612 results for "fc 26 ultimate team fast coins Visit Buyfc26coins.com Hyvä käyttöliittymä verkkosivustolla..xlc6"

in 17.45 milliseconds.

• MicroRNAs, Hypertension and End Organ Damage in Humans

  Study 1) Profiling of microRNAs in plasma of patients with hypertension complicated or not by metabolic syndrome or chronic kidney disease Hypertension (HTN) or high blood pressure is associated with subclinical target organ damage such as cardiac, vascular and kidney injury, which may lead to complications and death. In this study, we investigated circulating microRNAs as biomarkers of target organ damage in HTN patients. We profiled circulating microRNAs by RNA sequencing in platelet-poor plasma of normotensive subjects and patients with HTN complicated or not by metabolic syndrome (MetS) or chronic kidney disease (CKD) (n=15 each group). Differentially expressed microRNAs were identified with a threshold of false discovery rate <0.1. Differentially expressed microRNAs were identified uniquely to associate with HTN (8), MetS (1) or CKD (13), and 8 were similarly differentially expressed in different groups. This study identified the association of differentially expressed circulating microRNAs with target organ damage in HTN patients, which could have some pathophysiological and therapeutic implications. Study 2) Profiling of microRNAs in gluteal subcutaneous small arteries of patients with hypertension complicated or not by chronic kidney disease Hypertension (HTN) is associated with vascular damage characterized by endothelial dysfunction and vascular remodeling and stiffening, which contributes to kidney injury leading to chronic kidney disease (CKD). MicroRNAs are short non-coding RNAs which repress/degrade target mRNAs. The microRNA role in vascular injury in HTN remains unclear. In this study, we aimed to identify differentially expressed microRNAs in small arteries of patients with HTN associated or not with CKD, in order to shed light on the pathophysiological molecular mechanisms. Normotensive subjects and HTN patients associated or not with CKD grades 3-4 were studied (n=15-16). Small arteries were isolated from subcutaneous gluteal biopsies, RNAs were extracted, and small and total RNA sequencing was performed by Illumina HiSeq-2500. Differentially expressed genes were identified with a P<0.05 and fold change (FC) >1.3. Differentially expressed microRNAs and mRNAs were identified uniquely to associate with HTN (microRNAs: 10, mRNAs: 68), CKD (microRNAs: 68, mRNAs: 395), and both groups (microRNAs: 2, mRNAs: 32). This study identified differentially expressed microRNAs and mRNAs in small arteries with target organ damage in HTN, which could have some pathophysiological and therapeutic implications.

  Study phs002389

• Pharmacogenomics Research Network Antidepressant Medication Pharmacogenomic Study (PGRN-AMPS)

  This pharmacogenomic study focused on the response of patients with MDD to an 8-week course of treatment with citalopram or escitalopram. Briefly, clinical assessments and research assessments were performed at each study visit as summarized in Table 1. Many patients continued on antidepressant medication after the 8 week study. Table 1: Study timeline and patient contacts. Week Consent/Med Hx Write Rx SI Qx SCID HRS-D17 QIDSC16 CGI-I 0 SC RC RC SC SC SC 4 RC RC SC SC RC 8 RC RC SC SC RC HRS-D17=Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, QIDS-C16=Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology, CGI-I=Clinical Global Impression-Improvement, SCID=Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV, SC=Study Coordinator, RC=Research Clinician. Enrollment and baseline assessment. Upon initial intake, the Study Coordinator (SC) obtained informed consent as well as clinical and demographic information, including history of bone marrow or liver transplant or blood transfusion within the previous 6 weeks, and prior history of treatment during the current major depressive episode. The SC completed the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID), the HRS-D17 (17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression) and the QIDS-C16 (Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology) and reviewed the inclusion/exclusion criteria. After review with the Research Clinician (RC) and when appropriate, after a negative pregnancy test, the SC invited the subject to participate in the study if entry criteria were met. If the subject agreed, he/she received treatment according to the study protocol. Treatment schedule. Participants selected for inclusion in the study were seen at weeks 0, 4, and 8. The appropriate treatment antidepressant (citalopram or escitalopram) was determined following discussion between the patient and RC concerning medical, financial, and insurance considerations. The study medication citalopram was given in tablet or liquid form, depending on the patient's need. A fixed-flexible dose schedule was employed with the possibility of a dose escalation. In particular, the initial dose of citalopram was 20 mg and escitalopram was 10 mg. This dose was increased to 40 mg and 20 mg, respectively, after 4 weeks if the subject had a score of >/= 6 on the QIDS-C16 and the RC concluded that the subject could tolerate the increase. If necessary, dose was reduced at the discretion of the RC. The importance of medication compliance was discussed with the subject, and subjects were asked to bring in the medication at each visit for the purpose of counting remaining pills to assess compliance. Participants may have had an abbreviated course of therapy if they were clearly intolerant of the drug or failed to respond to a 40 mg dose of citalopram or a 20 mg dose of escitalopram. They then received standard treatment from a primary physician or psychiatrist with different medications and/or therapeutic modalities (e.g. psychotherapy). Special attention was given to subjects with suicidal ideation. Those subjects were offered additional appointments as needed to ensure their safety. Participants were also contacted by telephone at week 1 and week 2 by the Clinical Nurse Specialist (CNS) or other study personnel to ensure medication compliance and patient safety. The CNS was supervised by the study psychiatrist and principal investigator and deferred to the physician's judgment as needed. The SC was trained to notify the RC at the time of the clinical visits or the phone interviews if the subject endorsed any suicidal ideation or plans. For those subjects who were unable to attend the follow-up visits as scheduled, the patient was contacted by phone to complete the HRS-D17/QIDS-C16. The participant was also asked to return to the clinic to complete a final blood draw for the study. Adjunctive and concurrent medications. Adjunctive treatments were those used to manage transient associated symptoms (e.g., insomnia) or transient or longer-term medication side effects (e.g., sexual dysfunction). Adjunctive treatments that were not used to treat depression were allowed during the study. However, drugs in the exclusion criteria for this study were not used as adjunctive therapies. Subjects were allowed to participate in the study while receiving concurrent medications for general medical conditions as long as there was no contraindication to use while taking citalopram or escitalopram. Drug efficacy phenotype evaluation. The change in QIDS-C16 score and change in HRS-D17 score were used as the major research outcome measures to assess drug response. At each clinical research visit, the RC also completed the Clinician Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) scale. For the primary genome-wide association analyses, dichotomous outcome variables, remission and response, were defined based on the QIDS-C16 last visit score. Remission was defined as a QIDS-C16 score of 5 or less, while response was defined as at least a 50% reduction in the QIDS-C16 score from baseline. Specimen collection. Specimen collections were obtained by the General Clinical Research Center (GCRC) at St. Mary's Hospital (SMH). Subjects had blood drawn on an outpatient basis at GCRC-SMH on three separate occasions - baseline (0), week 4 and week 8 visits. Prior to sample collection, date and time of last dose of study medication was gathered at the 4 and 8 week visits. For those patients who were unable to complete the regularly scheduled visits, a dismissal blood draw was requested. GCRC then shipped samples to Mayo Clinic's Biospecimens Accessioning and Processing Lab. Genotyping and biomarker assays. DNA from 529 patients was genotyped by the RIKEN Center for Genomic Medicine (Yokohama, Japan) using Illumina Human610-Quad BeadChips (Illumina, San Diego, CA). The study also included the determination of plasma drug levels at weeks 4 and 8, and metabolite levels at baseline and weeks 4 and 8 for a subset of subjects. The primary genome-wide association study based on these data, which includes a summary of the protocol, subject description, selection of subjects for genetic analyses, and definitions of clinical outcomes, was published in the Pharmacogenomics Journal (Ji et al., 2012).

  Study phs000670

• Paired Biopsy Project: West Coast Dream Team

  This project aims to analyze the paired metastatic biopsy samples from patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), collected before the initiation of the first-line androgen receptor signaling inhibitor (ARSI) for mCRPC and after radiographic disease progression on that ARSI, to understand the resistance mechanisms. We generated both whole genome sequencing (WGS) and RNA-seq data on these samples. A majority of these samples have been deposited in the public domain along with prior publications, and this project contains the 16 WGS samples that have not yet been deposited.

  Study EGAS50000000327

• IMCISION DNAseq

  Whole-exome sequencing of 32 primary head and neck squamous cell carcinoma samples prior to treatment with neoadjuvant anti-PD-1 (n=6) or anti-PD-1 + anti-CTLA-4 (n=26) immunotherapy. DNA quantity used: 50ng. Library Preparation Kit: Twist Human Core Exome Plus (Twist Bioscience). Sequencing parameters: NovaSeq 6000, 2x 100 bp. File type: fastQ.

  Dataset EGAD00001008139

• What is a DAC?

  What is a DAC? Given the complexity, scale, and diversity of global submitters and studies, the EGA operates a distributed data access model in which requests are made to the data controller, not to the EGA. The European Commission defines a data controller, in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), as the person that determines the purposes for which and the means by which personal data is processed. A Data Access Committees, commonly referred to as DACs, comprise on or more individuals (or data controllers) that review data access requests and make decisions on who can access personally identifiable genetic, phenotypic, and clinical data deposited at the EGA. Therefore, the members of a DAC should be individuals who have the authority to approve data access requests. The animation describes how you can authorise access to your sensitive data with the help of Data Access Committee and Authorisation tool. Acknowledgement to CSC - IT Center for Finland, Elixir Finland, Elixir Europe. Frequently Asked Questions How can I create a Data Access Committee? How can I create a Data Access Committee? The members of a DAC can come from different areas of expertise, such as data management, data analysis, information technology, legal and compliance, subject matter experts, privacy and security, and representatives from the organisations or individuals that provide data to the DAC. The specific members of a DAC can vary depending on the needs of the organisation and the type of data being managed. The EGA strongly suggests checking with your organisation to align with its regulations How should a DAC be named? The chosen name must be informative to the applicant.  For example, internal identifiers, such as grant numbers, should not be used. Individual PI names should also not be used. DAC's are often named after the organisation or department of the data source.  Browse the full list of DAC names currently in the EGA. How can I become an EGA DAC contact? To register a DAC at the EGA you must create first as an EGA user. Once your EGA user has been approved by the Helpdesk team, you will be able to log in to the DAC Portal. How can I register a DAC? To register a DAC, follow the DAC Portal instructions.  You will be required to provide a DAC name, name of the individual(s) that make up your DAC and contact details for your DAC including your Institutional email(s). Wherever possible, the DAC should make sure that all points of contact are readily available and able to answer any initial data requests/queries in < 2 weeks.  Once your DAC is registered, you will have to wait upon the validation from our Helpdesk team. As soon as all the validations have been completed, your DAC will be activated. Alternatively, you can also establish a DAC at the EGA during a programmatic submission through Webin API. Which are the possible roles of a DAC contact? There are two possible roles for DAC contacts: member and admin. An admin has additional privileges compared to a member: An “admin” can manage data requests, create and edit policies, edit the content of the DAC, add or remove contacts, and decide the role of each contact. A “member” can manage data requests and create policies. However, a member does not have permission to modify DAC details, edit information from policies where they are not admins, or add/remove contacts. There is no limit to the number of admins in a DAC, and each admin is responsible for deciding who should have editing privileges. This allows for a more decentralised and democratic approach to managing the DAC. How can I modify the information of a DAC? To modify a DAC, follow the instructions here. Keep in mind that only DAC contact with an admin role can modify the information of a DAC. If your DAC was registered before the lauch of the DAC Portal, and its ID is EGAC0 (not EGAC5), you must use the programmatic submission to modify it. Please, do not hesitate to contact our Helpdesk team if you need help with this! To prevent potential data breaches and ensure adherence to GDPR regulations, it is essential that the European Genome-Phenome Archive (EGA) is informed via the Helpdesk team of any changes to the Data Access Committee (DAC). This should be done in addition to any changes being made on the DAC portal. Data Controllers (as per the definition in the DPA) are also responsible for notifying the previous DAC of any modifications. Without proper notification, changes might not be automatically updated in our system, leading to the risk of incorrect permissions being applied and potential data access issues. Therefore, it is imperative that all Data Controllers follow this protocol to maintain data integrity and security. What’s the link between DAC, policy and dataset? A dataset is linked to one single policy. At the same time, one policy has a one to one relationship with a DAC. In this example, you can see that in this dataset page, we are only showing the information of one DAC (1 dataset - 1 DAC). However, the ratio of objects does not work the same in the other direction. One DAC can own multiple policy objects. And each policy object can be reused in several datasets. Thus, one DAC can manage one or more datasets. In this example, you can see that in this DAC page, we are showing all the datasets that are managed by one DAC (1 DAC - >400 datasets). EGA Data Access Committee Best Practices Which are the EGA DAC best practices? Refer to DAC Best Practices What happens if a DAC member changes institutions? EGA is committed to the protection and ownership of the data stored in our systems. We respect the institution's ownership of the data, and as such, if a DAC member changes institutions, the ownership of the data will not be transferred to the new institution. Therefore, before changing institutions, we request that the DAC contact add a new member who will replace them once they no longer work at the institution. This ensures that the data remains protected and is accessible to authorised personnel at the institution. To prevent potential data breaches and ensure adherence to GDPR regulations, it is essential that the European Genome-Phenome Archive (EGA) is informed via the Helpdesk team of any changes to the Data Access Committee (DAC). This should be done in addition to any changes being made on the DAC portal. Data Controllers (as per the definition in the DPA) are also responsible for notifying the previous DAC of any modifications. Without proper notification, changes might not be automatically updated in our system, leading to the risk of incorrect permissions being applied and potential data access issues. Therefore, it is imperative that all Data Controllers follow this protocol to maintain data integrity and security. What happens if EGA detects an unresponsive DAC? EGA defines an unresponsive DAC as a DAC with one or more contacts who do not respond to data access requests. EGA has procedures in place to identify these types of DACs, escalate the issue, and attempt to reassign the DAC to a responsive contact. This is a crucial step in ensuring that data can be accessed and utilised by researchers. If EGA identifies an unresponsive DAC, the organisation will first try to resolve the issue by escalating it to the appropriate parties. This may involve attempting to reassign the DAC to a more responsive contact. Unfortunately, in situations where we cannot reassign the DAC, the dataset will be withdrawn from the public website and the files will be removed from our system. If an EGA ID is referenced in a publication, the EGA will take extra steps to ensure that the public is made aware of the data's unavailability. I don't want to receive an email notification for pending requests. How can I do that? If you are an EGA DAC with pending requests, you will always receive emails for new data access requests. However, the EGA understands that a request resolution can take some time, for this reason, if you add a comment (make sure you save it by clicking the APPLY button!) we will filter those requests at the time of sending the notification! How can I manage data access requests? What documentation does the DAC need to provide? Each dataset that is submitted to the EGA must be linked to a policy object. The policy is a Data Access Agreement (DAA), which defines the terms and conditions of using the dataset, such as how the data files should be stored once downloaded or details of publication embargoes that should be observed by the approved user. As part of the Data Access Agreement, information regarding the application can be captured to help inform the DAC when making its decision. For example, requestors could be asked to provide a proposed title for their research and a proposal of how the data will be used. By asking for provision of such information the DAC can be assured that the requestor fully understands any consents associated with the data. It is important that accounts created at the EGA, are created solely for those individuals that will be downloading the data from the EGA. As part of the data access request, we strongly encourage you to identify individuals that will need an account at the EGA in order to prevent sharing of login details, which is strictly prohibited under EGA user account policy. Such information can easily be captured in the DAA. NOTICE The data access agreement template below is provided for guidance only and should be adapted as you see fit to suit your own purpose. In the interest of promoting data sharing, we suggest that if an agreement cannot be met around clause 19 in this example that both parties should agree to remain silent, and that the clause should be removed from the agreement. Example DAA How can the DAC provide the DAA? The DAC should provide their own DAA when registering a policy. Data requestors will download this document and should fill it in and send it back to the DAC. Data access decisions should be based on such documentation. The DAA can be downloaded through the request data webpage. Once it has been filled in, the signed copy of the DAA can be uploaded back to the request data webpage and sent to the DAC for review. How can I grant access to the data? Once you receive a data access request, you can login to the DAC Portal. In this portal you will see all your pending requests and will be able to grant or decline access to the requestors. I am a member of the Data Access Committee. Could I approve somebody else to deal with the requests on my behalf? If you want to delegate data access decisions to someone else, make sure that the individual's account is officially registered as a member of the DAC. Remember that a DAC contact with an "admin" role can always add new members to an existing DAC, remove members, and modify contact details through the DAC Portal. Can I automatise the process of managing data access requests? The answer is yes! You can use a programmatic approach using our DAC API! Check out the DAC API specification! Data Breach What should a DAC do if they suspect a breach? If a DAC suspects a data breach of one or more of their datasets, they should immediately contact the EGA Helpdesk team at this link. The DAC must provide the following information when contacting the EGA Helpdesk team: A list of affected datasets An estimated date of the data breach (or interval of dates) A list of unauthorised users who accessed the data (if available). Otherwise, they can provide a list of authorised users for the affected datasets Any observations they would like to raise to the EGA team Once the DAC has contacted the EGA team, we will respond within 48 hours (please allow some leeway during peak times) and activate our data breach protocol. What can I expect from the EGA if they detect a breach? Once the EGA determines that a security incident has occurred, we will notify all DAC members that a data breach has been detected, and take steps to contain the incident. Containment approaches may include: Revoking a data provider's access to the EGA resources, such as by changing passwords. Removing affected EGA datasets from distribution, such as by withdrawing a dataset. Disabling certain functions or services, such as the EGA ingestion pipeline. Shutting down the system or disconnecting it from the network. After the incident has been contained, the EGA will determine whether it is necessary to eradicate components related to the incident. Finally, the EGA will enable recovery of the service to normal operation and confirm that all services are functioning normally.

  Documentation access/data-access-committee/what-is-dac

• Single cell characterization of T-cell lymphoma: RNA (2025-07-31)

  Lymphomas are types of blood cancer derived from lymphocytes, and can be classified into two main categories, Hodgkin's lymphomas (HL) and non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHL). T-cell lymphoma is a type of NHL that develops from T lymphocytes and accounts for 10-15% of total NHL cases. As a rare disease, T-cell lymphoma is functionally, pathologically, and clinically complex and heterogeneous. The 2016 revision of the WHO classification has listed 29 subtypes of mature T/NK-cell neoplasms, among which over 25 are T lymphocyte in origin. These subtypes of T-cell lymphomas have different biological behaviours and clinical prognosis. Clinically, T-cell lymphoma ranges from indolent (slow-growing) to aggressive (fast-growing and spreading) disease. According to the guideline booklet provided by the Lymphoma Research Foundation (https://lymphoma.org/aboutlymphoma/nhl/), indolent T-cell lymphoma subtypes include adult T-cell leukaemia/lymphoma (ATLL), cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL), and mycosis fungoides (MF), while the aggressive subtypes include anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL), angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL), peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL), and T lymphoblastic lymphoma (TLBL). PTCL and ALCL represent the most common subtypes of aggressive T-cell lymphoma whereas TLBL is a rare and aggressive subtype mostly diagnosed in children. In this study, we will use single cell RNA sequencing and single cell multiomic methods three aggressive T-cell lymphoma subtypes (ALCL, PTCL and TLBL) and try to gain a deeper insight into the genotypic and phenotypic features of these T-cell lymphomas. . This dataset contains all the data available for this study on 2025-07-31.

  Dataset EGAD00001015669

• A Retrospective and Cross-Sectional Analysis of Patients Treated for SCID Since January 1, 1968

  Individuals with a past diagnosis of severe combined immune deficiency (including many cases of &#34;leaky SCID&#34;, Omenn syndrome, and reticular dysgenesis) who have undergone blood and marrow transplant, gene therapy, or enzyme replacement in the past may be eligible for 6902. The purpose of 6902 is very similar to 6901, except 6902 is looking backwards at what has already been done in the past (compared to 6901 which is looking into the future). Over 800 patients with SCID are expected to be enrolled on 6902. This makes 6902 the largest study ever to describe outcomes for patients with SCID treated at many different hospitals around North America. One of the most important components of the 6902 study is the &#34;cross sectional&#34; study. Patients who have received their treatments (BMT, gene therapy, enzyme replacement) many years ago are asked to come back to the hospital where they were treated. During this visit, additional research blood work is drawn and information is gathered regarding long-term transplant outcomes such as infections, graft-versus-host disease, autoimmune diseases, and quality of life. This will allow PIDTC researchers to better understand long-term outcomes from procedures that occurred many years ago (sometimes over 30 years ago) - something that is not possible at the present time with 6901. This will help researchers to best design new treatments and clinical trials in the future for children with SCID.

  Study phs001326

• QUANTitative Chest Computed Tomography UnMasking Emphysema Progression in Alpha-1 Antitrypsin Deficiency

  AAT deficiency is a genetic disorder associated with emphysema. Spirometry, the lung function test that measures how well the lungs exhale air, is used to diagnose and track the progression of emphysema. Some studies have suggested that forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) measurements, a type of spirometry test, may lack accuracy in detecting disease progression in cases of severe AAT deficiency. Another method, high resolution chest CT scans, may be more accurate at measuring the progression of emphysema. The purpose of this study is to determine if high resolution CT scans are better at detecting the progression of emphysema than lung function tests. Results from this study may lead to the development of a more accurate way to assess lung tissue loss and may improve the understanding of lung destruction in AAT deficiency. This study will last 4 years and will enroll people with AAT deficiency who have nearly normal lung function test results. Study visits, each lasting about 4 hours, will occur at baseline and months 6, 12, 18, 24, and 36. At each visit, participants will undergo lung function tests, a CT scan, blood collection, and a physical exam. Female participants will have urine collected for a pregnancy test. All participants will also complete questionnaires to assess health status and lung function. Study researchers will call participants every 2 months to collect information on lung disease symptoms and medication changes.

  Study phs000698

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

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

  Study phs002023

• Characterization_of_genomic_landscape_of_Peripheral_T_cell_Lymphomas__not_otherwise_specified__PTCL_NOS_

  Peripheral T-cell lymphomas not otherwise specified (PTCL-NOS) represent a heterogeneous group of nodal and extra-nodal mature T-cell lymphomas, with a low prevalence in Western countries. PTCL-NOSs account for about 25% of all PTCLs and are currently diagnosed based on exclusion criteria, as this lymphomas lack unifying morphological, phenotypic and genomic features. Cytogenetic and FISH analysis of PTCL-NOS samples have not revealed recurrent pathogenetic abnormalities, while gene expression profiling has shown only partial ability to segregate cases representing homogeneous clinic-pathological entities. This underscores the need to look at PTCL-NOS with innovative and high-throughput approaches to identify recurrent genetic lesions that could further our understanding of the biology of this heterogeneous group of diseases, provide better diagnostic tools and perhaps new targets for innovative treatments. Our aim is to study ~15 patients affected by PTCL-NOS. Out study will be funded by a private, non-profit Italian cancer research fund (Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro, www.airc.it) based on a grant owned by Anna Dodero and Cristiana Carniti, hematologists at INT. Samples will be analysed by whole genome sequencing using Illumina X10 machines, on a 150bp-PE protocol. Data will be analysed using the pipeline available in Team 78, under the supervision of Peter Campbell, the WTSI faculty who will oversee the project, and by Francesco Maura, visiting scientist at the WTSI.

  Study EGAS00001002057