642 results for "fc 26 fast coins Besuche die Website Buyfc26coins.com. Schneller Service, sehr gut..ubZx"

in 32.75 milliseconds.

• Ecological Stressors, PTSD, and Drug Use in Detroit: The Detroit Neighborhood Health Study (DNHS)

  The Detroit Neighborhood Health Study (DNHS) is a prospective, representative longitudinal cohort study of predominantly African American adults living in Detroit, Michigan. The overall goal of the DNHS is to identify how genetic variation, lifetime experience of stressful and traumatic events, and features of the neighborhood environment predict psychopathology and behavior. Cohort participants were selected with a dual-frame probability design, using telephone numbers obtained from the U.S. Postal Service Delivery Sequence Files as well as a listed-assisted random-digit-dial frame. Individuals without listed landlines or telephones and individuals with only a cell phone listed were invited to participate through a postal mail effort. Participants completed a 40 minute, structured telephone interview annually between 2008-2012 to assess perceptions of participants' neighborhoods, mental and physical health status, social support, exposure to traumatic events, and alcohol and tobacco use; each participant was compensated $25USD. All survey participants were offered the opportunity to provide a specimen (venipuncture, blood spot, or saliva) for immune and inflammatory marker testing as well as genetic testing of DNA. Participants received an additional $25USD if they elected to give a sample. Informed consent was obtained at the beginning of each interview and again at specimen collection. The Institutional Review Board of the University of Michigan reviewed and approved the study protocol. The DNHS submission to dbGaP includes phenotype data from all five survey waves (n=856), all available GWAS data for participants who completed wave 4 (n=507), and methylation data for wave 1, wave 2, wave 4, and wave 5 participants (n = 456).

  Study phs000560

• A Prospective Study of Lifestyle, the Gut Microbiome, and Diverticulitis

  By leveraging a large-scale collection of stool specimens (Micro-N) within the Nurses' Health Study II, we performed shotgun metagenomic sequencing and untargeted metabolomics profiling among 121 case women with a diagnosis of diverticulitis requiring antibiotics or hospitalization, with each matched to a control woman without diverticulitis during the same time period accounting for age, race, and month of stool collection (total N=242). We found microbiome and metabolomic profiles differed in diverticulitis cases compared to controls. Data deposited include metagenomic sequencing data (after removing the human sequences) and metabolomics data.

  Study phs003531

• Understanding the development of resident memory T cells (Trm) in the human small intestine using integrative multiomic approaches: Adult RNA (2025-10-14)

  Animal studies have demonstrated that resident memory T (Trm) cells provide enhanced protective responses to a broad array of tissue-tropic pathogens, thus making Trm cells promising targets for novel vaccination strategies. However, the biological pathways that enable the long-term survival of Trm cells are poorly understood in humans. Here, we will employ a unique human intestinal transplantation setting that allows us to study the retention of persistent T cells in the grafts and the temporal development of resident T-cell populations from recruited recipient T cells. We will integrate high resolution transcriptomics, epigenetics, proteomics and immune repertoire single-cell data from purified intestinal T cells. These single-cell multiomics approaches will uncover the diversity and differentiation of the T cell populations in the human intestine, allowing us to temporally resolve the generation and maintenance of gut resident T cells. . This dataset contains all the data available for this study on 2025-10-14.

  Dataset EGAD00001015739

• Single cell targeted DNA-sequencing (and antibody sequencing) of high hyperdiploid B-ALL

  This dataset contains all sequencing data of the publication "Single-cell DNA and Surface Protein Characterization of High Hyperdiploid Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia at Diagnosis and During Treatment". We provide both the raw fastq-files as well as the processed data in the form of .h5 files. There are 13 patients: XJ176, XH135, XJ180, XI145, XI148, XI167, XI150, XJ175, XJ178, XI162, XF98, XG111 and XG115. Of 9 patients, also follow-up samples during/after treatment were sequenced: XJ180, XI145, XI148, XI167, XI150, XJ175, XJ178, XI162 and XG111. To identify the cell types and distinguish between normal and leukemic cells, cell surface proteins were also captured for 6 samples: XF98, XG111 (at diagnosis and during treatment), XG115, XI162 (after treatment) and XJ175 (after treatment). All samples were processed on the MissionBio platform with a custom amplicon panel, and DaB-seq for the combined targeted DNA and protein sequencing.

  Dataset EGAD50000000829

• fragmentomic features of individuals with different cfDNA concentrations

  The uploaded data includes sequencing data of 862 individuals from the nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) screening study. Samples from this cohort were sequenced using targeted sequencing methods for the Epstein Barr Virus (EBV) and selected autosomal DNA, but only ‘off-target’ reads were used for fragmentomic analyses. We have also performed genome-wide (non-targeted sequencing) for 1) Individuals with the highest and lowest cell-free DNA concentration (40 individuals); 2) A subsequent collection of the subjects with the highest and lowest DNA concentrations after six years (26 individuals); 3) 30 cases of pregnancy and 4) 20 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. All sequencing data are of extracted plasma cfDNA from human subjects. The targeted sequencing samples from 862 individuals were sequenced on the NextSeq500 System (Illumina) and aligned to the EBV genome (AJ507799.2) and the human genome (hg19). The alignments were provided in bam format. The original fastq files of the remaining non-target sequencing samples were provided.

  Dataset EGAD50000000970

• Metabolic reprogramming towards OXPHOS identifies a novel therapeutic target for mantle cell lymphoma

  Metabolic reprogramming is linked to cancer cell growth and proliferation, metastasis, and therapeutic resistance in a multitude of cancers. Targeting dysregulated metabolic pathways to overcome resistance, an urgent clinical need in all relapsed/refractory cancers, remains difficult. Through genomics analysis of clinical specimens, we show that metabolic reprogramming towards oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) and glutaminolysis is associated with therapeutic resistance to the Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), an incurable B-cell lymphoma with poor clinical outcomes. Inhibition of OXPHOS with a novel, clinically applicable small molecule, IACS-010759, which targets complex I of the mitochondrial electron transport chain, results in significant growth inhibition in vitro and in vivo in ibrutinib-resistant patient-derived cancer models. This work suggests that targeting metabolic pathways to subvert therapeutic resistance is a clinically viable approach to treat highly refractory malignancies.

  Dataset EGAD00001004577

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

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

  Dataset EGAD00001007752

• IMCISION RNAseq

  RNA sequencing of 32 primary head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) samples prior to treatment with neoadjuvant anti-PD-1 (n=6) or anti-PD-1 + anti-CTLA-4 (n=26) immunotherapy, and 30 paired on-treatment HNSCC samples (i.e. after neoadjuvant immunotherapy). RNA quantity used: 10ng. Library Preparation Kit: SMART Stranded Total RNA Seq Kit (Takara). Sequencing parameters: NovaSeq 6000, 2x 100 bp. File type: fastQ

  Dataset EGAD00001008127

• Germline RUNX1 Variation and Predisposition to Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic

  Somatic mutations of RUNX1, which encodes the myeloid and lymphoid transcriptional factor RUNX1, are common in both B- and T- acute lymphoid leukemia (ALL) and are associated with poor prognosis of T-ALL. However, there has been no comprehensive investigation of the pattern or prevalence of RUNX1 germline mutation in both B- and T-ALL. Here we report germline RUNX1 variants in 1.23% of B-ALL and 2.11% of T-ALL, identifying 31 unique variants in 62 B-ALL and 18 unique variants in 26 T-ALL children. The majority of frameshift and nonsense variants affected RUNX1 function in transcriptional regulation, hematopoiesis, and cellular proliferation. We identified JAK3 as the most frequent somatic mutation in T-ALL with RUNX1 variants. These results not only identify RUNX1 as a leukemia predisposition gene but also further underline the importance of germline genetic variants to the development of ALL

  Dataset EGAD00001007793

• RNA-seq of high grade serous ovarian tumours

  Somatic RNA for 40 samples matched to the WGS was extracted using the Qiagen Qiasymphony RNA protcol (cat no 931636). The tissue was initially homogenised using a Qiagen Bioruptor, followed by the manufacturers recommended protocol (including DNase digestion). The resulting RNA the underwent quality control as follows: firstly, A260 and A280nm were measured on a Denovix DS-11 Fx to qualitatively illustrate A260/280nm and A260/230nm ratios as measures of RNA purity. A260/280 had to be 2.0 and A260/230 had to be 2.0-2.2. Then RNA was quantified using LifeTechnologies Qubit RNA BR kit (cat no Q10210). RNAseq was carried out by the Edinburgh Clinical Research Facility on an Illumina NExtSeq500. Total RNA samples were assessed on the Agilent Bioanalyser (Agilent Technologies, #G2939AA) with the RNA 6000 Nano Kit (#5067-1512) for quality and integrity of total RNA, and then quantified using the Qubit 2.0 Fluorometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc, #Q32866) and the Qubit RNA HS assay kit (#Q32855). Libraries were prepared from total-RNA sample using the NEBNext Ultra 2 Directional RNA library prep kit for Illumina (#E7760S) with the NEBNext rRNA Depletion kit (#E6310) according to the provided protocol. 400ng of totalRNA was then added to the ribosomal RNA (rRNA) depletion reaction using the NEBNext rRNA depletion kit (Human/mouse/rat) (#E6310). This step uses specific probes that bind to the rRNA in order to cleave it. rRNA-depleted RNA was then DNase treated and purified using Agencourt RNAClean XP beads (Beckman Coulter Inc, #66514). RNA was then fragmented using random primers before undergoing first strand and second strand synthesis to create cDNA. cDNA was end repaired before ligation of sequencing adapters, and libraries were enriched by PCR using the NEBNext Multiplex oligos for Illumina set 1 and 2 (#E7500). Final libraries had an average peak size of 271bp. Libraries were quantified by fluorometry using the Qubit dsDNA HS assay and assessed for quality and fragment size using the Agilent Bioanalyser with the DNA HS Kit (#5067-4626). Sequencing was performed using the NextSeq 500/550 High-Output v2 (150 cycle) Kit (# FC- 404-2002) on the NextSeq 550 platform (Illumina Inc, #SY-415-1002). Libraries were combined in an equimolar pool based on the library quantification results and run across 5 High-Output Flow Cell v2.5.

  Dataset EGAD00001009048

• RNA-seq of high grade serous ovarian tumours

  Somatic RNA for 37 samples was extracted using the Qiagen Qiasymphony RNA protcol (cat no 931636). The tissue was initially homogenised using a Qiagen Bioruptor, followed by the manufacturers recommended protocol (including DNase digestion). The resulting RNA the underwent quality control as follows: firstly, A260 and A280nm were measured on a Denovix DS-11 Fx to qualitatively illustrate A260/280nm and A260/230nm ratios as measures of RNA purity. A260/280 had to be 2.0 and A260/230 had to be 2.0-2.2. Then RNA was quantified using LifeTechnologies Qubit RNA BR kit (cat no Q10210). RNAseq was carried out by the Edinburgh Clinical Research Facility on an Illumina NExtSeq500. Total RNA samples were assessed on the Agilent Bioanalyser (Agilent Technologies, #G2939AA) with the RNA 6000 Nano Kit (#5067-1512) for quality and integrity of total RNA, and then quantified using the Qubit 2.0 Fluorometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc, #Q32866) and the Qubit RNA HS assay kit (#Q32855). Libraries were prepared from total-RNA sample using the NEBNext Ultra 2 Directional RNA library prep kit for Illumina (#E7760S) with the NEBNext rRNA Depletion kit (#E6310) according to the provided protocol. 400ng of totalRNA was then added to the ribosomal RNA (rRNA) depletion reaction using the NEBNext rRNA depletion kit (Human/mouse/rat) (#E6310). This step uses specific probes that bind to the rRNA in order to cleave it. rRNA-depleted RNA was then DNase treated and purified using Agencourt RNAClean XP beads (Beckman Coulter Inc, #66514). RNA was then fragmented using random primers before undergoing first strand and second strand synthesis to create cDNA. cDNA was end repaired before ligation of sequencing adapters, and libraries were enriched by PCR using the NEBNext Multiplex oligos for Illumina set 1 and 2 (#E7500). Final libraries had an average peak size of 271bp. Libraries were quantified by fluorometry using the Qubit dsDNA HS assay and assessed for quality and fragment size using the Agilent Bioanalyser with the DNA HS Kit (#5067-4626). Sequencing was performed using the NextSeq 500/550 High-Output v2 (150 cycle) Kit (# FC- 404-2002) on the NextSeq 550 platform (Illumina Inc, #SY-415-1002). Libraries were combined in an equimolar pool based on the library quantification results and run across 5 High-Output Flow Cell v2.5.

  Dataset EGAD00001010139

• INSIGHT (Intervention Nurses Start Infants Growing on Healthy Trajectories) Cohort

  This is a study of the biological risk factors for children enrolled in the INSIGHT (Intervention Nurses Start Infants Growing on Healthy Trajectories) study. INSIGHT is a randomized, controlled trial testing a responsive parenting intervention designed for the primary prevention of childhood obesity against a safety control. These first-born children were deeply studied in this time period with data collected on a wide variety of variables including mode of delivery, gender, weight and height (collected at 7 time points), medication usage, diet information, and maternal health information (gestational weight gain, gestational diabetes, smoking during pregnancy). This study includes a survey of the oral and gut microbiota from 226 mother-child dyads. It was designed to investigate the relationship between a cross-sectional view of the child's microbiome (at two years of age) and the patterns of growth between birth and 2 years. Microbiome samples from children (buccal swab and stool sample) and their mothers (buccal swab) are collected at the children's 2-year clinical research visit. Stool metabolites have also been assayed for a subset of the 226 children using 1H-NMR. Additionally, we genotyped the same individuals for SNPs across the genome. For a subset of 48 individuals we have added second-born siblings. For these additional 48 children, we characterized the methylation pattern across the genome using cord blood and placenta samples.

  Study phs001498

• HELIUS cohort

  The gut microbiota composition is unique to every individual but is shaped by common factors including diet, lifestyle, medication use, early-life determinants, living environment or genetics. Most of these factors may be influenced by ethnicity. This study explored variations in fecal microbiota composition in 6048 individuals with different ethnic backgrounds living in the same geographical area (Amsterdam, the Netherlands). The HELIUS data are owned by the Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location AMC in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. To allow sharing of microbiome data collected in HELIUS with (inter)national researchers, 16s rRNA sequence analysis has been stored at the European genome-phenome archive (EGA; accession code EGAD00001004106). This requires that access needs to be granted, also because the HELIUS data are stored with relevant phenotypical variables. Access is granted to all researchers affiliated with an internationally recognized research institution who request to use the HELIUS data within the EGA context, after having signed the data transfer agreement. Any researcher can request the data by submitting a proposal to the HELIUS Executive Board as outlined at http://www.heliusstudy.nl/en/researchers/collaboration, by email: heliuscoordinator at amsterdamumc dot nl. The HELIUS Executive Board will check proposals if they do not conflict with ethical approvals and informed consent forms of the HELIUS study.

  Study EGAS00001002969

• 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

• Platinum Genomes

  Improvement of variant calling in next-generation sequence data requires a comprehensive, genome-wide catalogue of high-confidence variants called in a set of genomes for use as a benchmark. We generated deep, whole-genome sequence data of seventeen individuals in a three-generation pedigree and called variants in each genome using a range of currently available algorithms. We used haplotype transmission information to create a phased "platinum" variant catalogue of 4.7 million single nucleotide variants (SNVs) plus 0.7 million small (1-50bp) insertions and deletions (indels) that are consistent with the pattern of inheritance in the parents and eleven children of this pedigree. Platinum genotypes are highly concordant with the current catalogue of the National Institute of Standards and Technology for both SNVs (&#62;99.99%) and indels (99.92%), and add a validated truth catalogue that has 26% more SNVs and 45% more indels. Analysis of 334,652 SNVs that were consistent between informatics pipelines yet inconsistent with haplotype transmission ("non-platinum") revealed that the majority of these variants are de novo and cell-line mutations or reside within previously unidentified duplications and deletions. The reference materials from this study are a resource for objective assessment of the accuracy of variant calls throughout genomes.

  Study phs001224

• A Chromatin Accessibility Atlas of the Developing Human Telencephalon

  Gene expression differs between cell types and regions within complex tissues such as the developing brain. To discover regulatory elements underlying this specificity, we generated genome-wide maps of chromatin accessibility in nine anatomically-defined regions of the developing human telencephalon. Additionally, we defined the histone modification landscape of the prefrontal cortex and generated chromatin accessibility maps of its upper and deep layers. We predicted a subset of open chromatin regions (18%) that are most likely to be active enhancers, many of which are dynamic with 26% differing between early and late mid-gestation and 28% present in only one brain region. These predicted regulatory elements (pREs) are enriched proximal to genes with expression differences across developmental stages, regions, and cortical laminae; they harbor distinct sequence motifs that suggest potential upstream regulators. We leveraged this atlas to predict and validate novel regulatory elements of genes that control cortex laminar identity and genes associated with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). These include enhancers proximal to FEZF2 and BCL11A that were validated in mouse, and an enhancer of ASD gene SLC6A1 containing two functional de novo mutations in individuals with ASD whose enhancer function we validated via CRISPRa. We also include data for transcription factor binding in mid-fetal cortex tissues, using CUT&amp;RUN methods.

  Study phs002033

• Single_Cell_Sequencing_of_Sperm__scSperm_

  The aim of this project is to genotype and sequence single spermatozoa from two men, one in his twenties and the other in his seventies. The resulting data is used to quantify the mutations that have arisen in the gametes of both individuals in order to better understand the effect of aging on mutation rates and modes.Project Outline. In order to quantify mutations, semen from two individuals are sequenced. 48 single sperm cells are isolated from each individual, and their DNA is extracted. The resulting genomes are amplified using PicoPlex, GenomiPhi MDA, Repli-G MDA, and MALBAC. QC step is applied to check the quality of WGA DNA using standard Sequenom plex (26 SNPs). A subset of 32 amplification products which pass the intiall QC, are genotyped using Affymetrix SNP6 chips. 12 of the genotyped amplification products are also sequenced. In addition, one multi-cell sample per individual is sequenced as a reference and for validation purposes.Altogether, 12 single cell sperm genomes and two multi-cell genomes are sequenced, coming to a total of 14 genomes. Of the single cell sperm genomes, 2 are sequenced to 50x coverage, and the other 10 to 25x coverage. Both multi-cell genomes are sequenced to 25x coverage.

  Study EGAS00001000935

• Pancreatic, Small-intestinal and Pulmonary Neuroendocrine Tumors

  Purpose: The primary origin of neuroendocrine tumor metastases can be difficult to determine by histopathology alone, but is critical for therapeutic decision making. DNA methylation-based profiling is now routinely used in the diagnostic workup of brain tumors. This has been enabled by the availability of cost-efficient array-based platforms. We have extended these efforts to augment histopathological diagnosis in neuroendocrine tumors. Experimental Design and Results: We compiled data of 69 small-intestinal, pulmonary, and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. These data were used to build a ridge regression calibrated random forest classification algorithm (NEN-ID) that predicts the origin of tumor samples with high accuracy (&amp;gt; 95%). The model was validated during 3x3 nested cross validation and tested in a local (n=26) and external (n=172) cohort. In addition, we show that our diagnostic approach is robust across a range of possible confounding experimental parameters such as tumor purity and array quality. A software infrastructure and online user interface was built to make the model available to the scientific community. Conclusions: This DNA methylation-based prediction model can be used in the workup for patients with neuroendocrine tumors of unknown primary. To facilitate validation and clinical implementation, we provide a user-friendly, publicly available web-based version of NEN-ID.

  Study EGAS00001004878

• Spatiotemporal Genomic Profiling of Intestinal Metaplasia Reveals Clonal Dynamics of Gastric Cancer Progression

  Intestinal metaplasia (IM) is a pre-malignant condition of the gastric mucosa associated with increased gastric cancer (GC) risk. We analyzed 1256 gastric samples (1152 IMs) from 692 subjects from a 10-year prospective study. We identified 26 IM driver genes in diverse pathways including chromatin regulation (ARID1A) and intestinal homeostasis (SOX9), largely occurring as subclonal events. Analysis of clonal dynamics between and within subjects, and also longitudinally across time, revealed that IM clones are likely transient but increase in size upon progression to dysplasia, with eventual transmission of genetic events to paired GCs. Single-cell and spatial profiling highlighted changes in tissue ecology and lineage heterogeneity in IM, including an intestinal stem-cell dominant cellular compartment linked to early malignancy. Expanded transcriptome profiling revealed expression-based molecular subtypes of IM, including a body-resident “pseudoantralized” subtype associated with incomplete histology, antral/intestinal cell types, ARID1A mutations, inflammation, and microbial communities normally associated with the healthy oral tract. We demonstrate that combined clinical-genomic models outperform clinical-only models in predicting IMs likely to progress. Our results raise opportunities for GC precision prevention and interception by highlighting strategies for accurately identifying IM patients at high GC risk and a role for microbial dysbiosis in IM progression.

  Study EGAS00001007067

• PopCol 16S gut microbiome sequencing

  PopCol is a cohort study in Stockholm, Sweden that includes a data-rich set of individuals with data available from bowel symptoms questionnaires, gastroenterology visits and biospecimens (genotype and 16S sequencing from blood and stool samples, respectively). Genotyping was carried out using the Illumina HumanOmniExpressExome-8v1 arrays at the SciLifeLab NGI facility in Uppsala, Sweden. Fecal DNA was extracted from samples kept at -80°C using Qiagen 5 QIAamp DNA Stool Mini Kits and analyzed using 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing (in the V1-V2 hypervariable region). This was performed on the Illumina MiSeq platform at the Institute of Clinical Molecular Biology (IKMB) in Kiel, Germany. Of these, six PopCol participants were PPI users and 12 used antibiotics. The study was approved by the local Committee of Research Ethics (Forskningskommitté Syd) at Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, in November 2001. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants

  Dataset EGAD00001007071

• Effects of Metformin on Transcriptomic and Metabolomic Profiles in Breast Cancer Survivors Enrolled in the Randomized Placebo-Controlled MetBreCS Trial

  RNA from snap-frozen breast tissue biopsies were purified after lysing by tissuelyser (Qiagen) and using RNA Purification Plus Kit (Norgen biotek CORP, 47700) with additional on-column DNase-I treatment (Qiagen, 79254) at 27 °C. RNA purity and integrity (RIN) were quantified using RNA 6000 Nano kit (Agilent Technologies, 5067-1511) on the 4200 TapeStation (Agilent, Santa Clara, USA). Library preparation and 2x75bp paired-end of 160 ng total RNA input was performed using Illumina Stranded Total RNA Prep Ligation kit and Illumina HiSeq4000 system (Illumina, Sand Diego, CA, USA). RNA sequencing data from HiSeq4000 were quality checked and aligned to GRCh38 (GCA_000001405.15) reference genome using HISAT2 2.0.5 and submitted to subread v.1.5.2 for feature counts calculation. Finally, 36 paired biopsies samples (metformin n=26 and placebo n=12) were sequenced and included in the final analyses.

  Dataset EGAD50000001274

• Federated EGA

  Federated EGA Federated EGA Index Overview Map of FEGA status across the world Current status of the FEGA Network Documentation Overview Federated EGA is a global network of repositories enabling secure discovery and access to sensitive human data. Our vision is to accelerate scientific discovery and healthcare breakthroughs by creating the go-to worldwide sensitive human data resource. Our values are: Privacy & Trust: Ensuring privacy of data subjects, security of services and acting with integrity to build community trust.FAIRness: Driving reuse of data through standardisation of metadata and clear access policies.Diversity: Expanding our network and representing global diversity in the data we host to bring benefits worldwide. Federated EGA - European by name, global by nature Federated EGA collaborates with European and global initiatives (GA4GH, ELIXIR, 1+ Million Genomes Framework, GDI), demonstrating that a network for transnational discovery of and access to human data is possible. By providing a solution to emerging challenges around secure and efficient management of human omics and associated data, the FEGA Network fosters data reuse, enables reproducibility, and accelerates biomedical research. For general enquiries or to request more information about Federated EGA, please reach out to us here. Read more about the Federated EGA in our commentary in Nature Genetics! Learn more about setting up a Federated EGA Node in our onboarding documentation. Map of FEGA status across the world Current status of the FEGA Network Node Description Joined CEGA Central EGA is managed by the Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG) and EMBL-EBI. The EGA has been a trusted repository for sensitive data since 2008. CEGA coordinates the FEGA network, hosts central services and the EGA catalogue. 2022 Finland FEGA Finland is hosted by CSC - IT Center for Science Ltd., which is the national ELIXIR Node in Finland. CSC is a state-owned company specialising in providing high-quality IT infrastructure and services for Finnish higher education and research. 2022 Germany The German Human Genome-Phenome archive (GHGA) is part of the German National Research Data Infrastructure (NFDI). It is coordinated by the German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) and includes over 20 academic partners. 2022 Norway FEGA Norway is a service by ELIXIR Norway, the Norwegian node of the European organisation ELIXIR. University of Oslo as a partner institution in ELIXIR Norway is hosting the service relying on the TSD infrastructure for sensitive data. ELIXIR Norway is a consortium of 5 Norwegian universities and is coordinated by University of Bergen. 2022 Spain FEGA Spain is co-hosted by the Barcelona Supercomputer Center (BSC) and the Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), both part of ELIXIR Spain and the Spanish National Infrastructure for Personalised Medicine associated with Science and Technology (IMPaCT). 2022 Sweden FEGA Sweden is hosted by the National Bioinformatics Infrastructure Sweden (NBIS), which legally is part of Uppsala University. NBIS forms the bioinformatics platform at SciLifeLab and constitutes the Swedish node of the European organisation ELIXIR. 2022 Poland FEGA Poland is hosted by Biobank Lodz, which is part of University of Lodz. Biobank Lodz is an element of the infrastructure of the Regional Digital Medicine Centers established by the Medical Research Agency. 2022 Portugal FEGA Portugal is managed by BioData.pt, the distributed infrastructure for Life and Health data for Portugal. This entity is a non-profit association of 15 life sciences R&I organisations spread across the country, and the home of ELIXIR Node in Portugal. 2023 Canada Canadian Genome-phenome Archive is part of the Pan Canadian Genome Library, with the mandate to allow the secure and responsible sharing and analysis of Canadian genomic information. 2024 Switzerland Swiss FEGA is hosted by SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, which is the national ELIXIR Node in Switzerland, on behalf of the Swiss FEGA Partnership which includes 4 other key partners (ETH Zurich, Health 2030 Genome Center, Swiss Data Science Center and Switch). 2025 Documentation Title Version Description Mission, vision, values Federated EGA Mission, vision, values 1.0 The official Mission-Vision-Values statement for FEGA, produced and formally approved by the FEGA Strategic Committee in September 2025. Structure and Organisation Federated EGA Structure and Organisation 2.0 The structure of the FEGA network and service expectations, responsibilities and commitments. FEGA is organised into three tiers: Central EGA, FEGA Nodes and FEGA Affiliates. Strategic Committee Federated EGA Strategic Committee 1.1 Terms of reference for the FEGA Strategic Committee describe the purpose and objectives of the committee, which is to provide direction and strategic planning for the FEGA network. The committee receives input from, and provides feedback for the EGA Strategic Committee. Operations Committee Federated EGA Operations Committee 1.1 Terms of reference for the FEGA Operations Committee describe the purpose and objectives of the committee, which is to review operational performance and coordinate technical roadmaps of FEGA Nodes and Central EGA. The committee receives advice from, and provides operational reporting to the FEGA Strategic Committee. Guidelines Node Operations guidelines 2.1 An overview of the operational areas which require resources in order to create a FEGA Node. The document is based on more than 15 years' experience of EMBL-EBI and CRG operating the EGA and initial expericences of the inaugural FEGA Nodes. The operational areas of responsability are in line with the FEGA Maturity Model, which guides establishment and operation of FEGA Nodes. Collaboration Federated EGA Node Collaboration Agreement 1.3 Nodes are welcome to make a copy of this current version of the CA to start its review with their legal teams and understand the responsibilities of joining FEGA. Nevertheless, this version (the one with a watermark) shall not be signed: the official version needs to be obtained from FEGA prior signing through its official channels.

  Documentation about/projects-and-funders/federated-ega

• The Pioneer 100 Wellness Project (P100)

  108 individuals (age 21-89+ years; 59% males, 41% females; 89% Caucasian; not recruited based on any specific phenotype) participated in an IRB-approved study from April 2014 to January 2015. Each individual had the genome sequenced in full. Blood was collected in clinics every three months. Additionally, participants completed at-home collections of saliva, stool, and first morning void urine every three months. Stool and saliva samples were shipped directly to the vendor by the participant, while urine was given back to the study coordinators for distribution to the proper sample vendor. For each successful participant in each round we carried out 218 clinical laboratory tests, measured up to 643 metabolites and 262 proteins, and measured the abundance of 4616 operational taxonomic units (OTUs) in the gut microbiome using 16S rRNA sequencing. The P100 study had four objectives: 1) Establish cost-efficient procedures for generating, storing and analyzing multiple sources of health data obtained over time from participants and analyzed in combination with genomic data; 2) Develop and deploy analytic tools for integrating these diverse datasets and deriving actionable information from their observed interrelationships; 3) Identify novel patterns within the streams of health data that indicate either wellness, or transitions between wellness and disease; 4) Learn how to best interface with and present longitudinal health information to individuals by studying the reactions and feedback from participants as they are presented actionable information.

  Study phs001363

• Oncogenic Ectodomain deletion of FGFR1 caused by Breakage-Fusion-Bridges in Squamous Cell lung Cancer

  The identification of recurrent 8p11.23 amplifications including FGFR1 raised the hope of a treatable target in squamous cell lung cancer (SQLC). However, only a minority of patients with FGFR1-amplified tumors respond to single agent inhibitor therapy targeting FGFR. To understand the underlying mechanism of FGFR1 dependency, we performed whole genome and transcriptome sequencing of 25 FGFR1-amplified primary tumors with unknown response upon FGFR inhibition. In addition, we performed deep sequencing of 26 FGFR1-amplified samples whereof the response upon FGFR inhibition was known for 25 samples. In both cohorts we identified intra-chromosomal tail-to-tail breaks close to the FGFR1 transcription start site, being responsible for focal amplification of FGFR1. These specific breaks are caused by a Breakage-Fusion-Bridge-like (BFB-like) mechanism. Here, we associate these breaks with FGFR inhibitor sensitivity. Moreover, in some cases these breaks are located within the open reading frame of FGFR1, which leads to the expression of an ΔEC-FGFR1 transcript that lacks the ecto-domain. Overexpression of ΔEC-FGFR1 transforms Baf3 cells and lead to an FGFR1-dependent phenotype. Our results demonstrate that the truncation of the FGFR1 ectodomain is a frequent event in 8p11.23-amplified squamous cell lung cancer caused by tail-to-tail breaks. These breaks might be used as a predictive therapeutic marker to stratify patients for FGFR-inhibitor therapy.

  Study EGAS00001005059

• Neoadjuvant immune checkpoint blockade in mismatch-repair proficient colon cancers

  Immune checkpoint blockade has led to paradigm shifts in the treatment of various tumour types, yet limited efficacy has been observed in patients with metastatic mismatch-repair proficient (pMMR) colorectal cancer. Here we report an in-depth analysis of patients with early-stage pMMR colon cancer from the phase II NICHE study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03026140). A total of 31 patients received neoadjuvant treatment of nivolumab plus ipilimumab followed by surgery. The response rate was 26% and included six patients with a major pathological response (≤10% residual viable tumour). One patient with an ongoing clinical complete response did not undergo surgery. Responses were observed despite a low tumour mutational burden in all tumours, while chromosomal genomic instability scores were significantly higher in responders compared to non-responders. Responding tumours were more likely to be TP53 mutant, KRASG12 wildtype and had significantly higher baseline expression of proliferation signatures and TCF1. Imaging mass cytometry also revealed a higher percentage of Ki-67+ cancer and Ki-67+ CD8+ T cells in responders compared to non-responders. Meanwhile, in non-responders, we observed an enrichment for an inflamed-fibrotic microenvironment associated with TGF-β expression, hinting towards possible resistance mechanisms. These results provide a comprehensive analysis of response to neoadjuvant ICB in early-stage pMMR colon cancers and identify potential biomarkers for patient selection.

  Study EGAS50000000856