via XMLS programmatic submission, while new submitters are advised to utilise the Submitter Portal for their submissions. You can request a legacy EGA submission account (ega-box-XXXX) by populating this form. Please, allow two business days for our Helpdesk team to contact you after populating this form. WEBIN actions: Register metadata for a sequence submission Register study, samples, experiments, runs, DAC, policy and dataset/s after file upload. Register components for your array-based metadata submission Register study, samples, DAC or policy before uploading files. Edit existing submission metadata Change or update previously submitted metadata. Register metadata for a sequence submission Ensure that all sequence files have been encrypted before uploading them to your submission account using the EgaCryptor. Go to the EGA Webin and log in using your submission account name (ega-box-XXX) and password. Register components of your metadata submission Study Samples Data Access Committee (DAC) Data access policy Dataset For array-base submissions: Study, Samples, Data Access Committee (DAC) and Data access policy may all be registered BEFORE file upload and dataset registration through the array-base template. Register your Study Go to the “Studies (Projects)” box Click on “Register Study” and fill in the information related to your study. Click on “Submit”, this will save the information and generate an EGA study ID. To use the study accession number in a publication, the study has to be previously released on the EGA website, we suggest the following format: "Sequence data has been deposited at the European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA), which is hosted by the EBI and the CRG, under accession number EGASXXXXXXXXXXX.Further information about EGA can be found on https://ega-archive.org and “The European Genome-phenome Archive in 202 "(10.1093/nar/gkab1059)" Register your Samples Go to the “Samples” box Click on “Register Samples” Select “Download spreadsheet to register samples” and customise your template, there is a default EGA template (EGA default checklist) but more attributes can be added if required. For the EGA default checklist, there are mandatory,recommended and optional attributes. As well custom fields which can be added if required. Mandatory attributes Field Name Description tax_id Taxonomy ID of the organism as in the NCBI Taxonomy database. Entries in the NCBI Taxonomy database have integer taxon IDs. See our tips for sample taxonomy here scientific_name Scientific name of the organism as in the NCBI Taxonomy database. Scientific names typically follow the binomial nomenclature. For example, the scientific name for humans is Homo sapiens. sample_alias Unique name of the sample. If not selected system will auto generate an unique alias sample_title Title of the sample sample_description Description of the sample phenotype *** Where possible, please use the Experimental Factor Ontology (EFO) to describe your phenotypes. Recommended attributes Field Name Description subject_id Identifier for the subject where the sample has been derived from gender * Sex Optional attributes Field Name Description sex sex of the organism from which the sample was obtained disease_site Affected organ sample type Affected organ donor_id ** Identifier of the donor where the sample has been derived from *Gender should be described as 'male', 'female' or 'unknown'. If 'unknown' due to a known sex chromosome aneuploidy, please create a user defined attribute called 'Sex chromosome karyotype' and add the appropriate value, for example, 'XXY'. **Donor id (Subject id) should be a de-identified subject handle. If unknown, please add 'unknown' to the field. ***Phenotypes should, where possible, be an Experimental Factor Ontology accession. If a term cannot be found to describe your phenotype please use free text. All sample phenotypes considered important for further analysis of the data should be provided (for example, tumour type), additional phenotype attributes can be created by defining your own attributes; use the notion 'phenotype2', 'phenotype3', etc. After you have customised the fields for the sample submission, download the template and fill in the information. Example of the sample template: Finally upload the sample template to get the EGA accession IDs for the samples. Register your Data Access Committee (DAC) Further information on the role of your DAC Go to the “Data Access” box Click on “Register Dacs” Input the information about the DAC and register at least one main DAC contact. Register your Data Access Policy Your Data Access Policy provides the terms and conditions of data use, this is also referred to as the Data Access Agreement (DAA). Completion of a DAA by the applicant/s should form part of the application process to the Data Access Committee (DAC). Go to the “Data Access” box Click on “Register Policies” Select the DAC to which this policy will be linked to and fill in the policy information. Submitting your Runs and Analyses This section is only for sequence data submission, for array-based submission it can be skipped. Please refer to our Submitting array based metadata Runs Registration Go to the “Raw Reads (Experiments and Runs)” box Click on “Submit Reads” Select “Download spreadsheet template for Read submission” Select the template corresponding to your submission type For the templates you have the option to customise the optional fields. To check their description click on “Show Description “ Download the template and fill in the required information. Example of the runs template: We recommend that Fastq, BAM, and CRAM read files are submitted using Webin-CLI When using this interface instead of Webin-CLI, raw sequences must be uploaded in one of the supported data formats before they can be submitted. The files can be uploaded using FTP or Aspera. The study and the sequenced samples must be pre-registered before the raw reads are submitted. Please note that each individual study and sample should be registered only once. You will be asked to provide information about the sequencing libraries and instruments. Submitting your Dataset This section is only for sequence data submissions, for array based submissions it can be skipped. Please refer to our Submitting array based metadata The dataset describes the data files, defined by the run (EGARXXXXXXXXXXX) and analysis (EGAZXXXXXXXXXXX) accessions that make up the dataset and links the collection of data files to a specified Data Access Committee and Data Access Policy. As a result, you must have registered your Reads and experiments, Data Access Committee (DAC) and Data access policy before submitting your Dataset. 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. Please contact EGA Helpdesk for further assistance. Go to the “Data Access” box Click on “Register Dataset” Select the Data Access Committee (DAC) and Data access policy Register your dataset After submitting your dataset you should contact the EGA Helpdesk to provide a release date for your dataset. Datasets are automatically held (i.e. not released) unless they are affiliated to a study that has already been released. Edit/update existing submission metadata Go to the “Report” section of the object you would like to edit. Locate the object and click on the arrow under action. An option menu will be displayed. Objects can be edited through their XML or with the WEBIN menu. After an object has been edited, changes would be available on the website until the submission is released again. Please contact the EGA Helpdesk if you require further assistance.

  Documentation submission/metadata/submission/EGA_webin

• Genomic characterization of retinoblastoma (targeted sequencing)

  Retinoblastoma is the most frequent intraocular malignancy in children, originating from a maturing cone precursor in the developing retina. Little is known on the molecular basis underlying the biological and clinical behavior of this cancer. Here, using multi-omics data, we demonstrate the existence of two retinoblastoma subtypes. Subtype 1, of earlier onset, includes most of the heritable forms. It harbors few genetic alterations other than the initiating RB1 inactivation and corresponds to differentiated tumors expressing mature cone markers. By contrast, subtype 2 tumors harbor frequent recurrent genetic alterations including MYCN-amplification. They express markers of less differentiated cone together with neuronal/ganglion cell markers with marked inter- and intra-tumor heterogeneity. The cone dedifferentiation in subtype 2 is associated with stemness features including low immune and interferon response, E2F and MYC/MYCN activation and a higher propensity for metastasis. The recognition of these two subtypes, one maintaining a cone-differentiated state, and the other, more aggressive, associated with cone dedifferentiation and expression of neuronal markers, opens up important biological and clinical perspectives for retinoblastomas. In this study, we performed targeted sequencing of the exonic regions of RB1, BCOR and ARID1A on 37 samples from the series of 102 retinoblastomas. Among them, 23 samples were not subjected to whole-exome sequencing, and 14 samples have the whole-exome sequencing data (deposited in EGAS00001005248).

  Study EGAS00001005550

• Single cell RNAseq data of human neurons, Bouwen et al Nat Comm 2025

  Brain tumor patients often suffer from epilepsy, but the underlying neuronal changes leading to this neurological symptom are not well understood. This study examined the transcriptomic profiles of human cortical neurons collected from brain tumor patients with or without seizures. The goals of the study were to identify the molecular identities of the recorded neurons and confirm that they are layer 2/3 pyramidal neurons rather than neuron-like tumor cells; and to compare the differential gene expression profiles between patients with and without epilepsy. For each patient, cortical neurons were rapidly isolated from surgically resected tissue and prepared using the Smart-seq2 protocol. Samples from 12 patients were sequenced on an Illumina HiSeq 2500 platform to generate their transcriptomic profiles.

  Study EGAS50000001369

• Thirty cutaneous SCC WES tumour samples with matched normal

  Thirty cutaneous SCC WES tumour samples with matched normal include 20 samples from South et al. JID and 10 new samples. These 30 samples has been used to support the findings in the TGFb Nature Communications paper (DOI: 10.1038/ncomms12493). They are also a part of the ongoing study of cSCC genomic landscape of 40 cSCC samples in total.

  Dataset EGAD00001002253

• A Clinical Trial of Pembrolizumab in Patients with Hepatitis B Virus-related Hepatocellular Carcinoma, with Parallel Study on Baseline and Serial Change in the Immune Environment

  This is a single-arm Phase II trial of pembrolizumab in patients with hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma with parallel study on baseline and serial change in the immune environment. Subjects should have a confirmed diagnosis of HCC (in accordance with the AASLD guideline) and confirmed chronic infection with hepatitis B virus as defined by positivity for HBsAg. Antiviral therapy for HBV must be given for at least 12 weeks and HBV viral load must be less than 100 IU/mL prior to first dose of study drug. They must have disease not amenable to a curative treatment approach or loco-ablation. Subject must be fit and agreeable with baseline and post-treatment biopsy of tumor. Subjects must have at least one measurable lesion per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score of 0 or 1 and adequate organ functions. 30 subjects will be enrolled to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg IV every 3 weeks(Q3W). Pre-treatment and on-treatment biopsy after 2 cycles of Pembrolizumab will be preformed. Treatment will be stopped when progression of disease or intolerable toxicity occurs. The primary objectives of this trial are to study the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab in patients with HBV-related HCC and to study the serial change in RNA expression of immune-related gene panel in post-treatment biopsy tissue. The secondary objectives of this trial are to study the serial change in cytokine profile between pre-treatment and post-treatment samples, to study the PD-L1 immunohistochemical (IHC) expression in tumor sample at baseline and post-treatment tissue samples and to study the presence of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes in the baseline and post-treatment tumor samples. The exploratory objective of this trial is to evaluate the possibility of using baseline and the serial change in RNA expression of immune-related gene panel or PD-L1/2 IHC to predict treatment response.

  Dataset EGAD50000001872

• Public Access Defibrillation Community Trial (PAD)(PAD-BioLINCC)

  Data Access NOTE: Please refer to the “Authorized Access” section below for information about how access to the data from this accession differs from many other dbGaP accessions. Objectives The Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) Community Trial sought to evaluate broad implementation of Public Access Defibrillators (PAD) in urban community units. Survival to hospital discharge of participants with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest was the main outcome measure. Survival was compared in community units (e.g., apartment or office buildings, gated communities, sports venues, senior centers, shopping malls) served by non-medical responders trained in CPR and use of automated external defibrillators (AEDs), to units receiving the traditional optimum community standard of care (i.e., rescuers trained to recognize a cardiac emergency, call 911, and initiate CPR). Background Sudden out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OOH-CA) remains a significant cause of death, in spite of recent declines in overall mortality from cardiovascular disease. Existing methods of emergency resuscitation are inadequate due to time delays inherent in transporting trained responders with defibrillation capabilities to the side of the OOH-CA victim. Existing Emergency Medical Services (EMS) systems typically combine paramedic Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) services with some level of community involvement, such as bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training. Some communities include automated external defibrillators (AEDs) at isolated sites or in mobile police or fire vehicles. Such an approach typically varies in effectiveness, with an incremental improvement in effectiveness seen in communities that organize and integrate services with the existing EMS system. However, optimal improvement in survival from sudden OOH-CA may require a program that utilizes volunteer non-medical responders (who may not have a traditional duty to respond to an emergency) trained to use AEDs. Participants The PAD trial was a prospective, randomized community based trial. More than 19,000 volunteer responders from 993 community units in 24 North American regions participated. The two study arms had similar unit and volunteer characteristics. Participants with treated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in the two groups were similar in age (mean: 69.8 years), proportion of men (67 perecnt), rate of cardiac arrest in a public location (70 percent), and rate of witnessed cardiac arrest (72 percent). Conclusions Community units with volunteers trained in CPR and AEDs had significantly more participants surviving to hospital discharge than units with volunteers trained to use CPR only. There were 30 survivors among 128 definite cardiac arrests in the CPR+AED units and 15 survivors among 107 definite cardiac arrests in the CPR only units (p = 0.03). Serious adverse effects were rarely reported. No volunteers received inadvertent shocks, and no participants were shocked unnecessarily. AED maintenance problems were infrequent. A few participating volunteers reported severe stress related to responding to emergency situations. Although residential complexes represented 16% of the units and 29% of the treatable cardiac arrests, only 5% of the survivors were from residential complexes. Such information should be helpful for individual facilities that are considering implementing PAD programs. (NEJM 2004; 351:637-46).

  Study phs003858

• Parallel Genomic Alterations of Antigen and Payload Targets Mediate Polyclonal Acquired Clinical Resistance to the Antibody Drug Conjugate Sacituzumab Govitecan

  Sacituzumab Govitecan (SG), a novel antibody drug conjugate (ADC) incorporating the anti-TROP2 antibody hRS7 conjugated to a topoisomerase-1 inhibitor (SN-38) payload, is the first ADC to be approved for advanced triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). However, mechanisms governing therapeutic resistance to SG are not known. We sought to identify mechanisms of de novo and acquired resistance to SG through unbiased whole-exome sequencing (WES) and RNA sequencing analysis of pre-treatment and multi-site post-progression (autopsy) tumor specimens. We examined three metastatic TNBC cases exhibiting (1) de novo progression, (2) stable disease, and (3) a deep response followed by progression, then mapped the temporal and spatial genomic evolution of acquired resistance in the responding patient. We then conducted additional pre-clinical experiments to validate the observed resistance mechanisms. TROP2 RNA and gene copy number were associated with de novo resistance, as case (1) was found to have absent TROP2 expression in all specimens, case (2) expressed TROP2, while case (3) exhibited both expression and focal genomic amplification of the TACSTD2/TROP2 locus. The genomic phylogeny tree inferred from case (3) post-progression specimens revealed one branch harboring an acquired canonical E418K resistance mutation in TOP1 (encoding topoisomerase 1) and a subsequent sub-clonal TOP1 inactivating frameshift mutation, while a distinct branch exhibited acquisition of a novel T256R missense mutation in TACSTD2 (encoding TROP2). Both the TOP1- and TACSTD2-mutant clones seeded multiple distinct metastatic sites. Through reconstitution experiments in TROP2 negative cells we found that TROP2 T256R is a stable protein with defective cell membrane localization and reduced cell surface binding by RS7 compared to wild-type TROP2. Collectively, these findings underscore TROP2 as a determinant of initial response to SG, and they reveal parallel and mutually exclusive polyclonal molecular mechanisms of acquired resistance involving the direct antibody target and drug payload target in distinct metastatic subclones of a single patient. While further research is needed to extend these novel findings, this study highlights the specificity of SG and illustrates how identifying such mechanisms will inform rational therapeutic strategies to overcome ADC resistance.  

  Study phs002555

• Molecular defects in pseudohypoparathyroidism or related disorders

  Maintaining calcium levels within a narrow normal range is of critical importance for numerous different cellular functions. One of the most important regulators of blood calcium levels is parathyroid hormone (PTH), which mediates its actions through the PTH/PTHrP receptor, a Gαs-coupled receptor. Few inherited disorders are characterized by diminished blood calcium levels and elevated blood phosphate levels; some of these disorders are caused by too little PTH synthesis and/or secretion (hypoparathyroidism, HP), while others are caused by resistance towards PTH (pseudohypoparathyroidism, PHP). Only few of the inherited forms of HP (<10%) have been defined at the molecular level. In contrast, genetic mutations have been identified for several inherited forms of PHP. For example, PHP type Ia (PHP-Ia) is caused by maternally inherited mutations in those GNAS exons that encode Gαs, while autosomal dominant PHP type Ib (AD-PHP-Ib) is caused by maternal inherited deletions within or up-stream of GNAS, which are associated with abnormal GNAS methylation. However, a large number of patients with PTH-resistance and thus hypocalcemia show GNAS methylation changes, but their underlying genetic defects have not yet been defined at the DNA level. These "sporadic" patients may be affected by an autosomal recessive form of PHP-Ib (AR-PHP-Ib), which is most likely not linked to the GNAS locus. In our studies, we propose to search through exome sequence analyses for novel genetic mutations responsible for novel autosomal dominant forms of HP that are not caused by mutations in the known disease-causing genes; some of these families are large enough to perform genetic linkage studies. We furthermore propose to search for the genetic mutation(s) responsible for the autosomal recessive variant of PHP-Ib through the analysis of whole exome sequences; for these studies we focus particularly on patients, whose parents are likely to be consanguineous. The proposed efforts are expected to lead to the identification of novel genes that are involved in parathyroid development and function (HP) and genes that are involved in the establishment or maintenance of GNAS methylation (AR-PHP-Ib).

  Study phs000476

• Neural Systems, Inhibitory Control, and Methamphetamine Dependence

  The Neural Systems, Inhibitory Control, and Methamphetamine Dependence study started in 2011 and is currently finishing data collection for its last participants. The study included methamphetamine abusing individuals and healthy control participants aged 18-55 years. Participants who qualified over the telephone were scheduled to visit the London Laboratory at the UCLA Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior for the In-Person Screening Phase. The screening procedures, usually scheduled over two visits, determined if participants were eligible to complete the subsequent study visits. Both groups completed identical screening procedures, with the exception of more in-depth drug use questions for the methamphetamine users. After providing written consent, participants completed questionnaires about their mood, medical, psychiatric and drug use history, personality and life experiences. They also provided a urine sample to determine what drugs they recently used and a breath sample to determine the carbon monoxide levels in their system. The drug screen tested for recent methamphetamine, cocaine, opiates/opioids, benzodiazepines, THC and other amphetamines. Methamphetamine participants needed to test positive for methamphetamine at admission. If methamphetamine participants tested positive for any drugs other than methamphetamine or marijuana, and if healthy control participants tested positive for any drugs other than marijuana, they were excluded from the study. Additionally, the urine samples of female participants were tested for pregnancy; pregnant females were also excluded. If no exclusionary criteria were met during the first screening visit, participants completed a second screening visit to ensure they were mentally and physically healthy enough to participate. The second screening visit included a psychiatric diagnostic interview (DSM-IV (SCID-I) for first 500 participants and the MINI International Neuropsychiatric Interview M.I.N.I for the last 50 participants). Additionally, laboratory tests and procedures were completed by the UCLA General Clinical Research Center and interpreted by a study physician. Laboratory tests included vital signs (heart rate--BPM, blood pressure, and respirations), an electrocardiogram (ECG) to record the electrical activity of the heart, and an 18-cc blood sample to perform laboratory tests which included a complete chemistry and metabolic panel, hepatic panel, Hepatitis-C tests, and HIV test. The laboratory tests from this blood sample ensured that participants' liver and kidneys were functioning normally, and that their standard blood counts (red cell, white cell, and salts) were also normal. If a Hepatitis-C (HCV) or HIV test was positive, participants were not allowed to continue in the study and their results were reported to the California State Health Department. Participants deemed eligible to continue in the methamphetamine group participated on an outpatient basis or were admitted to the UCLA Medical Center to participate on an inpatient basis for up to 10 days. Typically, detectable levels of methamphetamine in urinalysis remain for 2-3 days, therefore inpatient days 0-3 served as a "washout period" and the methamphetamine abusing inpatient participants provided daily urine samples to test for recent drug use and pregnancy (female participants only). Outpatient participants were also required to remain abstinent from all drugs except nicotine and marijuana for at least 4 days prior to study sessions. Self-reported abstinence for outpatients was verified by urine toxicology and saliva screening at every visit to UCLA before completion of study procedures. Neurocognitive assessments, about three hours each, typically took place on two separate days. The purpose of the neurocognitive sessions were to assess participants' intellectual and neurocognitive functioning. On either the same day as the neurocognitive testing or on separate days, both methamphetamine abusers and healthy controls were administered a structural MRI to collect information on brain structure.

  Study phs001197

• A biobank of patient-derived pediatric brain tumor models

  Brain tumors are the leading cause of cancer-related death in children. Genomic studies have provided insights into molecular subgroups and oncogenic drivers of pediatric brain tumors that may lead to novel therapeutic strategies. To evaluate new treatments, better preclinical models adequately reflecting the biological heterogeneity are needed. Through the Children’s Oncology Group ACNS02B3 study, we have generated and comprehensively characterized 30 patient-derived orthotopic xenograft models and 7 cell lines representing 14 molecular subgroups of pediatric brain tumors. Patient-derived orthotopic xenograft models were found to be representative of the human tumors they were derived from in terms of histology, immunohistochemistry, gene expression, DNA methylation, copy number, and mutational profiles. In vivo drug sensitivity of targeted therapeutics was associated with distinct molecular tumor subgroups and specific genetic alterations. These models and their molecular characterization provide an unprecedented resource for the cancer community to study key oncogenic drivers and to evaluate novel treatment strategies.

  Study EGAS00001002536

• HipSci - Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells Initiative

  Human induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells can be generated from adult tissues and differentiated into a range of specific cell types (Yamanaka and Blau, 2010). They therefore provide unprecedented opportunities for investigating disease mechanisms and understanding the phenotypic consequences of genetic variation within the normal population. HipSci brings together diverse constitutents in genomics, proteomics, cell biology and clinical genetics to create a UK national iPS cell resource and use it to carry out cellular genetic studies. Between 2013 and 2016 we aim to generate iPS cells from over 500 healthy individuals and 500 individuals with genetic disease. We will then use these cells to discover how genomic variation impacts on cellular phenotype and identify new disease mechanisms. Strong links with NHS investigators will ensure that studies on the disease-associated cell lines will be linked to extensive clinical information. Further key features of the project are an open access model of data sharing; engagement of the wider clinical genetics community in selecting patient samples; and provision of dedicated laboratory space for collaborative cell phenotyping and differentiation.

  Study EGAS00001001465

• Renal Cell Carcinoma Tumors From S-TRAC trial (NCT00375674) Whole Transcriptome Sequencing

  We report a comprehensive genomic and transcriptomic analysis of tumor samples from 171 patients at high risk for recurrent renal cell carcinoma post nephrectomy from the S-TRAC trial (NCT00375674). We identify gene expression signatures, including STRAC11 (derived from the sunitinib-treated population). The overlap in key elements captured in these gene expression signatures, which include genes representative of the tumor stroma microenvironment, regulatory T cell, and myeloid cells, suggests they are likely to be both prognostic and predictive of the anti-angiogenic effect in the adjuvant setting. These signatures also point to the identification of potential therapeutic targets for development in adjuvant renal cell carcinoma, such as MERTK and TDO2. Finally, our findings suggest that while anti-angiogenic adjuvant therapy might be important, it may not be sufficient to prevent recurrence and other factors such as immune response and that tumor environment may be of greater importance.

  Study EGAS00001006528

• Renal Cell Carcinoma Tumors From S-TRAC trial (NCT00375674) Exome Sequencing

  We report a comprehensive genomic and transcriptomic analysis of tumor samples from 171 patients at high risk for recurrent renal cell carcinoma post nephrectomy from the S-TRAC trial (NCT00375674). We identify gene expression signatures, including STRAC11 (derived from the sunitinib-treated population). The overlap in key elements captured in these gene expression signatures, which include genes representative of the tumor stroma microenvironment, regulatory T cell, and myeloid cells, suggests they are likely to be both prognostic and predictive of the anti-angiogenic effect in the adjuvant setting. These signatures also point to the identification of potential therapeutic targets for development in adjuvant renal cell carcinoma, such as MERTK and TDO2. Finally, our findings suggest that while anti-angiogenic adjuvant therapy might be important, it may not be sufficient to prevent recurrence and other factors such as immune response and that tumor environment may be of greater importance.

  Study EGAS00001006529

• Genetic Analysis of Skin Cells

  Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is a form of skin cancer originating from keratinocytes in the skin. They have high mutation burdens, primarily driven by UV-radiation-induced DNA damage. The order in which mutations undergo selection during the evolution of cSCC is not known. A subset of cSCCs grow out of benign neoplasms called actinic keratoses. To better understand the evolution of cSCC, we identified cases of cSCCs adjacent to actinic keratoses. From these cases, we separately microdissected the surrounding normal skin, the actinic keratosis, and the cSCC, and we performed targeted DNA-sequencing on the tissue from each area. We reconstructed tumor phylogenies and performed spatial transcriptomics on the 10X FFPE Visium platform on a subset of cases. Collectively, these studies revealed the mutational and gene expression changes that arise during the evolution of cSCC.

  Study phs003282

• High-coverage whole-genome sequencing reveals structural variations in triple-negative breast cancer

  Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) cells do not express estrogen receptors, progesterone receptors or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). Currently, apart from poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, there are few effective therapeutic options for this cancer type. Here, we present a comprehensive characterization of genetic alterations in TNBC via high-coverage whole-genome sequencing along with transcriptomic and whole-exome sequencing. Silencing of BRCA1 gene impaired the homologous recombination (HR) pathway in a subset of TNBC, which exhibited similar phenotypes with tumors with BRCA1 mutations; they harbored many structural variations (SVs) with relative enrichment for tandem duplication. Clonal analysis suggested that TP53 mutations and methylation of CpG dinucleotides in the BRCA1 promoter were the early events of carcinogenesis. SVs were associated with driver oncogenic events such as amplification of MYC, NOTCH2 or NOTCH3 and impacted tumor suppressor genes including RB1, PTEN and KMT2C. We also identified a variety of oncogenes that could transform 3T3 mouse fibroblast cells, suggesting that individual TNBC tumors may undergo a unique driver event that can be targetable. Thus, we revealed several features of TNBC that had important clinical implications.

  Study JGAS000095

• Characterization of a human iPSC-derived islet differentiation model

  To explore the contribution of islet development to T2D pathogenesis, we characterised the transcriptomes of 3 human iPSC lines (from independent donors) differentiated along the islet development lineage. Whole transcriptome RNA-seq was performed at 7 developmental stages: definitive endoderm, primitive gut tube, posterior foregut (PF), pancreatic endoderm, endocrine progenitors, endocrine-like cells, and beta-like cells (BLC). Differentially-expressed (ΔExp) genes were assigned to the stage in which they were most upregulated (versus baseline iPSC profile), and used to assess the enrichment of T2D GWAS genes, as well as to predict the upstream transcription factors at each developmental stage.We found 9409 ΔExp genes across all stages, including known markers of islet development (NEUROG3, INS). Genes ΔExp in the most-differentiated (BLC) stage were significantly enriched for genes within the 99% credible sets of T2D GWAS loci. Despite this enrichment in BLC only, over 70% of genes mapping within the credible sets were ΔExp before this stage, highlighting the relevance of key T2D GWAS genes in islet development: e.g. expression of TCF7L2 peaked during the PF stage (log2FC=1.2; q=8.5×10-10). REST and LMNA are also highlighted by the analyses as having a potential function in islet development, considering their pattern of expression and those of the genes they regulate. Transcriptomic signatures derived from this iPSC differentiation model highlight T2D-associated GWAS loci, monogenic diabetes genes and potential master regulators of gene networks with plausible function in islet development. All these provide clues for developmental mechanisms contributing to T2D diabetes pathology.

  Study EGAS00001002721

• Genotype calls (vcf files)

  Genotype calls for 83 Aboriginal Australian genomes split by chromosomes. In short, genotypes were called individually with samtools. They were subsequently filtered with thresholds related to sequencing depth, location of variants, sequencing error, and strand bias. Once combined, the genotypes were filtered when not in Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. The genomes were phased with IMPUTE using the 1000 Genomes reference panel. NB: for the Y chromosomes​, only the 44 Aboriginal Australian males are included.

  Dataset EGAD00001004155

• 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

• Gabriella Miller Kids First Pediatric Research Program in Pediatric T-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia

  The outcome for patients with relapsed T-ALL is dismal with 3-year event free survival of AALL0434 was a Children's Oncology Group-initiated phase 3 randomized clinical trial comparing Capizzi-style escalating methotrexate plus pegaspargase (CMTX) vs. high dose methotrexate (HDMTX), with/without six 5-day courses of nelarabine. Survival on this study was superior to any prior trial for de novo T-ALL, changing the standard of care. Yet, a substantial minority (~15%) of patients had relapsed or refractory (r/r) disease. Through the TARGET initiative, RNA sequencing (RNA-Seq), DNA copy number analysis, and whole-exome sequencing (WES) were performed on 264 T-ALL patients treated on AALL0434, demonstrating recurrent alterations could be grouped into 10 different potentially targetable functional pathways. This analysis was not powered to examine associations between genetic lesions with outcome, because too few patients with r/r disease were included. This project is dedicated to testing the hypothesis that comprehensive genomic profiling of the entire AALL0434 cohort will identify recurrent genetic alterations that can be segregated into biologically relevant deregulated pathways that can be combined with MRD to identify patients at risk for poor outcomes before they relapse and provide rationale for treatment with alternative therapies. In addition, a number of small recent studies demonstrated that many of the biologically relevant alterations in T-ALL occur in non-coding regions of the genome, but no large studies have performed whole genome sequencing (WGS) in T-ALL. This project also tests the hypothesis that WGS of a large cohort of patients with T-ALL will identify novel lesions in coding and non-coding regions that will be highly impactful in the understanding of T-ALL pathogenesis.These hypotheses are tested by performing comprehensive genomic profiling (WGS, WES, RNA-Seq, and copy number analysis) of the entire AALL0434 cohort with available samples with the following specific aims: (1) identify recurrent genetic alterations that predict poor outcome in T-ALL; (2) identify novel alterations, including non-coding alterations in T-ALL; and (3) identify germline genetic variants that predispose to T-ALL and to increased toxicity to chemotherapy.

  Study phs002276

• Unrelated Donor Reduced Intensity Bone Marrow Transplant for Children with Severe Sickle Cell Disease (BMT CTN-0601-BioLINCC)

  ObjectivesThe primary objective is to determine event-free survival (EFS) at 1 year after unrelated donor (URD) hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT) using bone marrow (BM) in patients with sickle cell disease (SCD).BackgroundSickle cell disease (SCD), also known as sickle cell anemia, is an inherited blood disease that can cause organ damage, stroke, and intense pain episodes. Children with sickle cell disease experience organ damage, impaired quality of life, and premature mortality. A blood stem cell transplant is a treatment option for someone with a severe form of the disease. Prior to undergoing a transplant, people typically receive a conditioning regimen of high doses of chemotherapy and other medications to prepare the body to accept the transplant. This type of conditioning regimen is known as a myeloablative conditioning regimen, but it can result in toxicities and sterility. A conditioning regimen that uses lower doses of chemotherapy and medications may be safer for transplant recipients. This type of regimen is known as reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) regimen. RIC has a more favorable toxicity profile but is associated with higher rates of graft rejection (GR), especially with graft sources such as umbilical cord blood This study evaluated the safety and effectiveness of blood stem cell transplants, using bone marrow from unrelated donors, in children with severe SCD who receive a RIC regimen prior to the transplant.SubjectsPatients 3.0-19.75 years old with symptomatic SCD AND one or more of the following complications: (1)-(i) a clinically significant neurologic event (stroke) or any neurologic defect lasting > 24 hours and accompanied by an infarct on cerebral magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); OR, (ii) patients who have a Transcranial Doppler (TCD) velocity that exceeds 200 cm/sec by the non-imaging technique (or TCD measurement of >185 cm/sec by the imaging technique) measured at a minimum of 2 separate occasions one month or more apart; OR, (2) Minimum of two episodes of acute chest syndrome within the preceding 2-year period defined as new pulmonary alveolar consolidation involving at least one complete lung segment (associated with acute symptoms including fever, chest pain, tachypnea, wheezing, rales, or cough that is not attributed to asthma or bronchiolitis) despite adequate supportive care measures; OR, (3) History of 3 or more severe pain events (defined as new onset of pain that lasts for at least 2 hours for which there is no other explanation) per year in the 2 years prior to enrollment despite adequate supportive care measures (if patients are receiving hydroxyurea and compliant with therapy, being symptomatic is an indication for transplantation; however, if patients decline hydroxyurea or non-compliant with this therapy, they would still remain eligible for study if pain criteria as described above are met). Lansky/Karnofsky performance score must be &#8805; 40. Hemoglobin S must be &#8804; 45%. Patients must have an unrelated adult bone marrow donor who is HLA-matched at 8 of 8 HLA-A, -B, -C and -DRB1 at high resolution using DNA-based typing. Patients with bridging fibrosis or cirrhosis of the liver, with uncontrolled bacterial, viral, or fungal infection in the past month, or seropositivity for HIV are excluded. Patients with HLA-matched family donors, or who have received prior HCT, and females who are pregnant or breast feeding are excluded. Thirty patients were enrolled on this study and of these, 29 patients met the criteria and proceeded to the study transplant.DesignParticipants attended a study visit prior to the transplant to undergo a blood collection, neurocognitive testing to measure learning and brain function, magnetic resonance angiogram (MRA) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans. Questionnaires to assess quality of life were also completed. All patients received erythrocyte transfusions before transplant. Twenty-two days (-22) before the transplant, participants began receiving a reduced intensity conditioning regimen of chemotherapy and medications. On days -21, -20, and -19 participants weighing 10 kg or more received 10 mg, 15 mg, and then 20 mg of Alemtuzumab intravenously (IV) followed by 30 mg/m2/day IV on days -8 through -4 of Fludarabine. Eight days (-8) before the transplant, participants were admitted to the hospital to continue the conditioning regimen which included 140 mg/m2 IV of Melphalan on day -3. Participants received the bone marrow transplant on day 0. Prophylaxis for GVHD consisted of a calcineurin inhibitor (tacrolimus or cyclosporine) administered from day -3 through day 100 after graft infusion, with subsequent taper through day 180; methotrexate 7.5 mg/m2 on days 1, 3, and 6; and methylprednisolone 1 mg/kg per day from days 7 through 28, with subsequent taper by 20% per week. One week after the transplant continuing until the WBC is normal, participants received granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). After leaving the hospital, participants attended study visits weekly during weeks 1 to 8, at day 60, weekly during weeks 9 to 14, at Day 100, at month 6, and at years 1 and 2. At all study visits, a blood collection, medical history review, and physical exam occurred. In addition, at day 100, month 6, and years 1 and 2, questionnaires to assess quality of life were completed. At select visits the following procedures were conducted: lung function testing, heart function testing, MRA and MRI scans, and neurocognitive testing.The primary outcome was 1-year EFS. Death, disease recurrence or graft rejection by 1 year were considered events for this endpoint.ConclusionsThe trial met its prespecified 1-year EFS, and significantly improved HRQL was reported posttransplant. However, although the Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) provided successful engraftment in most patients, the regimen cannot be considered safe for widespread adoption without modification due to the regimen-related toxicity (RRT) and high rate of chronic GVHD, which was the predominant cause of mortality.

  Study phs003470

• Distinct portrayal of lesions in synchronous multifocal lung adenocarcinoma revealed by genome sequencing

  Distinguishing multiple primary lung cancers in the synchronous multifocal intrapulmonary lesions has important significance on clinical staging and therapeutic decision. To investigate genomic aberration profiles, we applied whole genome and whole exome sequencing, and microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization on 15 intrapulmonary tumors derived from six patients with synchronous multifocal lung cancers having similar histological diagnosis. Any pair of intrapulmonary tumors in a single patient, which shared the identical genetic background and environment, showed an extinctive heterogeneity between each other. Phylogenetic relationship analysis indicated an independently branched evolution among all the tumors, suggesting they were multiple primary lung cancers. EGFR or KRAS mutations were found in 7 or 3 out of the 15 tumors, from 3 or 2 patients, respectively. Somatic mutational heterogeneity of these two genes in a single patient was also observed. Our analysis indicates genomic aberration profiling is valuable for identification of multiple primary lung cancer, especially when high histopathological concordance was observed between lesions. We also suggest a thoroughly molecular diagnosis against therapeutic target genes should be taken for each accessible nodule before making a plan for adjuvant therapy.

  Study EGAS00001001572

• Kids First: Genomic Etiologies of CHARGE Syndrome, Related Conditions and Structural Anomalies

  Developmental disorders with structural birth defects account for the majority of morbidity and mortality in children's hospitals, and the genetic bases of many clinical phenotypes remain unknown. Genetic testing for individuals with structural malformations has uncovered the basis of many such birth defects; however, many more cases remain unsolved, posing challenges for diagnosis, treatment, and prevention. Multiple anomaly conditions are particularly challenging to diagnose, since they often present with unique combinations of clinical features that vary widely between affected individuals, even in the same family. CHARGE Syndrome (Coloboma of the eye, Heart Defects, Atresia of the choanae, Retardation of growth and development, Genital abnormalities including pubertal delay and infertility, Ear abnormalities with deafness and vestibular disorders) is a multiple anomaly condition that affects a wide variety of organ systems. CHARGE Syndrome is caused in most cases by monoallelic pathogenic variants in CHD7, the gene encoding ATP-dependent helicase chromodomain DNA binding protein 7. Both de novo and inherited variants in CHD7 have been reported in CHARGE, and a growing number of families present with individuals who test positive for a pathogenic CHD7 variant yet exhibit only mild features. Similarly, individuals with CHARGE Syndrome often exhibit broad variability and reduced penetrance of clinical features, consistent with pleiotropic roles for CHD7 during development and/or additional genetic contributors or modifying alleles. Recent work has also implicated RERE, KMT2D, EP300, and PUF60 in having a role in CHARGE Syndrome.We hypothesize that (1) some cases of CHARGE are due to other genetic etiologies including oligogenicity, and (2) genetic modifiers contribute to the broad clinical variability and reduced penetrance of CHARGE features. To address these hypotheses, we have generated a cohort of 223 deeply clinically phenotyped individuals with CHARGE Syndrome and related disorders and structural anomalies who tested negative by chromosomal microarray, single gene sequencing, next generation panel sequencing, or exome sequencing. These individuals exhibit clinical CHARGE-like features including structural birth defects affecting craniofacial, ocular, neurosensory, brain, heart, mediastinal, renal, genitourinary, and skeletal organs. Our cohort includes these 223 individuals as well as affected and unaffected family members who consented to clinical and research genetic testing and donated blood samples for DNA and RNA isolation and sequencing. Building on this valuable cohort, we propose to use exome and genome sequencing to identify novel genetic etiologies of CHARGE and related developmental disorders for which alternative genetic tests have been inconclusive. Identification of novel pathogenic genetic variants and contributing modifier alleles within the coding and non-coding portion of the genome of these individuals will improve genetic diagnosis and provide important insights toward understanding the developmental mechanisms of structural birth defects.

  Study phs002592

• GOSH_Childhood_Leukemia_Behjati_WellcomeCore_RNA

  Paediatric single-cell archival project This project is taking sequential samples of children with B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (B-ALL) treated at Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) between 2011 and the present day. Patients selected, are those that have done badly (e.g. had to escalate treatment, relapsed or died) despite having apparently ""good"" or ""intermediate"" risk cytogenetics, and often also had immunotherapy (e.g., the bi-specific T-cell engager blinatumomab) because of this. Using samples from key treatment-points, we hope to better characterise their disease and treatment response, to re-define understandings of risk for patients who did unexpectedly poorly. Additionally, we hope to define the disease/immunological factors that determine response to increasingly used immunotherapies within the field of paediatric B-ALL. Each of the samples will be viably frozen bone marrow-derived mononuclear cells. They will come in Eppendorf's, frozen and de-anonymised, from GOSH. We plan to primarily do single cell analysis (GEX, BCR +/-TCR), and then tumour-only WGS and bulk-RNA expression on left-over

  Study EGAS00001007616

• NHLBI TOPMed: The Vanderbilt Atrial Fibrillation Registry (VU_AF)

  The Vanderbilt Atrial Fibrillation (AF) Registry was founded in 2001. Patients with AF and family members are prospectively enrolled. At enrollment a detailed past medical history is obtained along with an AF symptom severity assessment. Blood samples are obtained for DNA extraction. Patients are followed longitudinally along with serial collection of AF symptom severity assessments.

  Study phs001032