17524 results for "fc 26 coins Buyfc26coins.com is EA Sports official for FC 26 coins They are definitely a top seller..rG5l"

in 18.25 milliseconds.

• Submission FAQ

  Submission FAQ Before Submission Is the EGA the right archive for my data? The most suitable archive for your data is dependent on the type of data you are wishing to submit and whether the data require public or controlled access. Public access is defined as complete and open access to all submitted data. On the contrary, controlled access, exerted by the EGA, requires formal applications to be made to access the submitted data files and metadata. EGA only accepts human-derived data subject to controlled access. If your submission contains other types of data, please choose the appropriate repository for it (see image below): ENA, EVA, ArrayExpress, BioSD and GWAS catalog.  Should your submission be subjected to controlled access? Data access conditions are normally defined in the original informed consent agreements signed by the participants involved in your study. All data submitted to the EGA is subject to controlled access. These consents prevent the derived data files, potentially identifiable, from being dispersed by open and public access. Controlled access data often refers to human data derived from medical research and consortium projects. If in doubt, consult the informed consent agreements that apply to your study The EGA enables you to hold a submission before publication. What data types can be submitted to the EGA? Data types accepted by the EGA can be split into three categories: Sequences: both in generic and platform-specific formats. Array-based: from raw signal files to processed matrices. Phenotypes: all possible phenotype formats are accepted. All manufacturer-specific raw data formats derived from major next generation sequencing platforms are accepted. Also generic sequence formats: flat reads in a FASTQ file, aligned sequences (BAM or CRAM files) as well as sequence variation files in VCF format. All array-based technologies are accepted, including raw data, intensity and analysis files, without any restriction on data formats accepted. We also accept and distribute phenotype data (associated to the samples) in almost any format: from an image to a README file. How long does a submission take? Submissions to EGA come in a variety of formats and sizes, thus it is difficult for us to exactly predict how long a submission will take. We, therefore, advise all of our submitters to allow as much time as possible to make a submission. Based on previous records, we anticipate that the submission process may take at least one month. The submitter’s familiarity with the procedures, possible technical issues that may arise during submission and the amount of data that is being submitted are the main factors that will affect the length of the submission process. However, each step of a regular submission should be considered when estimating the time it would take: Encryption of the files Upload of the files Metadata submission Archival of the files Release of the study and datasets to EGA webpage For example, the upload of the files depends on the submission size, while metadata submission mainly relies on each submitter’s expertise. Further, some steps (e.g. answering to inquiries) depend on the EGA Helpdesk team, which may take some days to be processed during busy times Is data deposited in the EGA secure? The EGA set-up consists of a secure computing facility for data processing, a shared EBI set-up for data submissions and distribution of data via data requests made through the EGA website. Data is also copied in the Barcelona Supercomputing Center (BSC) infrastructure, where all stored and distributed data is encrypted Data is encrypted along the submission process and stored securely, granting its access to authorised users exclusively. During the download process, through our Python Client or Aspera, all requested data is downloaded over secure https connections. All data at the EGA is encrypted, and only accessible (for log-in and download) through secure protocols. For further information please, visit our security overview. What documentation do I need to provide? All submissions require policy’s documentation: 'Data Access Agreement (DAA)', 'Data Processing Agreement (DPA)' and 'Authorized Submitters Formulary'. The data processors (EGA) and the data owners will also sign the DPA. Will all metadata be public? Among the submitted metadata we need to make the distinction between identifiable and unidentifiable metadata: (1) the former may allow the identification of the human the sample derived from (e.g. detailed geographical providence, personal name, family ancestry…); (2) while the latter can be used to interpret the data without compromising the anonymity of the patients. The majority of the metadata submitted to the EGA corresponds to the unidentifiable category (e.g. sequencer's model). This type of metadata is publicly available on the EGA website and other EBI resources/partners’ websites. On the other hand, some parts samples’ metadata are subject to being identifiable, and thus only accessible by authorized data requesters, with the exception of: 5 submitter-defined attributes of the sample: alias, title, subject_id, gender and phenotype. It is the submitter’s responsibility not to submit sensitive metadata in these public fields. 3 anonymised fields that pinpoint the sample record in archivals: sample’s EGA stable ID (EGAN…), BioSample ID (SAMEA…) and submitter’s center name. During Submission Are there any sample specific requirements for EGA? All samples submitted to the EGA must include the attributes of biological sex, subject ID (anonymised individual identifier) and phenotype information. These are critical for data findability and its analysis, and we highly recommend using controlled ontology terms where applicable. For example: defining tumour and non-tumour samples and/or defining disease state. The EGA recommends using the Experimental Factor Ontology Database to find ontologized terms that describe your sample phenotypes. How do I get an accession number to use in my publication? You will receive your study accession number (EGAS…) upon complete your submission, either: Programmatically. As soon as the metadata is submitted and validated your study will be assigned an accession number that will be given in the submission’s response. Manually registering your study and relevant metadata using the online metadata submission tool: the EGA submitter Portal. How are files uploaded to the EGA? Data files are uploaded into private submission drop boxes (i.e. environments to which you are granted access and where you can transfer your files) using INBOX or FTP. These spaces are provided as part of the submission procedure. Before uploading any file, you must encrypt your files, . Only encrypted files shall be uploaded to the drop boxes. Why does data need to to encrypted for my submitted files? It is one of the security steps the EGA has implemented. In case of a security breach, people without the proper encryption key will not be able to read or use the information that could have been leaked. This measure is essential when working with sensitive data, such as controlled access human data. All submitters must use crypt4gh to create EGA compliant files prior to uploading them. This encryption is GPG-based, using EGA’s public key. Why are my files not available if I see them in the INBOX? There exists a time window between the data upload and the availability of such files via the Submitter Portal. For this reason, some metadata (run and analysis objects) cannot be registered until at least 24 hours after the files have been uploaded to your box. Why are MD5 sum values generated for my submitted files? We require pre- and post- encryption MD5 (message-digest) checksum values to be provided for all submitted files. These 128-bit values are computed using the content of each file, creating unique sequences that allow us to ensure that file integrity has been maintained during the transfer process. In other words, if the MD5 checksums we generate and those you generated match, we infer that the content of the transferred files is correct (i.e. files are not corrupted or truncated). MD5 checksums are computed automatically using the crypt4gh tool provided. Your submission will not be accepted and may be significantly delayed if you do not provide MD5 checksum values for all data files in the required format. How can I check if my files are correctly uploaded to the inbox? It is important to check the status pf your file so you know whether your files are in the inbox, being processed, or if there is any issue with one of them. In order to check this, you should: Look for the file locally. Drag and drop it to the file table. Then bars will appear on the table, which means that we are processing it. Green: The files checksum are correct and your file will move to “ingested files”. No further actions are needed from your end.. Red: The files checksum does not match and your file needs to be re-uploaded. Please re-upload relevant files to your inbox using the same path. How can I add my dataset to the cBioPortal instance? In order to link your data to the cBioPortal, you must register it as a normal dataset in the Submitter Portal. For more information, please refer to the cBioPortal documentation. After Submission How do I use my accession number in my publication? We suggest the use of the below template, using your study accession ID (EGAS…) : 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 at https://ega-archive.org and "The European Genome-phenome Archive of human data consented for biomedical research" Your study ID will be the one that groups your whole submission, and thus its usage is recommended as such. Nevertheless, all metadata submitted to EGA hold a unique and persistent identifier (starting with EGA…) that can be used to identify specific records. For example, you could reference a specific dataset (EGAD…) or sample (EGAN…) in your publications (see full list of identifiers). How do I make my data searchable? Once you have finalized your submission, you can schedule the data release. Please take into account that the release process needs time for the files to be archived in our system, and for the Helpdesk team to validate your submission. Can I withdraw (meta)data from the EGA? We have methods in place for the secure removal of deposited (meta)data. Contact EGA-helpdesk for further details. EGA complies with FAIRness of (meta)data, and thus, even when the data is removed we keep an entry for their identifiers in our system. In other words, we execute a soft delete on canceled objects (e.g. a study): metadata is still stored in our systems, but it loses all links, cannot be queried and data files cannot be retrieved anymore. The reason behind this behaviour is so that queries using withdrawn data properly respond back (see example of a canceled study). What happens to the data once it has been submitted to the EGA? When the data is submitted, the submitter can choose either keep their data private or schedule the release of their data.

  Documentation submission/metadata/submission/FAQ

• The European Bank for Induced Pluripotent stem cells (EBiSC) is designed to address the increasing demand by iPSC researchers for quality-controlled, disease-relevant research grade iPSC lines, data and cell services.In this study Whole Genome Sequencing was performed on a selection of lines from the project.

  Induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells have the potential to significantly advance drug development and health research, yet collections of stem cells are scattered across the world, their quality cannot always be guaranteed, and accessing them is often difficult. The goal of EBiSC is to establish a European iPS cell bank that will be the ‘go-to’ resource for the characterisation, storage and distribution of high quality iPS cells. Ultimately, EBiSC will become an independent organisation, distributing high quality iPS cells on a not-for-profit basis to scientists worldwide.

  Study EGAS00001002755

• Uncovering Inversion Formation in the Human Genome and its Impact to Disease

  The relevance of inversions for disease causation, speciation and adaptation is broadly recognized, although the prevalence of inversions is unknown. In humans, de novo inversions are associated with congenital anomalies in approximately 9.6% of patients. Yet, despite the biological relevance of inversions, their molecular features, formation mechanism, impact to the genomic structure of carriers, as well as their contribution to clinical phenotypes, have not been further explored. Inversions are typically classified as balanced reciprocal events generated by ectopic recombination, although recent studies reveal a distinct picture whereby inversions originate from mechanisms that concomitantly generate copy number variants (CNVs). Surprisingly, those complex inversions underlie as much as 30% of neurodevelopmental-associated CNVs. The hypothesis of this project are: inversions are often generated de novo by mechanisms other than ectopic recombination a relevant fraction of inversions are associated with complex genomic rearrangements (CGRs), often overlooked in sporadic diseases, and inversions are a "hidden" type of structural variation for which contribution to a clinical phenotypes has been under assessed due to the lack of appropriate detection tools. A combined strategy using multiple genomic tools will be applied to characterize inversions and associated genomic alterations in individuals with neurodevelopmental disorders and controls: whole genome sequencing (WGS) with short-and long-reads; genome mapping; classical cytogenetics; and array CGH. This project will establish common ground to bridge studies of rare and common diseases, human evolution, and population genetics.

  Study phs002999

• Characterization_of_individual_foci_of_multicentric_multifocal_breast_cancer_using_targeted_next_generation_sequencing

  Multifocality or multicentricity in breast cancer may be defined as the presence of two or more tumor foci within a single quadrant of the breast or within different quadrants of the same breast, respectively. This original classification of the breast cancer as multicentric or multifocal was based on the assumption that cancers arising in the same quadrant were more likely to arise from the same ductal structures than those occurring in separate areas of the breast. The problem with these definitions is that the “quadrants” of the breast are arbitrary external designations, as no internal boundaries do exist. This project will therefore focus both on synchronous multifocal and multicentric tumors. The incidence of multifocal and multicentric breast cancers was reported to be between 13 and 75% depending on the definition used, the extent of the pathologic sampling of the breast and whether in situ disease is considered evidence of multicentricity (1). Although this incidence is variable, those figures show that it is a frequent phenomenon. Multiple (multifocal/multicentric) breast carcinomas, especially when occurring in the same breast, represent a real challenge for both pathologists and clinicians in terms of identifying the cellular origin and the best therapeutic management of the cancer. Multifocality or multicentricity has been associated with a number of more aggressive features including an increased rate of regional lymph node metastases and adverse patient outcome when compared with unifocal tumors (2-3), and a possible increased risk of local recurrence following breast conserving surgery (4). For the moment, the literature is divided on whether there is a corresponding impact on survival outcomes. Today, the current convention to stage and to treat multifocal and multicentric tumors is the classical tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging guidelines with which tumor size is assessed by the largest tumor focus without taking other foci of disease into consideration. If some papers, as the recent one from Lynch and colleagues, support the current staging convention (3), others, however, as Boyages et al. suggested that aggregate size and not the size of the largest lesion should be considered in order to refine the prognostic assessment of those tumors (5). On the top of that, the question whether multifocal/multicentric carcinomas are due to the spread of a single carcinoma throughout the breast or is due to multiple carcinomas arising simultaneously has been a matter of debate. Some studies suggested that multifocal breast cancer may result from either intramammary spread from a single primary tumor or multiple synchronous primary tumors; whereas others suggest that multiple breast carcinomas always arise from the same clone (6-8). Recently, Pietri and colleagues analyzed the biological characterization of a series of 113 multifocal/multicentric breast cancers (8) which were diagnosed over a 5-year period. The expression of estrogen (ER) and progesterone (PgR) receptors, Ki-67 proliferative index, expression of HER2 and tumor grading were prospectively determined in each tumor focus, and mismatches among foci were recorded. Mismatches in ER status were present in 5 (4.4%) cases and PgR in 18 (15.9%) cases. Mismatches in tumor grading were present in 21 cases (18.6%), proliferative index (Ki-67) in 17 (15%) cases and HER2 status in 11 (9.7%) cases. Interestingly, this heterogeneity among foci has led to 14 (12.4%) patients receiving different adjuvant treatments compared with what would have been indicated if we had only taken into account the biologic status of the primary tumor. This study therefore showed that differences in biological characteristics of multifocal/multicentric lesions play a crucial role in the adjuvant treatment decision making process. In this study, we will concentrate on a larger series of patients with multifocal invasive ductal breast cancer lesions. We aim at: 1. Evaluating the incidence of multifocality according to the different breast cancer molecular subtypes (ER-/HER2-, HER2+, ER+/HER2-). 2. Evaluating the incidence of multifocality in patients with hereditary breast cancer disease (presence of germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations). Moreover, we would like to investigate if multifocal lesions with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations exhibit a characteristic combination of substitution mutation signatures and a distinctive profile of deletions as demonstrated recently by Nik-Zainal and colleagues (9). 3. Correlating multifocality with clinical information in order to define its influence on patients’ survival (DFS and OS). 4. Carrying high coverage targeted gene sequencing of driver cancer genes and genes whose mutation is of therapeutic importance in order to compare clinically-relevant genetic differences between several multifocal breast cancer lesions. 5. Evaluating the impact of the distance between the different lesions on the clinical outcome but also on the genetic differences. 6. Comparing gene expression patterns between several multifocal breast cancer lesions and correlate them with the results of the targeted genes screen. 7. Characterizing the genomic and transcriptomic status of cancer related genes in metastatic lesions (local recurrence, positive lymph node or distant metastatic sites) from the same multifocal invasive ductal breast cancer patients in order to evaluate the consequence of genomic and transcriptomic heterogeneity of multifocal lesions on metastatic lesions. Multiple (multifocal/multicentric) breast carcinomas, especially when occurring in the same breast, represent a real challenge for both pathologists and clinicians in terms of identifying the cellular origin and the best therapeutic choice. This project has the potential to identify genetic/transcriptomic differences existing between several lesions constituting multifocal breast cancers, which in the routine clinical practice are usually considered to be homogeneous among them. We foresee validating significant results in a larger series of patients and this, in turn, could have a remarkable impact on the treatment and clinical management of multifocal breast cancers. Indeed, we hope to provide some evidence whether or not each focus matters in multifocal and multicentric breast cancer to define the adequate therapeutic approach, especially in the context of targeted therapies. The work to be done at Sanger will be target gene screen pooling of 1400 samples.

  Study EGAS00001000407

• Global Microbiome Conservancy Sequence Data

  The human body is a complex ecosystem, hosting tens of billions of bacteria, primarily in the gut. This community, known as the 'gut microbiome', is vital to human health, affecting functions ranging from metabolism, immunity, and development, to behavior. Conversely, reduced microbiome diversity and other imbalances of the gut community (dysbiosis) are associated with many diseases of the industrialized world, such as metabolic syndrome, asthma, and inflammatory bowel diseases among others. Microbiome-based interventions thus hold the potential to revolutionize our understanding of, and therapeutic approaches to, many aspects of human health and disease. Despite many advances, current understanding of the human microbiome is largely limited to majority ethnic groups in industrialized nations, and does not reflect the full diversity of human commensal microbiota. In addition to the scientific ramifications of minority underrepresentation, there are significant translational and ethical implications as well: first, failing to capture the full diversity of healthy human microbiota may limit our ability to understand and generate effective therapeutics for many microbiome-associated diseases. Second, underrepresented groups are less likely to benefit from microbiome-based medical advances tailored to well-studied populations, propagating healthcare inequities.  Human gut microbial diversity is diminishing around the globe, due to the spread of industrialized diets and lifestyles, which are associated with reduced microbiome biodiversity. The Global Microbiome Conservancy (GMbC) is a non-profit collaboration between scientists and communities around the world that aims to 1) preserve the full biodiversity of the human gut microbiome, 2) characterize its evolution across populations and host lifestyles and 3) investigate its interactions with the human host. We are collecting gut microbiome and human DNA samples from diverse populations around the world, from isolated groups to urbanized populations, to culture and study this essential biodiversity and to preserve it in a living "seed bank" of bacterial isolates as a long-term safeguard against future extinctions. Human genetic data for the samples sequenced in this study can be found in phs002205.

  Study phs002235

• Common origin and somatic mutation patterns of composite lymphomas and leukemias

  When two lymphomas occur concurrently or sequentially in a patient, it is a major question whether they derive from the same lymphocyte or hematopoietic precursor cell or developed independently. We studied four composite classic Hodgkin lymphomas (HL) and other mature B-cell lymphomas, and two composite mature B- and T-cell neoplasias by whole exome sequencing (WES) and analyzed shared somatic mutations in the lymphomas of these clonally related composite lymphomas, indicating their derivation from a common, pre-malignant precursor. Most identified mutations were restricted to one or the other of these lymphomas, likely explaining how distinct lymphomas developed from a common ancestral B cell. In the two B-cell/T-cell lymphoma cases, and a composite clonally unrelated HL/chronic lymphocytic leukemia, the lymphoma partners did not share any somatic mutations. In three cases, we identified potentially oncogenic variants also in cells serving as constitutional controls.

  Study EGAS50000001017

• Illumina HumanCoreExome genotyping data from the TEENAGE (TEENs of Attica: Genes and Environment) study.

  The TEENAGE study is a cross-sectional study comprising healthy Greek adolescents. The study was conducted according to the guidelines specified in the Declaration of Helsinki and all procedures involving human subjects were approved by the Institutional Review Board of Harokopio University and the Greek Ministry of Education, Lifelong Learning and Religious Affairs. The TEENAGE study target population comprised adolescent students aged 13 to 15 years attending the first three classes of public secondary schools located in the wider Athens area of Attica. The regions across Attica from which students were recruited were physically similar and all urban in nature. Sampling of regions and schools selected to participate was random. Students were enrolled from the wider urban region to ensure that they were coming from families with varying educational background and socio-economic status. Moreover, in order to exclude any vast economic disparities, all participating schools were exclusively public schools, which are free of charge. A total of twenty-four schools participated in the study out of 285 junior secondary public schools in Attica. Anthropometric, medical and dietary information was obtained. DNA samples were genotyped using Illumina HumanCoreExome BeadChips (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA) at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Hinxton, UK. Genotypes were called using GenCall (Illumina Genome Studio) followed by zCall and quality control (QC) was performed in two stages (pre- and post-zCall).

  Study EGAS00001001001

• Somatic_mutation_and_clonal_evolution_in_premalignant_lung_disease___WGS

  Cancer is a genetic disease caused by an accumulations of mutations, however many of these mutations have been identified in pathologically normal tissue. We aim to use laser-capture microscopy (LCM) to sample individual clones from the lung tissue of individuals with a variety of lung diseases (COPD, UIP, IPF, Emphysema, pulmonary hypertension). This will allow us to identify whether cancer-associated mutations appear in this normal tissue, assess the mutational burden present, and identify the mutational processes causing these mutations. Smoking is a large risk factor for developing many of these lung diseases so we are particularly keen to determining whether there is evidence of a smoking signature in these patients.

  Study EGAS00001002747

• A Whole Genome Association Scan for Myopia and Glaucoma Endophenotypes using Twin Studies

  Myopia and glaucoma are highly prevalent ophthalmic disorders worldwide and contribute significantly to ocular morbidity. There is substantial evidence that genetic factors play a significant role in the development of non-syndromic myopia and glaucoma. We propose to perform mapping studies for well-characterized twin populations in the United Kingdom and Australia in order to ultimately identify implicated genes for these disorders and related ocular parameters. This will provide a fundamental molecular understanding of how these disorders develop, and may lead to directed physiologic (i.e. pharmacologic, gene therapy) interventions. Our aim is to dissect the genetic basis of the eye disorders myopia and glaucoma. Instead of limited analyses of the trait/disease in a dichotomous manner, we are using continuous phenotypes of measures of refraction and intermediate phenotypes of glaucoma to analyze quantitative traits in unselected population samples of volunteer twins. Achievement of this goal requires cooperative efforts and large sample sizes. Thus, we have created an international collaboration of large complementary studies.

  Study phs000142

• Mutations in the RAS/MAPK pathway drive replication repair deficient hypermutated tumors and confer sensitivity to MEK inhibition

  The RAS/MAPK pathway is an emerging targeted pathway across a spectrum of both adult and pediatric cancers. Typically, this is associated with a single, well-characterized point mutation in an oncogene. Hypermutant tumors which harbor many somatic mutations may obscure the interpretation of such targetable genomic events. We find that replication repair deficient (RRD) cancers which are universally hypermutant and affect children born with RRD cancer predisposition, are enriched for RAS/MAPK mutations (p=10-8). These mutations are not random, exist in subclones, and increase in allelic frequency over time. The RAS/MAPK pathway is activated both transcriptionally and at the protein level in patient derived RRD tumors and these tumors responded to MEK inhibition in vitro and in vivo. Treatment of patients with RAS/MAPK hypermutant gliomas reveal durable responses to MEK inhibition. Our observations suggest that hypermutant tumors may be addicted to oncogenic pathways resulting in favorable response to targeted therapies.

  Study EGAS00001005008