Search Results - EGA European Genome-Phenome Archive

EGA synthetic data

Synthetic Data One of the limitations in genomics research is that human genomics data is not openly available; access must be controlled according to participant consent agreements and data protection regulations such as GDPR. Obtaining authorization to access such data can sometimes take a long time, resulting in delays to important research work. In this context, synthetic genomic and phenotype data can be useful resources for researchers to avoid these delays. Synthetic data are artificially generated datasets, often created with algorithms, which can be used without the need for authorization to test new products and tools, build technical demonstrators, validate data models, and train AI models. The EGA provides access to synthetic cohort datasets augmented with rich synthetic metadata that overcomes these real data usage restrictions. Whilst synthetic datasets are not included in the general EGA mandate and services, we can consider such submissions and evaluate their acceptance on the basis of their unique use cases not already covered by existing synthetic datasets. Access to synthetic data studies is managed by the EGA Helpdesk Data Access Committee. Study ID Title Located in EGAS00001002472 CINECA synthetic cohort EUROPE UK1 referencing fake samples Central EGA EGAS00001005591 Synthetic data - Genome in a Bottle Central EGA EGAS00001005042 Test Study for EGA using data from 1000 Genomes Project - Phase 3 Central EGA EGAS00001005702 Human genomic and phenotypic synthetic data for the study of rare diseases Central EGA EGAS50000000190 EOSC4Cancer Synthetic Colorectal Cancer Genomic data Central EGA EGAS50000000086 Synthetic - FEGA Sweden Heilsa synthetic dataset December 2023 Federated EGA Sweden EGAS50000000678 Synthetic - GDI synthetic data Federated EGA Spain

Documentation synthetic-data

Joslin Study on the Genetics of Type 2 Diabetes

Between 1993 and 2003, families were recruited in the Joslin Study on the Genetics of Type 2 Diabetes for the presence of an autosomal dominant mode of inheritance of diabetes. Recruiting and screening of families occurred through probands who were receiving medical care at the Joslin Clinic (Boston, MA). Screening of families included 1) a proband and at least one sibling with type 2 diabetes, 2) diabetes occurring in at least three generations, 3) diabetes inherited on one side of the prospective family. Probands had to have a diabetes diagnosis between the age range from 10 to 60 years. Demographic data, clinical data, and family history were collected from participating family members, along with blood and urine samples. This study includes genetic and phenotypic data from one family examined in Simeone, Wilkerson, et. al. (NPJ Genomic Medicine 2022, PMID: 35869090). Genotype data for 14 family members and whole genome sequencing data for 6 individuals were generated with the goal of identifying a potential genetic cause of disease in this family. To de-identify this family and protect confidentiality, information on sex in phenotype data and variants identified in X, Y, and MT chromosomes have been removed in compliance with IRB guidelines.

Study phs002959

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 (>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

Genomic Profiling Reveals Spatial Intra-tumour Heterogeneity in Follicular Lymphoma

Follicular lymphoma (FL) is an incurable indolent non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) that behaves heterogeneously and is synonymous with the reciprocal translocation t(14;18)(q32;q21), leading to aberrant constitutive over-expression of BCL2 [ref]. High risk groups with poor overall survival include patients that transform to a high grade lymphoma, most commonly diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) or progress early (within 2 years) of receiving treatment. Recently several studies have shed light on the diverse genomic landscape of FL, with frequently mutated genes including those involved in chromatin remodelling, (CREBBP, KMT2D, EZH2, EP300), immune modulation (TNFRSF14), JAK-STAT (STAT6, SOCS1), NF-ĸB (CARD11, MYD88, TNFAIP3) and mTORC1 signalling (RRAGC) [ref]. To date, the majority of these studies have either focussed on inter-patient genetic heterogeneity or established the extent of clonal heterogeneity as a patient’s tumour evolves over time. Furthermore, these temporal studies have alluded to the existence of a tumour-repopulating population (referred to as the common progenitor cell (CPC)) that evades treatment and acts as a reservoir, seeding each subsequent relapse and transformation event. Although these previous studies have illuminated the longitudinal clonal dynamics that occur in FL, our understanding of the degree of spatial or intra-tumour heterogeneity (ITH) that exists within an individual patient thus far remains limited. Earlier studies have predominantly focused on differences in cytological grade and immunophenotype between spatially separated lymph nodes and bone marrow, the most common site of extra-nodal involvement in FL, with genomic profiling restricted to examining somatic hypermutation patterns in IgVH genes [ref]. In contrast next generation sequencing has been increasingly utilised in solid organ malignancies to derive comprehensive genomic profiles from spatially separated sites. The seminal study by Gerlinger et al revealed profound differences in the genetic make-up between individual primary and metastatic sites of renal cell carcinoma [ref]. Significant heterogeneity has since been demonstrated both between and within lesions in the same patient in lung, pancreas and breast cancer with presumed driver mutations distributed within the “branches” of the evolutionary phylogenetic tree, suggesting that a single biopsy is incapable of capturing the full genomic heterogeneity of an individual’s malignancy [ref]. This geographical heterogeneity not only adds to the diverse pool of tumour subclones that may contribute to drug resistance mechanisms but importantly, presents a major obstacle for precision-based approaches focussed on targeting specific lesions within a single biopsy. In FL, the exponential increase in clinical trials using novel agents such as EZH2, PI3K and BTK inhibitors reflects this shift in cancer care and along with the development of molecular prognostic scores such as the m7-FLIPI highlights the clinical need to accurately define genomic alterations with clinical relevance. As the majority of FL patients manifest disseminated tumour involvement, we sought to uncover the extent and clinical importance of spatial heterogeneity in FL by comprehensively genetically profiling 22 synchronously removed spatially separated biopsies from 9 patients. Using a combination of whole exome and targeted deep sequencing, our results inferred the complex subclonal architecture within these tumours and the mutational differences between anatomical sites, demonstrating cases with significant intrinsic genetic diversity.

Study EGAS00001002492

Center for Craniofacial and Dental Genetics: Study of Dental Caries and Cleft Lip/Palate in Guatemala

This study provides an opportunity to investigate the genetics of both dental caries and orofacial clefts (OFCs) in one set of families ascertained in Guatemala. This study is part of the Gene Environment Association Studies initiative (GENEVA, http://www.genevastudy.org), which was developed through the trans-NIH Genes, Environment, and Health Initiative (GEI). Furthermore this study brings together multiple research priorities of the University of Pittsburgh Center for Craniofacial and Dental Genetics (www.ccdg.pitt.edu). A genome-wide panel of 610,000 SNPs was genotyped at the Broad Institute to be comparable to our other pertinent GENEVA studies that are also part of dbGaP (dbGaP accession number phs000095, "Dental Caries: Whole Genome Association and Gene x Environment Studies" and dbGaP accession number phs000094, "International Consortium to Identify Genes and Interactions Controlling Oral Clefts"). The goal of this study is to investigate genetic determinants to dental caries and to OFCs in a novel study population. To date, most genetic studies of dental caries have been conducted in Caucasians, and of OFCs in Caucasians and Asians. The Guatemalan population under study is rural and ethnically mixed with a high proportion of Native-South-Americans. Thirty-six Guatemalans from this dataset were also part of the recent GWAS studies of cleft lip and cleft palate (Beaty et al., 2010 and 2011, dbGaP Study Accession: phs000094, "International Consortium to Identify Genes and Interactions Controlling Oral Clefts"). In addition to the families ascertained in Guatemala, some subjects were genotyped with this cohort to augment the data in the parent GENEVA study (Dental Caries: Whole Genome Association and Gene x Environment Studies, dbGaP accession number phs000095), in particular individuals from the IOWA and PITT GENEVA study sites. Their data are available with the parent study. Dental caries (also known as tooth decay) remains the most common chronic disease of childhood, five times more common than asthma and seven times more common than environmental allergies, with more than 40% of children exhibiting caries when they enter kindergarten. In 2005, it was estimated that dental health care costs were approximately $84 billion, of which 60% or about $50 billion were related to treatment of dental caries. The etiology of dental caries has been studied for many years. Multiple factors contribute to a person's risk for caries, including: 1) environmental factors such as diet, oral hygiene, fluoride exposure and the level of colonization of cariogenic bacteria and 2) host factors such as salivary flow, salivary buffering capacity, position of teeth relative to each other, surface characteristics of tooth enamel and depth of occlusal fissures on posterior teeth. In spite of all that is known about this disease, there are still individuals who appear to be more susceptible to caries and those who are extremely resistant, regardless of the environmental risk factors to which they are exposed, implying that genetic factors also play an important role in caries etiology. This conclusion is supported by studies in both humans and animals, with the most compelling evidence coming from studies of twins reared apart in which investigators found significant resemblance within monozygotic (MZ) but not dizygotic (DZ) twin pairs for percentage of teeth and surfaces restored or carious and estimated the genetic contribution to caries as 40%. Other recent studies of twins reared together estimated the heritability for caries, adjusted for age and gender, as ranging from 45-64%. In our study populations of families, we also estimated caries heritability as approximately 54%-70% of variation in primary dentition caries scores and 35%-55% in the permanent dentition (Wang et al., 2010). Orofacial clefts (OFCs), particularly cleft lip with or without cleft palate (CL/P) and isolated cleft palate (CP) are a major public health problem, affecting one in every 500-1000 births worldwide thus representing the most common facial birth defect and one of the most common of all congenital anomalies. CL/P is a major structural birth defect that is notable for significant lifelong morbidity and complex etiology. The extensive psychological, surgical, speech and dental involvement emphasize the importance of understanding the underlying causes of CL/P. Therefore, many research groups have attempted to elucidate the etiology of CL/P, with some recent success by our research group and others (see Beaty et al., 2010, 2011; Dixon et al., 2011). It is clear that CL/P can occur as part of Mendelian syndromes, that certain chromosomal abnormalities include CL/P in the phenotype, and that certain teratogens can increase the risk of having an offspring with CL/P. However, phenotypes of known etiology comprise only a small portion of all individuals with a CL/P or CP, and the major focus of research into OFCs is to develop an understanding of the etiology of nonsyndromic (NS) forms of clefting. A major focus of the University of Pittsburgh CCDG has been to study additional phenotypes within nonsyndromic OFC families in order to identify sub-clinical expressions of OFC risk genes or risk variants, e.g. SNPs (see Weinberg et al., 2006). A detailed oral exam is conducted as part of these extended phenotypic studies, including a dental caries exam. Note that although there are some reports in the literature of higher caries experience in individuals with clefts, the most recent meta-analysis of those literature reports concluded that individuals born with these defects do not have a higher frequency of caries (Hasslöf and Twetman, 2007). Notably, we investigated the association of CL/P and caries in three of our study populations (including part of the Guatemalan population in this GWAS study) and also found no increase in caries rates of CL/P cases versus controls (Jindal et al., 2011). This study is part of the Gene Environment Association Studies initiative (GENEVA, http://www.genevastudy.org), which was developed through the trans-NIH Genes, Environment, and Health Initiative (GEI). The overarching goal is to identify novel genetic factors that contribute to dental caries and oral clefts through large-scale genome-wide association studies of well-characterized Guatemalan families and individuals. Genotyping was performed at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard. The study was supported by the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR, U01-DE018903). Data cleaning and harmonization were done at the GEI-funded GENEVA Coordinating Center at the University of Washington.

Study phs000440

Angelman, Rett, Prader-Willi Syndromes Consortium (ARP) Angelman Syndrome Natural History Protocol

This study is a longitudinal multidisciplinary investigation on the natural history, morbidity and mortality of Angelman Syndrome (AS). We will collect detailed longitudinal data on a cohort of AS individuals to gain a better understanding of the disease progression, and to follow the natural history of the clinical features of this cohort including assessment of quality of life and longevity. The participants to be recruited for the study will include 1) patients who have a documented molecular diagnosis of AS and 2) patients with a clear clinical diagnosis of Angelman Syndrome as determined by the Principal Investigator (PI) and the Co-investigators in this study but who do not have a known molecular defect. One of the goals of the natural history study will be to characterize the phenotypic differences between patients with Class I deletions and those with Class II deletions, particularly with respect to the issue of autism. A blood sample may be collected on the participants in order to create a DNA repository, and in some cases, to establish cell lines if further material is required for molecular studies. Alternatively, DNA may be obtained by buccal mucosa swabs/brushing. In those AS patients with known deletions involving the 15q11-q13 regions, a blood sample will be collected to perform comparative genome hybridization (CGH) microarray studies to characterize the extent of the deletion. No drugs or treatments will be administered through this protocol. In rare instances, a skin biopsy to establish a fibroblast cell line may be requested (using separate consent).

Study phs000576

Cancer Moonshot Biobank

The National Cancer Institute initiated the Cancer Moonshot Biobank to accelerate research through the collection and distribution of biospecimens for key research efforts. The Biobank will engage with over one thousand cancer patients, being treated with standard-of-care therapies, for longitudinal biospecimen and data collection. Cancer patients will be enrolled into the study from a diverse participant population engaged at medical institutions throughout the U.S. The biospecimens will be distributed to qualified scientists to accelerate research progress. The Biobank program, working closely with Leidos Biomedical, Inc. (LBR), will partner with community hospitals and other medical institutions, designated as Biospecimen Source Sites (BSS), to engage and consent eligible participants and collect biospecimens and associated clinical data; work with a central Biospecimen Core Resource (BCR) to support biospecimen collection, processing and storage activities and perform pathology quality control; work with LBR's Molecular Characterization (MoCha) lab to perform clinical tumor molecular characterization assays and return results to patients and their physicians; and make the biospecimens and associated data available to researchers to accelerate cancer research progress. Return of clinical results, a dedicated Patient and Provider Engagement (PPE) website, electronic informed consent, local participant engagement projects, and an embedded ethical, legal and social issues sub-study will together support patient and provider engagement in the program. Cancer Moonshot Biobank imaging data is being made available in The Cancer Imaging Archive (TCIA) on a release schedule that is coordinated with the program releases of data to dbGaP. The imaging data can be found at the following link: Cancer Moonshot Biobank Imaging

Study phs002192

Lactate metabolism in cancer stem cell fate regulation

Tumors arise as a result of uncontrolled cell proliferation driven by mutations in the signaling pathways that regulate the balance between cell division and differentiation. Despite of that, in the tumor, cancer stem cells seem to retain their capability to differentiate, which can lead to differential chemotherapy response. We previously showed that intestinal stem cells and differentiated cells display specific metabolic features and that they interact through metabolites. Moreover, we found that altering mitochondrial metabolism is sufficient to lead and define stem cell differentiation. In cancer, cellular metabolism is highly derailed. However, how metabolic changes in the cancer cell contribute to cell fate decisions remains unknown. Recently, the crosstalk between metabolism and epigenetics has emerged as one of the players in tumor development. Here we aim to address the impact of the altered metabolism of cancer cells on their epigenome as a regulatory axis of cell identity and fate. We use human-derived tumor organoids where we introduce genetic encoded fluorescent-based reporters to visualize cell identity and metabolism at single cell level. We combine 4D live imaging with a recently developed machine learning method to re-construct cell-lineages, trace stem cell state and metabolic changes during tumor organoid development. We find that, mimicking the tumor metabolic microenvironment (Warburg effect-driven low-glucose high-lactate) leads to changes cellular metabolism and histone acetylation. Strikingly, these alterations provoke profound changes in tumor development by increasing the population of cancer stem cells and their proliferation and differentiation dynamics.

Study EGAS50000000063

RB Loss in Resistant EGFR Mutant Lung Adenocarcinomas that Transform to Small Cell Lung Cancer

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are effective treatments for non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations. However, they do not lead to cures, and, on average, relapse occurs typically occurs afterafter an average of one year of continuous treatment. In a subset of patients, aA fundamental histological transformation from NSCLC to small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is observed in a subset of the resistant cancers, but the molecular changes associated with this transformation remain unknown. Analysis of a cohort of tumor samples and cell lines derived from resistant EGFR mutant patients with SCLC transformation revealed that RB is lost in 100% of these SCLC transformed cases, but rarely in those that remain NSCLC. Global changes in gene expression, including increased neuroendocrine marker expression and absence of EGFR expression, are observed in resistant EGFR mutant cancers that transformed to SCLC. Consistent Further, with their similarities to classical SCLC at the genetic and gene expression levelincreased neuroendocrine marker and decreased EGFR expression as well as greater sensitivity to BCL2 family inhibition are observed in resistant SCLC transformed cancers compared to resistant NSCLCs. , cell lines derived from resistant EGFR mutant SCLC biopsies are substantially more sensitive to Bcl-2 family inhibition with ABT-263 compared to those derived from resistant EGFR mutant NSCLCs. Together, these findings suggest that despite developing initially as EGFR mutant adenocarcinomas, this subset of resistant cancers ultimately adopt many of the molecular and phenotypic characteristics of classical SCLC.

Study EGAS00001001102

Immunodeficiency syndrome caused by LCP1 mutations

Severe congenital neutropenia (SCN) is characterized by neutropenia, recurrent infections and an increased leukemia risk. Multiple genetic defects underlying SCN have been identified, but a genetic diagnosis is still lacking in a significant proportion of patients. Here, we report three independent pedigrees with autosomal dominant variants in LCP1. Variants c.740-1G>T and c.740-20_744del resulted in the same alternatively spliced RNA product, causing an in-frame deletion (p.A247_E254del). Variant c.509C>T in the third pedigree resulted in p.S170L. Variant carriers suffer from neutropenia, poor or complete lack of response to G-CSF treatment, and variable degrees of lymphopenia. Patients with A247_E254del presented with tetraploid cells in the bone marrow, indicative of disturbed cytokinesis. In one of these kindreds, two individuals developed acute leukemia. G-CSF non-responsiveness and defective cell cycling were repaired upon correction of the LCP1 A247_E254del variant in patient-derived induced pluripotent stem cells, supporting the monogenic origin of the disease. Indicative of their gain-of-function, both A247_E254del and S170L variants increased F-actin bundling and formation of abnormal protrusions. Single-cell transcriptome analysis of A247_E254del bone marrow-derived hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) showed deregulation of signaling pathways controlling mitosis in multi-lineage and lymphoid-primed HSPC subsets. We conclude that activating LCP1 variants cause a new autosomal dominant hematopoietic disorder. Depending on the consequences of the LCP1 variants for protein structure, patients may suffer from G-CSF refractory severe neutropenia, lymphopenia, defective cytokinesis and predisposition to leukemia.

Study EGAS00001008293

Two monogenic disorders masquerading as one: Severe congenital neutropenia with monocytosis and non-syndromic sensorineural hearing loss

Study EGAS00001004176

A first-in-human clinical study of an allogenic iPSC-derived corneal endothelial cell substitute transplantation for bullous keratopathy

iPSC-derived corneal endothelial cell substitutes recover pathological corneal edema. No adverse reactions are observed after one year follow-up. Gene mutations may appear despite whole genome sequencing of the master cell bank. This study contains the RNA-seq data.

Study EGAS50000000673

RNA sequencing data of pediatric T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (set 3)

The dataset includes RNA sequencing FASTQ files from diagnostic tumor samples of two T-ALL patients (ALLK-126, ALLT-503). Two diagnostic samples of ALLT-503 were sequenced: one extracted from the bone marrow (ALLT-503D-RNA) and one from the lymph node (ALLT-503lympD-RNA). Novogene's internal method was used in directional library preparation including rRNA removal. The diagnostic tumor samples were sequenced using Illumina Novaseq X Plus, and the target sequencing depth was 21 Gb per sample.

Dataset EGAD50000002586

the Yemeni-Somali 5 million SNP array dataset

The three new samples (two from Yemen and one from Somalia) that carry a maternal lineage affiliated with the Malagasy motif were assayed for genome-wide SNP genotypes using the Illumina Human Omni5 Bead Chip (Illumina), which surveys 4,284,426 single nucleotide markers regularly spaced across the genome.

Study EGAS00001003425

MCO colorectal cancer genomics at UNSW

This dataset contains DNA sequencing data from 95 colorectal cancer and matched-normal samples. The dataset contains targeted deep sequencing of selected regulatory elements in 95 cancer and matched-normal samples, and data for one sample that was additionally whole-genome sequenced (cancer and matched-normal).

Study EGAS00001003450

LCCC1122: Defining the Triple Negative Breast Cancer Kinome Response to GSK1120212

In this study the investigators looked at adaptive reprogramming impact on the kinome when a MEK inhibitor called GSK1120212 (trametinib) was administered in a "window of opportunity" trial. GSK1120212 is not yet approved by the FDA for use in breast cancer patients. The investigators gave GSK1120212 for a short period of time (one week) to examine MEK and the other kinase expression in cancer cells both before and after the study drug is given. The investigators gave this drug for research purposes only. The length of time it was given is not intended to treat cancer. Recently researchers at UNC developed a process that can comprehensively profile the majority of the individual kinases in the kinome and examine the impact on kinase expression of kinase inhibitors (Duncan et al, Cell 2012, PMID: 22500798). This can tell us which kinases need to be concurrently blocked to augment responsiveness and prevent acquired resistance so that the investigators can design the best combinations of kinase blocking drugs for triple negative breast cancer. This is especially important for individuals with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) because there are no targeted drugs available that can block molecules that affect tumor growth. The investigators believe that kinase-blocking drugs have the potential to be a more effective treatment for people with TNBC. In this recently published study (Zawistowski et al, Cancer Discovery 2017, PMID: 28108460), TNBC patients treated with trametinib for 7 days resulted in a transcriptional response characterized by significant reprogramming of the tyrosine kinome, and this adaptive bypass response in human tumors was found to be similar to that seen in preclinical models including TNBC cell lines and mouse xenografts. In this study we also examined whether reprogramming differed between TNBC molecular subtypes, finding that basal-like and claudin-low human TNBC cells and mouse tumor subtypes had different adaptive transcriptional responses to MEK-ERK inhibition. Mechanistically we found that genome-wide enhancer remodeling drove the adaptive transcriptional response, suggesting that epigenetic approaches to reprogramming may be more durable than kinase inhibitor polypharmacology.

Study phs001405

HCA_Thymus_Disease_DiGeorge_Transplant_RNA

Single cell transcriptomics study of thymic transplant biopsies Allogeneic thymus transplantation is the only curative therapy for complete DiGeorge Syndrome (cDGS), a rare severe primary immunodeficiency characterised by athymia. GOSH is one of only two centres worldwide to offer this treatment. Despite a lack of major histocompatibility complex (MHC)-matching between donor and host, transplanted thymus becomes repopulated by recipient bone marrow derived precursor cells and supports development of functional T-cells. The mechanisms underlying thymopoiesis in this context are poorly understood, but over time we observe reconstitution of T-cell immunity, with the ability to produce host naïve T-cells showing a broad T-cell receptor (TCR) repertoire and to generate MHC-restricted T-cell proliferative responses. Although lifesaving, the achieved immunological reconstitution is typically not complete with circulating T-cell numbers usually remaining below the age related normal ranges. Additionally, we observe persistence of donor-derived T-cells of unknown clinical significance. To gain more insight into the mechanisms by which MHC-mismatched transplanted thymus supports T-cell development with self-tolerance, as well as into the basis of suboptimal T-cell immunity, we now aim to investigate immune reconstitution after thymus transplantation in further detail by using single-cell transcriptomics, applied to thymic transplant biopsies and peripheral blood samples collected during standard post-transplant patient care. By identifying which lineages of host- derived cells repopulate the thymic tissue after transplantation, we will be able to address the role of MHC in positive and negative T-cell selection during T-cell differentiation. We will also be able to clarify the exact ontogeny of the persistent donor T-cells, as well as their possible role. Understanding the mechanisms of action of HLA-mismatched transplanted thymus will contribute to treatment optimisation. Additionally, our research provides a unique opportunity to further investigate key immunological concepts, such as tolerance and autoimmunity, challenging existing paradigms in thymus immunology. This data is part of a pre-publication release. For information on the proper use of pre-publication data shared by the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute (including details of any publication moratoria), please see http://www.sanger.ac.uk/datasharing/

Study EGAS00001004025

High-coverage whole exome sequence in non-TRU-type lung adenocarcinomas

In order to elucidate the key genetic events in non-TRU-type lung cancer, we selected 43 non-TRU-type lung adenocarcinomas and performed a whole exome sequence and RNA-seq analysis using a next-generation sequencer. The results of the analysis identified mutations in TP53, KRAS and NKX2-1 as the top three significantly mutated genes, while the EGFR mutation was rare in this cohort. Eight NKX2-1 mutations (5 frameshift, 2 nonsense, and one missense) were identified, with one case harboring two distinct NKX2-1 mutations (missense and frameshift). All NKX2-1 mutants were transcriptionally inactive in reporter assays. Histologically, invasive mucinous adenocarcinomas accounted for most of the NKX2-1 mutations (5 cases), while 1 enteric and 1 acinar adenocarcinoma harbored the NKX2-1 mutation.

Study JGAS000105

Gliomas, glioneuronal and neuronal tumors

The dataset represents a total of 85 DNA samples from 22 male and 20 female pediatric patients affected with gliomas, glioneuronal, and neuronal tumors. The samples were subject to whole genome sequencing, WGS, [71 samples, (representing 18 male and 17 female individuals)] and whole exome sequencing, WES, [14 samples, (representing 4 males and 3 female individuals)]. One tumor tissue sample and one peripheral blood sample were analyzed from each of 84 patients, whereas two tumor tissue samples and one peripheral blood sample were analyzed from one patient. The WGS samples were sequenced 2x150 bp paired-end on an Illumina HiSeqX v2.5 instrument, and the WES samples were sequenced 2x100 bp paired-end on an Illumina HiSeq 2500 instrument. The FASTQ files generated were aligned to the human reference genome sequence GRCh38/hg38 using bwa-mem, with the ALT-aware option turned on. Sorting of reads and marking of PCR duplicates was performed with GATK. Base quality score recalibration and joint realignment of reads around insertions and deletions (indels) were conducted using GATK tools. The dataset consists of 85 files in the CRAM format (lossless compression) with a total file size of ~13,3 TB. Additional genomic and molecular data (FASTQ, BAM, IDAT, and VCF files) and limited clinical data can be requested by ethically approved projects conducting research in the field of pediatric cancer.

Dataset EGAD50000000300

Synthetic data - Genome in a Bottle

In May, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) released its first genome in a bottle, a reference sample of DNA for validating human genome sequences. This so-called truth sequence comes from a decades-old sample donated by a Utah woman for (other) research purposes (NA12878 cell line), which, over the years, has been one of the most studied, and hence best-characterized, human samples. Seeing genomic medicine moving toward mainstream healthcare, researchers at NIST recognized the need for a reference human genome and assembled a private-public consortium in 2012 to create one. As detailed in a 2014 Nature Biotechnology paper (Nat. Biotechnol.32, 246–251, 2014), the group integrated and arbitrated among sequences from 14 data sets, five sequencing technologies, seven read mappers and three variant callers.

Study EGAS00001005591

Programmatic submission based on XML

Programmatic submissions (XML based) For further information please check our Submission FAQs, submission quickguide as well as submission terms! Introduction Besides the Submitter Portal tool, EGA supports programmatic sequence and clinical data metadata submissions. If you are not sure what this means, you may want to explore our brief metadata introduction. Programmatic submissions are recommended for array-based submission. Moreove, it may be of help if your submission is recurrent or it is difficult to manage manually due to its sheer size. Otherwise, we highly recommend using the Submitter Portal to perform submissions. In this page we will guide you through the required steps to programmatically submit data to the EGA. Programmatic submissions require your metadata to be structured for an easy and straightforward validation and archival. It basically consists in formatting your metadata as Extensible markup language (XML) files and submitting them to the EGA using the WEBIN Before submitting metadata to the EGA, it is important to ensure that the information in your XML files is compliant with our standards. You can see further details on how these standards are maintained at EGA at our EGA Schemas documentation page. Using WEBIN, you can validate your XML files against EGA's schemas to ensure that your metadata is compliant before submission. WEBIN services WEBIN production service WEBIN test service We advise you to submit your metadata to the test service when submitting to the production service for the first time. The test service is identical to the production service except that all submissions will be discarded in the following 24 hours. This allows you to learn about the submission process without having to worry about data being submitted. Authentication Authentication is required each time a submission is made. The submission service uses HTTPS protocol for metadata encryption and identification to provide a secure submission environment. Data file upload Both Runs and Analyses reference files (e.g. FASTQ need to be uploaded to the EGA before these metadata objects are submitted. In other words, if you submit a Run that references a file that we cannot find associated with your account, the metadata submission will fail. See further details on how to upload your files in our File Upload documentation. Metadata model of the EGA Our metadata model is formed by multiple metadata objects. Check further details in our documentation at our EGA Schema documentation page. Working with EGA XMLs files Now that the basic concepts of the EGA metadata have been described, you can start preparing your programmatic submission through XML. Here you will find the guidance on how to prepare the XML files. Programmatic Submission Tutorial Video Take a look at the Programmatic Submission Tutorial Video, which explains the workflow of a programmatic submission and goes over an example metadata submission. Programmatic Submission Tutorial Video. When building your XML files, we recommend using text editors (e.g.Sublime Text or VisualStudio) that allow you to visualise the structure of the XML with ease. Furthermore, these editors constantly check the consistency of the XML structure. Alternatively, and if the submission consists of a big number of objects (specially analyses), you may find the tool star2xml handy. This tool allows for a direct conversion between metadata in a tabular format (e.g. a spreadsheet) into XMLs. Identifying objects: Aliases and center names Every EGA object must be uniquely identified within the submission account using their alias attribute. The aliases can be used in submissions to make references between EGA objects. Let us dig into EGA's use of aliases and center names: alias: every object should have a name that is unique within your submission account. Once submitted successfully, every alias will be assigned a unique and permanent accession (EGA ID). refname: when an object references another by its alias, the alias of the referenced object goes into the "refname" attribute of the referencing object. For example, if a sample has the alias "sample1", and an experiment uses this sample, then the experiment's "EXPERIMENT/SAMPLE/refname" attribute should be "sample1". center_name: The "center_name" attribute is required within the submission XML and, if not provided when the object is submitted, it will be automatically filled using your default EGA account center_name. This element is the "controlled vocabulary acronym or abbreviation that is provided to the account holder when the account is first generated". If the submitter is brokering a submission for another institute, the submitter should use their special broker account name in broker_name while the data centre acronym remains in center_name. Log-in details should have been provided when you requested a submission account. Please contact our Helpdesk team if you have any questions. run_center: Many submitting centers contract out the actual sample sequencing to another center. In these cases, the sequencing center should be acknowledged in the run_center attribute. Again, this is controlled vocabulary and the acronym should be sought from EGA helpdesk before submitting. Please contact our Helpdesk team if you have any questions. Prepare your XMLs The goal of this section is to provide sufficient information to be able to create the metadata XML documents required for programmatic submissions. Please note, the EGA utilises the XML schemas maintained at the European Nucleotide Archive (ENA). It is important due to the fact that by using a similar system, some pieces of documentation from the ENA's programmatic submission can also help you with your programmatic submission to the EGA. For example, you can submit programmatically without using a Submission XML by following the steps at Submission actions without submission XML. A submission does not have to contain all different types of XMLs. For example, it is possible to submit only a few samples; or a study that is later to be referenced. You can submit each object one by one, or submit all in a batch: you choose what method of submission works best for you. We do recommend, nevertheless, that you submit the objects to be referenced (e.g. samples or studies) first, and the objects that reference these (e.g. experiments or datasets) afterwards. You can see a graphical view of these objects and their relationships at our EGA Schemas page. Independently of the submission scenario, you will always require a Dataset XML. The entity of a dataset is what is used to control access to the given data, in the form of runs or analyses. In other words, when a requester is granted access, it is through the dataset and the objects (e.g. runs or analyses) that the dataset contains, granting access to them in one go. Given the nature of the EGA, a dataset XML will always be required for the data access. First, we will differentiate between submissions of "raw" and "processed" data: Runs and Analyses, respectively. Run data submissions Raw data derives from instruments "as is". For example, a plain sequence file (e.g. FASTQ or unaligned BAM files) would be considered raw data. A typical raw (unaligned) sequence read submission consists of 8 XMLs: Submission Study Sample Experiment Run DAC Policy Dataset When technical reads (e.g. barcodes, adaptors or linkers) are included in the submitted raw sequences, a spot descriptor must be submitted to describe the position of the technical reads so that they can be removed. The following data files can be submitted without providing spot descriptor information in the experiment/run XML: BAM files (single reads) SFF files (single reads without barcodes) FastQ files (single reads without any technical reads) Complete Genomics files Analysis data submissions Processed data is, in some way, refined raw data. This includes raw data that has been processed by some form of analysis method (e.g. alignment, noise reduction, etc.). For example, an aligned sequence (e.g. BAM file), that was created using raw FASTQ files, would be a processed file. This category includes most types of data: sequence alignment files (e.g. BAM or CRAM), clinical data (e.g. phenopackets), sequence variation files (e.g. VCF), sequence annotation, etc. A typical EGA analysis data submission consists of 7 EGA XML: Submission Study Sample Analysis DAC Policy Dataset We accept three different types of analysis data submissions: BAM files (for multiple read alignments) VCF files (for sequence variations) Phenotype files (in any format) In anycase, keep in mind that samples must be created in order to be referenced in the analyses. In other words, the provenance of the information within the BAM, VCF and phenotype files Example XMLs Below you can find a non-extensive list of example XMLs with descriptive fields (i.e. explaining what to provide in each field). Furthermore, you can also find real examples (i.e. the true value of the provided fields) in our GitHub repository. Submission XML The submission XML is used to validate, submit or update any number of other objects. The submission XML refers to other XMLs. New submissions use the ADD action to submit new objects. Object updates are done using the MODIFY action and objects can be validated using the VERIFY action. Descriptive submission XML example True values submission XML example Study XML The study XML is used to describe the study containing a title, a study type and abstract as it would appear in a publication. Descriptive study XML example True values study XML example Please use the following notation within the property "STUDY_LINKS" when including PubMed citations in the Study XML: <STUDY_LINKS> <STUDY_LINK> <XREF_LINK> <DB>PUBMED</DB> <ID>18987735</ID> </XREF_LINK> </STUDY_LINK> </STUDY_LINKS> Sample XML The sample XML is used to describe the samples used to obtain the data, whether they were sequenced, measured in any other way, or have an associated phenotype. The mandatory fields include information about the taxonomy of the sample, sex, subject ID and phenotype. For example, the mandatory attribute fields for each sample would look like these, within the array of "SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES": <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES> <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <TAG>subject_id</TAG> <VALUE>free text!</VALUE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <TAG>sex</TAG> <VALUE>female/male/unknown</VALUE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <TAG>phenotype</TAG> <VALUE>Free text, EFO terms (e.g. EFO:0000574) are recommended</VALUE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES> Sample is one of the most important objects to be described biologically, it is highly recommended that “TAG-VALUE” pairs are generated as SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES to describe the sample in as much detail as possible. For example, were we to give the population ancestry of the sample, we could add a new attribute to the array, in which, for example, we would indicate that the sample derives from an individual of "Mende in Sierra Leone" (MSL), with an african ancestry: <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <TAG>Population</TAG> <VALUE>MSL</VALUE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> Given that VALUE and TAG are free text, the combinations are limitless in order to give you full flexibility on the information you want to provide. We recommend you use the Experimental Factor Ontology (EFO) to describe the phenotypes of your samples. You can provide more than one phenotype by adding more items to the array of SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES. Phenotypes considered essential for understanding the data submission should be provided. Each phenotype described should be listed as a separate sample attribute <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE>. There is no limit to the number of phenotypes that can be submitted. If a suitable EFO accession cannot be found for your phenotype attribute, please consider using another controlled ontology database (e.g. HPO, MONDO, etc.) before using free text. Descriptive sample XML example True values sample XML example Experiment XML The experiment XML is used to describe the experimental setup, including instrument platform and model details, library preparation details, and any additional information required to correctly interpret the submitted data. Where any of these values differ between runs, a new experiment object must exist, since runs are grouped by experiments. Each experiment references a study and a sample by alias, or if previously-submitted, by accession. Pooled data must be demultiplexed by barcode for submission. Descriptive experiment ( Illumina paired read ) XML example True values experiment ( Illumina paired read ) XML example Run XML The run XML is used to associate data files with experiments and typically comprises a single data file (e.g. a FASTQ file). Please note that pooled samples should be de-multiplexed prior submission and submitted as different runs. Descriptive run XML example True values run XML example Analysis XML Given that an analysis can be used to submit any type of processed data to the EGA, we will list below an example of each of the three most common types of analysis XMLs submitted to the EGA: sequence alignments (e.g. BAM files); sequence variation (e.g. VCF files); and clinical metadata or phenotypes (e.g. phenopackets). Regardless of the type of processed data submitted in the analysis, the analysis must be associated with a Study and can reference multiple types of other objects, from samples to experiments, if they are available at the EGA. Just like with Runs, whenever a file is submitted to the EGA through an analysis object, the file MD5 checksums must be present, in order for the EGA to validate file integrity upon transfer. This also includes index files when applicable (e.g. .bai.md5 files). Ideally, any analysis that uses a reference sequence for some kind of alignment (e.g. BAM, CRAM or VCF files), would contain metadata about the alignment, such as INSDC reference assemblies and sequences, by either using accessions (e.g. CM000663.1) or common labels (e.g. GRCh37). Read alignment (BAM) Analysis XML The Analysis can be used to submit BAM alignments to EGA. Only one BAM file can be submitted in each analysis and the samples used within the BAM read groups must be associated with Samples. Descriptive bam alignments XML example True values bam alignments XML example Sequence variation (VCF) Analysis XML The Analysis can be used to submit VCF files to EGA. Only one VCF file can be submitted in each analysis and the samples used within the VCF files must be associated with Samples. Download analysis XML (VCF) Phenotype files The Analysis XML can be used to submit phenotype files to the EGA. Only one phenotype file can be submitted in each analysis and the samples used within the phenotype files must be associated with EGA Samples. Download analysis XML (Phenotype) DAC XML The DAC XML describes the Data Access Committee (DAC) affiliated to the data submission. The DAC may consist of a group or a single individual and is responsible for the data access decisions based on the application procedure described in the POLICY.XML. As with any other object, if it was already submitted to the EGA, there is no need to submit it again: you can reference an existing object within the EGA. Hence, A DAC XML does not need to be provided if your submission is affiliated to an existing EGA DAC.. Further information on DACs can be found here, and you can always contact our Helpdesk team if you have further inquiries. Descriptive dac XML example True values dac XML example Policy XML The Policy XML describes the Data Access Agreement (DAA) to be affiliated to the named Data Access Committee. Descriptive policy XML example True values study XML example Dataset XML The dataset XML describes the data files, defined by the Run.XML and Analysis.XML, that make up the dataset and links the collection of data files to a specified Policy. The dataset xml is commonly the last metadata object to be submitted, since it references multiple other entities. Please consider the number of datasets that your submission consists of. For example, a case-control study is likely to consist of at least two datasets. In addition, we suggest that multiple datasets should be described for studies using the same samples but different sequence technologies. Descriptive dataset XML example True values dataset XML example Validating and submitting your EGA Validating EGA's XMLs through Webin After you have ensured that the XMLs are properly formatted and contain all the required information. You can proceed to validate and submit your data. Use the curl command to validate your XML file: Once you have prepared your XML file and asserted you have access to Webin, you can validate your XML file programmatically against EGA's schemas using the curl command. There are multiple ways in which you can validate your XMLs. This variety has to do with the fact that: (1) there are 2 instances of Webin (test and production); and (2) that validation is a default step during submission. In other words, any time that you submit your data through Webin, it will be validated automatically before being accepted. This allows for 4 possible routes of validation, all having the same validation result: validating or submitting to either the production service or the test service of Webin. For example, directly validating a "study" object XML in the testing service (wwwdev…) would look like the following: curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=VALIDATE" "https://wwwdev.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" In this command, you would need to replace <USERNAME> and <PASSWORD> with your EGA account username and password, respectively. You would also replace <INPUT_FILE> with the path to your XML file. A mock example would look like the following: curl -u ega-test-data@ebi.ac.uk:egarocks -F "ACTION=VALIDATE" "https://wwwdev.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" The validation attempt can have different results depending on the given arguments: If your XML file is valid according to EGA's schemas, you will see a message indicating that your XML file is compliant. For example, see below for our mock example, where the "success" was "true" (i.e. no validation errors found). Nevertheless, notice how the "<STUDY accession=" is empty: it is because we were simply validating, so the study did not get an accession or ID. <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="receipt.xsl"?> <RECEIPT receiptDate="2023-04-11T15:19:28.850+01:00" submissionFile="submission-EBI-TEST_1681222768850.xml" success="true"> <STUDY accession="" alias="Mock example" status="PRIVATE"/> <SUBMISSION accession="" alias="SUBMISSION-11-04-2023-15:19:28:840"/> <MESSAGES> <INFO>VALIDATE action has been specified.</INFO> <INFO>Submission has been rolled back.</INFO> <INFO>This submission is a TEST submission and will be discarded within 24 hours</INFO> </MESSAGES> <ACTIONS>VALIDATE</ACTIONS> <ACTIONS>PROTECT</ACTIONS> If there are any errors or warnings, the tool will display them, allowing you to correct them before submitting your data to EGA. For example, in the following response, it is said that the object we were trying to submit was already existing, and therefore the "success" was "false". <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="receipt.xsl"?> <RECEIPT receiptDate="2023-04-11T15:12:35.609+01:00" submissionFile="submission-EBI-TEST_1681222355609.xml" success="false"> <STUDY alias="Example!_Human Microbiome Project SP56J" status="PRIVATE" holdUntilDate="2023-03-11Z"/> <SUBMISSION alias="SUBMISSION-11-04-2023-15:12:35:576"/> <MESSAGES> <ERROR>In study, alias: "Example!_Human Microbiome Project SP56J". The object being added already exists in the submission account with accession: "ERP127584".</ERROR> <INFO>VALIDATE action has been specified.</INFO> <INFO>Submission has been rolled back.</INFO> <INFO>This submission is a TEST submission and will be discarded within 24 hours</INFO> </MESSAGES> <ACTIONS>VALIDATE</ACTIONS> <ACTIONS>PROTECT</ACTIONS> If the curl command retrieves no response at all, please double check if your username and password are correctly provided. Also notice the "ACTION=..." argument passed to the Curl command. This specifies the action to take during the call to Webin, so we do not need a "Submission" XML just for a validation attempt. See more at submission actions without submission XML. Furthermore, validation of multiple files or objects (e.g. sample, experiment, study…) can be done in a single command by adding more arguments (i.e. '-F'). For example: curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=VALIDATE" "https://wwwdev.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" -F "SAMPLE=@sample.xml" -F "DATASET=@dataset.xml" As mentioned above, beside "validate" action in the test environment, you can also validate your metadata by three other methods: "Validate" in the production server. From our example above, you simply need to take the "dev" away from the URL. curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=VALIDATE" "https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" "Add" in the development server. From our example above, you would simply need to replace the action: from "validate" to "add". Whatever is submitted to this service will be discarded in 24h, so whether something gets submitted or not would not matter in the long run. curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=ADD" "https://wwwdev.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" "Add" in the productionserver. A combination of the previous two methods, which would render this attempt into a submission. This path is just to be taken when you are sure your metadata is compliant and what you want to submit. curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=ADD" "https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" What happens after the submission of a dataset XML? Once you have completed the registration of your dataset/s please contact our Helpdesk Team to provide a release date for your study. Please note that all datasets affiliated to unreleased studies are automatically placed on hold until the authorised submitter or DAC contact contact the EGA Helpdesk for the study to be released. We strongly advise you not to delete your data until EGA Helpdesk confirms that your data has been successfully archived.

Documentation submission/metadata/submission/programmatic-submission-xml

Whole Exome Sequencing of Calcitonin Producing Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms (CT-pNENs) Indicates a Unique Molecular Signature

Calcitonin-producing pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (CT-pNENs), which can mimic clinical and laboratory features of medullary thyroid carcinoma, are an extremely rare clinical entity with approximately 60 cases reported worldwide. The molecular profile of CT-pNENs is not yet known. Whole-exome sequencing (WES) was performed on tumor and corresponding serum samples of five patients with increased calcitonin serum levels and histologically proven calcitonin-positive CT-pNENs. cBioPortal analysis and gene enrichment analysis with DAVID were performed to validate candidate genes. Immunohistochemistry was used to detect protein expression of MUC4 and MUC16 in CT-pNEN specimens. Common somatic mutations of pNENs like MEN1, ATRX and PIK3CA were identified in cases of CT-pNENs. New somatic SNVs in ATP4A, HES4, and CAV3 have not yet been described in CT-pNENs. Pathogenic germline mutations in FGFR4 and DPYD were found in three of five cases. Mutations of CALCA (calcitonin) and the corresponding receptor CALCAR were found in all five tumor samples, but none of them resulted in clinical or protein sequelae. All five tumor cases showed single nucleotide variations (SNVs) in MUC4, and four cases showed SNVs in MUC16, both of which were membrane-bound mucins. Immunohistochemistry showed protein expression of MUC4 and MUC16 in one case each, and the liver metastasis of a third case was double positive for MUC4 and MUC16. The homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) score of all tumors was low.CT-pNENs have a unique molecular signature compared to other pNEN subtypes, specifically involving the FGFR4, DPYD, MUC4, MUC16 and the KRT family genes. However, these WES data from only five cases must be interpreted with caution because causal interpretation of the mutational landscape in CT-pNENs is difficult. Further research is needed to explain differences in pathogenesis compared with other pNENs. In particular, multi-omics data such as RNASeq, methylation, and whole genome sequencing could be informative.

Study phs003060

Metagenomic Analysis to Identify Novel Infectious Agents in Systemic Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma

Anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) is a rare T-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Risk of systemic ALCL is markedly increased among immunosuppressed people, such as those with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection or solid organ transplant recipients. This increased risk in immunosuppressed populations suggests a viral etiology, given similar elevations for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), Burkitt lymphoma, and Hodgkin lymphoma (caused by Epstein-Barr virus [EBV]) and other virus-related cancers in immunosuppressed individuals. EBV might be a plausible candidate, but most reported ALCL tumors are EBV-negative. Therefore, we conducted a metagenomic analysis of microbial associations with ALCL to determine whether a known or novel pathogen is associated with the tumor. We obtained archived formal fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) ALCL tumor tissue from the Iowa cancer registry and an additional case from an immunosuppressed individual infected with human immunodeficiency virus. Controls included 3 diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCLs) in transplant recipients (shown to be related to Epstein-Barr virus [EBV] by in situ hybridization) and 3 breast cancers (no known viral etiology). RNA was extracted from FFPE specimens, and total RNA libraries were prepared using the KAPA RNA HyperPrep Kit (Roche). Five samples (IA01, IA53, IA57, IA07, and IA17) were sequenced on a NextSeq 500 (Illumina) and the remainder on a NovSeq 6000 (Illumina). Using novel computational approaches, we eliminated human reads and aligned residual non-human reads to known microbial references using GATK-PathSeq or conducted de novo assembly of unassigned reads using virID pipeline. Although EBV was detected in the 3 DLBCL controls, we did not detect EBV or any novel pathogen in ALCL tumors or in the breast cancers. Our study had a modest sample size and only one case arising in HIV-infected individual. Therefore, further studies are required to characterize the metagenome of systemic ALCLs, especially cases arising in immunosuppressed people.

Study phs002064

National Institute on Aging - Late Onset Alzheimer's Disease Family Study: Genome-Wide Association Study for Susceptibility Loci

Alzheimer disease is the most common neurodegenerative disorder of the elderly affecting an estimated five million Americans. Genetic factors contribute to the risk for disease with heritability estimates ranging from 57% to 79%. More than a decade ago, the ε4 variant of APOE was identified and remains the most consistently replicated genetic variant influencing the risk of late onset Alzheimer disease. A segregation analysis suggests there may be four additional genes influencing the age-at-onset of Alzheimer disease. In 2007 there were 968 association studies in 398 candidate genes reported, but none replicated consistently. There are many reasons for the lack of consistency, but one important reason for the lack of progress is the paucity of a sufficient number of well characterized families and patients available to the entire scientific community. The extensive effort and expense required to ascertain such a population has been addressed by the NIA-LOAD Family Study. Its goal is to identify and recruit families with two or more siblings with the late-onset form of Alzheimer's disease and a cohort of unrelated, non-demented controls similar in age and ethnic background, and to make the samples, the clinical and genotyping data and preliminary analyses available to qualified investigators world-wide. Genotyping by the Center for Inherited Disease Research (CIDR) was performed using the Illumina Infinium II assay protocol with hybridization to Illumina Human 610Quadv1_B Beadchips. This genotyping represents the largest collection of families ever assembled with Alzheimer's disease combining the NIA-LOAD Genetics Initiative Multiplex Family Study, the National Cell Repository for Alzheimer's Disease (NCRAD) with additional controls from the University of Kentucky. These genotyping results will serve as a focal point for future research that will identify all of the remaining genetic variants in Alzheimer's disease.

Study phs000168

Gene Environment Association Studies (GENEVA): Genetics of Early Onset Stroke (GEOS) Study

The Genetics of Early Onset Stroke (GEOS) Study is a population-based case-control study designed to identify genes associated with early-onset ischemic stroke and to characterize interactions of identified stroke genes and/or SNPs with environmental risk factors such as smoking and oral contraceptive use. The GEOS study consists of 921 ischemic stroke cases with age of first stroke 16-50 years and a similar number of controls, identified from the Baltimore-Washington area. Cases and controls were recruited in 3 different time periods: Stroke Prevention in Young Women-1 (SPYW-1) conducted from 1992-1996, Stroke Prevention in Young Women-2 (SPYW-2) conducted from 2001-2003, and Stroke Prevention in Young Men (SPYM) conducted from 2003-2007. The overall GEOS sample includes 477 cases who self-reported their race as "white" and 396 cases who self-reported their race as "African American." Traditional stroke risk factors and other study variables, including age, ethnicity, and history of hypertension, diabetes, myocardial infarction (MI), current smoking status, and current oral contraceptive use (both defined as use within one month prior to event for cases and at a comparable reference time for controls), were also collected during standardized interview and were included as covariates in our analyses. This study is part of the Gene Environment Association Studies initiative (GENEVA, http://www.genevastudy.org) funded by the trans-NIH Genes, Environment, and Health Initiative (GEI). The overarching goal is to identify novel genetic factors that contribute to early-onset ischemic stroke through large-scale genome-wide association studies of cases and controls of European and African descent from the Baltimore-Washington area. Genotyping was performed at the Johns Hopkins University Center for Inherited Disease Research (CIDR). Data cleaning and harmonization were done at the GEI-funded GENEVA Coordinating Center at the University of Washington.

Study phs000292

6935 results for "fc coins xbox one Buyfc26coins.com is FC 26 coins official site..hLXt"

in 23.11 milliseconds.