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

in 18.20 milliseconds.

• Development, maturation and maintenance of human prostate inferred from somatic mutations

  Stem cells within prostate epithelium frequently undergo malignant transformation, but there is limited information on their clonal dynamics and mutation burden in healthy human prostates. We sequenced whole genomes from 409 microdissections of prostate epithelium across 8 donors, using phylogenetic reconstruction with spatial mapping in a 59-year-old man’s prostate to provide high-resolution reconstruction of tissue dynamics across the lifespan. Somatic mutation burden increases linearly with age, at ~16 mutations/year/clone, and is higher in peripheral than peri-urethral regions. The 24-30 independent glandular subunits are established as rudimentary ductal structures during fetal development by 5-10 embryonic cells each. Puberty induces formation of further side branches and terminal acini by local stem cells disseminated through the rudimentary ducts during development. During adult tissue maintenance, clonal expansions are small, with limited geographic scope and minimal migration. Driver mutations are rare in normal ageing prostate epithelium, but the one canonical driver we did observe generated a sizable intraepithelial clonal expansion. By resolving unbiased, continuously occurring lineage-marking mutations, we define stem cell dynamics through embryogenesis, puberty and ageing, with relevance for prostate cancer.

  Dataset EGAD00001006591

• Submission FAQ

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

  Documentation submission/metadata/submission/FAQ

• GA4GH

  Standards The EGA is a long-standing supporter of the Global Alliance for Genomics & Health (GA4GH) to enhance responsible sharing of human genetic data through the development of interoperable global standards for human data access. The EGA is one of the founding GA4GH Driver Projects and has contributed to the development and implementation of several GA4GH standards and APIs. Below is a list of the GA4GH standards and APIs that are currently available or planned for implementation at EGA. TechnicalStandards Purpose SpecificationVersion SupportedVersion Implementation Large Scale Genomics htsget A protocol for secure, efficient, and reliable access to sequencing read and variation data. V1.3.0 V1.0.0 Specification Documentation Endpoint Read File Formats (SAM/BAM/CRAM) Specifications for storing next-generation sequencing read data. V3.0.0 V3.0.0 Implementation Example of Usage Variation File Formats (VCF/BCF) The specifications for Variant Call Format Files (VCF) and its binary counterpart BCF. V4.0.0 V2.0.0 V4.0.0 V2.0.0 Implementation Example of Usage Crypt4GH v1.0 Enables direct byte-level compatible random access to encrypted genetic data stored in community standards (e.g. CRAM, VCF) V1.0 V1.0 Specification Documentation Endpoint refget API Enables access to reference sequences using an identifier derived from the sequence itself. V1.2.6 NA Specification RNAget API v1 Provides a means of retrieving data from several types of RNA experiments including (i) feature-level expression data from RNA-seq type measurements and (ii) coordinate-based signal/intensity data similar to a bigwig representation via a client/server model. V1.0.0 NA Documentation Discovery Beacon v2 Supports discovery of genomic variants, phenotypes, and individuals V1.0.1 V0.3 Web UI API Source Code Service Info API v1 The Service Info API is an endpoint for describing GA4GH service metadata, designed for extension and inclusion in other APIs. Service info is used to describe a single service, while Service Registry is used to describe multiple services. V1.0.0 NA Documentation Service Registry API v1 provides information about other GA4GH services, primarily for the purpose of organizing services into networks or groups and service discovery across organizational boundaries. V1.0.0 NA Documentation Data Use Researcher Identities Data Use Ontology (DUO) Allow users to semantically tag genomic datasets with usage restrictions, allowing them to become automatically discoverable based on a health, clinical, or biomedical researcher’s authorisation level or intended use. 2021-02-23 2021-02-23 Specification Documentation Endpoint Authentication & Authorization Infrastructure (AAI) The GA4GH AAI specification leverages OpenID Connect (OIDC) Servers for use in authenticating the identity of researchers desiring to access clinical and genomic resources from data holders adhering to GA4GH standards, and to enable data holders to obtain security-related attributes of those researchers. V1.2.0 V1.2.0 API URI: ega.ebi.ac.uk:8443 Documentation Repository Researcher IDs (passport, visa) Specify the collection of researchers that may access a dataset at any given time, and the credentials they must supply. V1.0.1 V1.0.1 Specification Documentation Endpoint Cloud Tool Registry Service API TRS is a standard API for exchanging tools and workflows to analyze, read, and manipulate genomic data. V2.0.1 NA Documentation Repostiory Data Repository Service API ​DRS API is a standard for building data repositories and adapting access tools to work with those repositories, works with other approved APIs from the GA4GH Cloud Work Stream to allow researchers to discover algorithms across different cloud environments and send them to datasets they wish to analyse. V1.0.3 NA Documentation Repostiory Workflow Execution Service API This API lets users run a single workflow (defined using CWL or WDL) on multiple different platforms, clouds, and environments, and be confident that it will work the same way. The API provides methods to request that a workflow be run, pass parameters to that workflow, get information about running workflows, and cancel a running workflow. V1.0.1 NA Documentation Repostiory Genomic Knowledge Standards Variation Representation v1 Provides a flexible framework of computational models, schemas, and algorithms to precisely and consistently exchange genetic variation data across communities. V1.3.0 EGA team is contributing to including it in in Beacon v2 Specification and Elixir Reference Implementation Documentation Repostiory Clin/ Pheno Data Capture Phenopackets Provides information models with different levels of complexity to enable high level clinical phenotype information as well as deep clinical phenotype information to be exchanged. V2.0.0 Included in Ongoing Submissions EGA team is contributing to including it in in Beacon v2 Specification and Elixir Reference Implementation Documentation Repostiory Driver Project The EGA, jointly coordinated by the EBI and the CRG, was announced, in 2017, to be one of the 15 Driver Projects for GA4GH. Driver Projects are international genomic data initiatives, focussed on real projects and challenges that will guide the development efforts in order to accelerate and enable completely responsible and standarised data sharing by 2022. All chosen Driver Projects make a cross-sectional effort by playing an important role across the different workstreams. Thomas Keane, Jordi Rambla, Mallory Freeberg, and Aina Jené have been named Driver Project Champions for the EGA. All Driver Project Champions will be leading this ambitious initiative for the following years.

  Documentation about/projects-and-funders/ga4gh

• 20180208_EGA_Trench_MetCellLine.1

  Illumina platform sequencing data of SureSelect exome libraries prepared from 3 samples from one donor: a normal, primary breast cancer, and cell line derived from metastasis

  Dataset EGAD00001003956

• Pomalidomide for the Treatment of Bleeding in HHT (PATH-HHT)

  Data Access NOTE: Please refer to the "Authorized Access" section below for information about how access to the data from this accession differs from many other dbGaP accessions.Objectives: To determine efficacy (reduction in severity of epistaxis), tolerability, and improvement in quality of life of pomalidomide compared to placebo after 24 weeks of treatment.Background: This study addresses the efficacy of pomalidomide in the treatment of epistaxis in patients with Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia (HHT) who have anemia and/or require blood transfusion or iron infusion for treatment of bleeding-induced anemia and iron deficiency. HHT (also known as Osler-Weber-Rendu disease) is an inherited bleeding disorder. Over 95% of patients develop recurrent epistaxis, which may be severe and result in chronic anemia, need for iron infusions and blood transfusions, substantial psychiatric comorbidity (including depression and post-traumatic stress disorder) and reduction in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). HHT is clinically diagnosed using the Curacao criteria, which consists of 1) spontaneous and recurrent epistaxis, 2) telangiectasias at characteristic sites, 3) visceral arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) or telangiectasias, and 4) a first degree relative with HHT (inheritance is usually autosomal dominant). Patients with three criteria are considered to have definite HHT, and those with 2 criteria probable HHT. HHT affects approximately 1 in 3,800 individuals. Significant manifestations of HHT often do not appear until the third or fourth decades, sometimes later.Participants: 144 patients from 11 clinical centers were enrolled.Design: This is a multi-center, double blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial that investigated the efficacy and safety of pomalidomide in patients with HHT and chronic epistaxis leading to iron-deficiency anemia or requiring intravenous iron infusions or blood transfusion.Screening evaluation included the Epistaxis Severity Score (ESS) with three-month recall, which reflected the patient's history of epistaxis and bleeding over the prior three months, as well as detailed review of iron infusion and red cell transfusion over the preceding six months. Eligible patients were provided a diary to record the duration of each epistaxis event that occurred during the 4 weeks prior to the baseline visit, and then returned for the baseline randomization visit, at which time patients underwent genetic testing, if this had not been previously performed, and completed an ESS with 4-week recall and quality of life assessments. Patients were randomized 2:1, stratified by study site, to either pomalidomide 4 mg/day or matching placebo during each of six 28 day cycles (24 weeks). Patients were seen every four weeks during treatment, and at a 4-week post-treatment follow-up visit to measure the ESS (with 4-week recall), laboratory assessments including iron stores and need for iron infusion, CBC, and metabolic profile. Patients were assessed for adverse events (AE) throughout the study. Treatment dosage could be reduced, or temporarily or permanently discontinued following AE-specific guidelines related to fatigue, cytopenias or other toxicities.Quality of life assessments were completed at baseline, and the 12- and 24-week visits, and the 4-week post-treatment follow-up visit using validated NIH instruments of 1) Neuro-QOL satisfaction with social roles and activities, 2) PROMIS emotional distress – depression, and 3) PROMIS fatigue, and the HHT-specific quality of life instrument developed specifically for this study. The effect of pomalidomide on duration of epistaxis was assessed via diary between weeks 8-12, 20-24 and the 4-week post-treatment period.Conclusions: Among patients with HHT, pomalidomide treatment resulted in a significant, clinically relevant reduction in epistaxis severity. No unexpected safety signals were identified (Al-Samkari et al., 2024; PMID: 39292928)

  Study phs003948

• Acute Respiratory Distress Network Early Versus Delayed Enteral Feeding to Treat People with Acute Lung Injury or Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDSNet EDEN-BioLINCC)

  Data Access NOTE: Please refer to the “Authorized Access” section below for information about how access to the data from this accession differs from many other dbGaP accessions. Biospecimens: Access to Biospecimens is through the NHLBI Biologic Specimen and Data Repository Information Coordinating Center (BioLINCC). Biospecimens from ARDSNet-EDEN include bronchial lavage, plasma, DNA, and urine. Please note that use of biospecimens in genetic and non-genetic research is subject to a tiered consent. Objectives: To determine if initial lower-volume trophic enteral feeding would increase ventilator-free days (VFDs) and decrease gastrointestinal intolerances compared with initial full enteral feeding. Background: Mechanically ventilated patients cannot eat normally and if not fed for long periods become malnourished. Because malnutrition is associated with poor outcomes in critically ill patients, artificial nutrition is often provided, especially in those with acute lung injury (ALI) and with expected longer duration of mechanical ventilation. When feasible, enteral nutrition targeting full caloric needs has been advocated over parenteral nutrition. However, feeding intolerance and common care practices often serve as practical barriers to reaching recommended goals. Although confounded by indication and severity of illness, several observational studies have shown improved clinical outcomes, including fewer infections, shorter duration of mechanical ventilation, and lower mortality for patients receiving a higher percentage of calculated caloric needs. Nonetheless, the best timing, formulation, and amount of enteral nutrition remain unknown. Participants: A total of 1,000 participants were enrolled. Design: Participants were randomized, stratified by site and presence of shock at enrollment, to receive either trophic or full enteral feeding for the first 6 days of mechanical ventilation. The initial 272 patients were also simultaneously randomized to a separate trial (the OMEGA study) comparing a nutritional supplement containing omega-3 fatty acids and antioxidants with an isocaloric, isovolemic control in a 2 × 2 factorial design.The designated feeding strategy was initiated within 6 hours of randomization and continued until death, extubation, or day 6. The care of mechanically ventilated patients still receiving enteral feedings after day 6 was managed according to the full feeding strategy in both groups. In extubated patients who then required reintubation, enteral nutrition was restarted and managed according to the study protocol.In the full-feeding group, enteral nutrition was initiated at 25 mL/h and advanced to goal rates as quickly as possible. Gastric residual volumes were checked every 6 hours while enteral feeding was increased. Patients randomized to the initial trophic-feeding group had enteral nutrition initiated at 10 mL/h (10-20 kcal/h) for the first 272 patients who also received the omega-3 or control supplement (240 mL volume per day). After the data and safety monitoring board stopped the OMEGA portion of the factorial design, the initial trophic feeding rate was changed to 20 kcal/h to approximate the calories that had been delivered in the OMEGA study. Gastric Residual Volumes (GRVs) were checked every 12 hours during trophic feeding. In patients randomized to trophic feeding, enteral nutrition was advanced to full-energy feeding rates following the same protocol used for the full-feeding group if they were still receiving mechanical ventilation at 144 hours. Conclusions: There was no difference between groups with regard to the primary end point, VFDs to day 28. There also were no differences in 60-day mortality, organ failure−free days, ICU-free days, or the incidence of infection between groups. Similarly, there were no differences between groups in VFDs or survival when analyzed by body mass index category or when subsets of patients with shock or more severe lung injury (acute respiratory distress syndrome) were examined.JAMA. 2012 Feb 22;307(8):795-803

  Study phs004168

• Exome Sequencing of Spanish Patients with rare genetic diseases.

  Whole exome sequencing of Spanish patients suffering from a rare genetic disease. The study was carried out in 2013 as a part of a public call from CNAG (Centro Nacional de Análisis Genómico), where data of eight spanish families were sent to analyse. The study concluded with three solved cases: two of aniridia and one syndromic RP.

  Study EGAS00001004028

• RNA-Seq and small RNA-Seq of tuberous sclerosis complex cortical tubers and age-matched controls.

  This dataset contains both standard RNA-Seq and small RNA-Seq of TSC related cortical tubers and age matched cortical controls. For the standard RNA-Seq paired-end sequencing was carried out. Each sample was split across multiple lanes. For the files available here the multiple lanes have been merged together, resulting in one forward and one reverse .fastq file for each sample. Small RNA-Seq was carried out on the same samples that underwent standard RNA-Seq. Again paired-end sequencing was carried out. The files here are raw and will need to be undergo quality control and trimming.

  Dataset EGAD00001003444

• Intellance-2: omics data on recurrent glioblastoma patients participating in the Intellance-2 clinical trial, prior to treatment.

  This study contains omics data from patients from the Intellance-2 clinical trial, in which effectiveness of ABT414 in EGFR amplified recurrent glioblastoma patients was tested. Patients were randomly assigned to one of three arms: (1) standard of care treatement (TMZ or CCNU), (2) Only ABT414 and (3) ABT414 + (TMZ|CCNU)

  Study EGAS00001005437

• Multi-omic dataset of neuroendocrine neoplasm organoids

  This dataset corresponds to one of the first biobanks for the understudied neuroendocrine neoplasms from multiple grades and body sites (lung, pancreas, small intestine). It contains whole-genome sequencing data for original tumors, patient-derived tumor organoids at multiple passages, and matched normal tissue, and RNA-seq data for the original tumor and patient-derived tumor organoids.

  Study EGAS00001005752

• Total exRNA Profiles from Plasma, Saliva, and Urine of Healthy Subjects

  We sequenced small RNAs from 183 plasma samples, 204 urine samples and 46 saliva samples from 55 college athletes ages 18-25 years. Many of the participants provided more than one sample, weeks or months apart, allowing us to assess variability in an individual's exRNA expression levels over time. Several individuals provided all three biofluid types at one time, producing data on individual expression levels across several biofluid types. Here we provide a systematic analysis of small exRNAs present in each biofluid, as well as an analysis of exogenous RNAs. We find that a large number of RNA fragments in plasma (63%) and urine (54%) have sequences that are assigned to YRNA and tRNA fragments respectively. Surprisingly, while many miRNAs can be detected, there are few miRNAs that are consistently detected in all samples from a single biofluid. Additionally, we performed whole transcriptome sequencing on 134 plasma and 115 urine samples and identified circRNA.

  Study phs001258

• Characterizing Individual Cells Obtained from Bone Marrow Biopsies of MPN Patients

  We profiled the transcriptomes of individual cells obtained from bone marrow aspirates of 7 treatment-naïve newly diagnosed JAK2-mutant myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) patients (3 polycythemia vera and 4 essential thrombocythemia patients), and 2 healthy controls. The submitted data corresponds to sequencing reads mapped to the human reference genome GhRC38 build using CellRanger for a total of 9 samples (one per patient). In addition, to reconstruct the lineage histories of single cells in MPN patients, we performed whole-genome sequencing of single-cell-derived colonies of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells from 2 essential thrombocythemia (ET) patients: 22 JAK2-mutant colonies and 20 WT colonies for patient ET 1; and 13 JAK2-mutant colonies and 21 WT colonies for patient ET 2. The submitted data consists of sequencing reads aligned to the human reference genome GhRC38 build using bwa-mem. Each file corresponds to the whole-genome sequencing data for one colony.

  Study phs002308

• Comprehensive genomic and transcriptomic analysis of three synchronous primary tumours and a recurrence from a head and neck cancer patient

  Synchronous primary malignancies occur in a small proportion of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients. Here, we analysed three synchronous primaries and a recurrence from one patient, by comparing the genomic and transcriptomic profiles among the tumour samples and determining the recurrence origin. We found remarkable levels of heterogeneity among the primary tumours, and through the patterns of shared mutations, we traced the origin of the recurrence. Interestingly, the patient carried germline variants which might have predisposed him to carcinogenesis, together with a history of alcohol and tobacco consumption. Mutational signature analysis confirmed the impact of alcohol exposure, with Signature 16 present in all tumour samples. Characterisation of immune cell infiltration highlighted an immunosuppressive environment in all samples, which exceeded the potential activity of T cells. Studies such as the one described here have important clinical value and contribute to personalised treatment decisions for patients with synchronous primaries and matched recurrences.

  Study EGAS00001004857

• RNAseq sample

  RNAseq sample used in study titled "Immune-awakening revealed by peripheral T cell dynamics after one cycle of immunotherapy".

  Dataset EGAD00001005747

• Paired-WGS Sequencing of Primary lymphomas of the central nervous system (PCNSL)

  26 Tumor/Control pairs of WGS data of PCNSL tumors, sequenced on either Illumina HiSeq2000/2500 instruments or HiSeq X Ten. The controls are blood or buffy coat samples in most cases.

  Dataset EGAD00001007806

• NHLBI and NIDDK Sponsored GWAS in Benign Ethnic Neutropenia/Leukopenia (BEN) in African-Americans (age >45 yrs old) from the REGARDS

  Benign ethnic neutropenia (BEN) is a clinical condition more commonly observed in African-Americans. It is characterized by a relative reduction in neutrophil count by about 1000 cells per microliter, leading to a decrease in total leukocyte count by similar decrement. Previous reports of this condition showed that there was neither higher frequency nor increased severity of infections in affected individuals. Bone marrow examinations showed normal white cell maturation; and ex vivo culture of marrow cells showed low normal or slightly reduced number of myeloid colonies. Under physiologic stress, the increases in neutrophil and leukocyte counts of BEN individuals are slightly lower, compared to normal African-Americans or Caucasians. These clinical observations suggest that BEN results from a lower 'set point' for cell number in the marrow. Additionally, case reports of familial BEN, the persistence of BEN over many decades in the US, UK, and Africa, and the recent report of Duffy antigen and chemokine receptor (DARC) being associated with neutropenia, all suggest a strong genetic association to neutropenia/leukopenia. Our initial look into microarray analyses in a pilot trial of subjects showed that there were no significant differences in mRNA signals between BEN and normal subjects. Therefore, we are now proposing a larger study, utilizing Illumina Omni Express chips, to look for genetic associations. We have partnered with the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke study (REGARDS), where nearly half of the cohort are African-Americans. This will be one of the few GWAS being performed in only African-Americans, and will provide valuable genetic information to link with neutropenia and possibly other conditions/diseases. Genotyping was performed by the Johns Hopkins University Center for Inherited Disease Research (CIDR). Quality control of the genotypic and phenotypic data was performed through a collaboration between CIDR and the Genetics Coordinating Center, Department of Biostatistics at the University of Washington, which is funded by a federal contract supported by 14 NIH Institutes (HHSN268200782096C).

  Study phs000507

• National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Duke Cognition Cohort

  The overall goal is to identify genetic variants influencing normal variation between humans, with a focus on cognitive and neurosensory traits. Because of the focus of funding agencies on disease, very few studies of the genetics of non-disease traits have been performed. The genetic variation underlying the vast majority of differences between humans therefore remains not only undiscovered, but also unexplored. We have assessed >1,200 healthy volunteers for >70 diverse, non-disease phenotypes, with a focus on cognitive and neurosensory traits that are understudied and seem to have a strong biological basis. Our study includes measurements of face recognition, night vision, cognitive performance, auditory pitch discrimination, contagious yawn susceptibility, time perception, sense of direction, taste preferences, personality, sexual behaviors, sleep habits, acne, headache locations, synesthesia, and teeth sensitivity. This method is very different from the focus of most studies on collecting cohorts of patients with disease and controls with minimal phenotypic information. Because we phenotype the same healthy volunteers for multiple highly variable yet heritable traits, we can perform genetic analyses on a large number of phenotypes by just investing once in sequencing the DNA of these participants. An additional >2,000 participants in our cohort have been measured just for cognitive performance instead of for the more extensive phenotyping. Most of the genetic studies in this cohort have been about cognitive perfromance. The number of participants with genetic data generated who have undergone the more extensive phenotyping is limited. Our studies of the more novel traits like contagious yawning have therefore focused more on correlations between different phenotypes until we have a sufficient sample size to truly attempt to make genetic discoveries. . The dataset also includes two small challenge studies. In one study, the cognitive performance of 150 healthy volunteers was measured before and after an acute dose of the antiepileptic drug topiramate. In the other study, the cognitive performance of 13 healthy volunteers was measured before and after 24 hours of sleep deprivation.

  Study phs001406

• National Eye Institute (NEI) Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study (OHTS)

  The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study (OHTS) is an National Eye Institute-sponsored multi-center, randomized, prospective treatment trial designed to determine whether lowering intraocular pressure (IOP) in individuals with ocular hypertension delays or prevents the development of primary open angle glaucoma (POAG). A total of 1,636 individuals with ocular hypertension between 40 and 80 years old were enrolled in the study. In addition to ocular hypertension, subjects in the OHTS were required to have normal optic nerve appearance as determined by the OHTS Optic Disc Reading Center and normal and reliable visual field tests at the time of enrollment by the OHTS Visual Field Reading Center. OHTS subjects were randomly assigned to either an observational group which received close observation or a topical medication group which received medication as needed to achieve a 20% reduction in IOP from their baseline levels. Subjects then were examined at regular intervals for optic disc cupping or visual field defects. Other clinical measures were also obtained from OHTS subjects including central corneal thickness (CCT) and intraocular pressure. The primary outcome monitored for the OHTS was the development of glaucoma in one or both eyes as defined by reproducible visual field abnormality or reproducible optic disc deterioration attributed to POAG by the masked OHTS Endpoint Committee. The OHTS study design has been reported in detail (Gordon, 1999; PMID: 10326953). The OHTS confirmed that ocular hypertension is a risk factor for developing POAG and showed that lowering IOP reduced the risk for developing POAG (Kass, 2002; PMID: 12049574). The OHTS also demonstrated that thin CCT is a significant risk factor for the development of POAG (Gordon, 2002; PMID: 12049575). Blood samples were also collected from 1,077 OHTS participants for an ancillary genetics study. DNA was prepared from these samples and used in a genome-wide association scan (GWAS) designed to identify genetic factors that control the magnitude of quantitative features of glaucoma (baseline IOP, baseline cup-to-disc ratio, and CCT). Genotypes from the GWAS and these clinical data (IOP, cup-to-disc ratio, and CCT) have been provided to dbGaP.

  Study phs000240

• Exploring the Genetic Variants Associated with Brain Growth in Children

  Understanding the genetic factors that control brain growth during childhood and adolescence is a priority for neuroscience. Its importance lies partly in the finding that disturbances in the course of brain development characterizes many common childhood behavioral problems. Recent advances in neuroimaging such as the use of non-invasive magnetic resonance imaging have provided a chance to define these trajectories in the living child. The intramural programs of the NIMH and NHGRI have conducted repeated neuroanatomic imaging on children along with the banking of DNA, providing a cohort which is studied for defining developmental trajectories of the brain. A central goal of this cohort is to define the disturbances in brain development that are linked with common behavioral problems, such as excessive impulsivity, hyperactivity and inattention. Studies have demonstrated that problems in these domains are distributed across the entire population and that children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) lie at the extreme end of these behavioral dimensions. We found a similar dimensionality in the development of brain regions that are associated with these behavioral problems. Specifically, we showed that the rate of change in both the lateral prefrontal cortex and interconnected striatum during childhood and adolescence was linked to the severity of symptoms of hyperactivity and impulsivity. As symptoms increased, the rate of growth of both structures decreased. The lateral prefrontal cortex and striatum are core components of richly interconnected 'loops' that support a host of cognitive processes, including attention, cognitive control and motor planning. Anomalies in these structures and their connections have been implicated in many childhood behavioral problems, including ADHD. In summary, we aim to identify the common and rare genetic variants that are associated with the developmental trajectories of the lateral-prefrontal cortex and striatum. Identifying genetic variants influencing the growth of these structures may reveal the biological mechanisms underlying dysregulated control of attention, impulse and activity level, which in the extreme constitute ADHD. The study thus could inform our understanding of neurobiology underpinning one of the most common neuropsychiatric disorders of childhood.

  Study phs000962

• Diabetic Retinopathy Genomics Study (DRGen) - Genetic Biomarkers of Diabetic Retinopathy

  Using a well-defined, clinically supported phenotypic strategy, we seek to better understand the role of common and rare genetic variants in the progression of diabetic retinopathy (DR). Whole exome/whole genome sequencing (WES/WGS) was used to systematically search the human genome to detect DR susceptibility genes or genes that protect people from developing advanced DR. Clinical data and bio specimens were obtained from clinically defined DR phenotypes such as, (i) No/Mild NPDR (non-proliferative DR) with a subset of extreme phenotype, ii) Diabetic macular edema (DME) alone and iii) Proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) alone. In this ongoing comprehensive genomic study, we wish to i) Identify potential common and rare variants that may influence the phenotypic differentiation of DR into DME or PDR, ii) Define genetic variants stratified based on the "extreme phenotype," and iii) Characterize genetic factors that determine the differential response to anti-VEGF drugs in DME patients. Definition of Diabetic Retinopathy and classification of groups Study 1. Proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR). Anybody showing evidence of retinal neovascularization on the disc (NVD) or elsewhere (NVE) with or without pre-retinal and vitreous hemorrhage will be considered PDR. We will include only those "active" PDR patients. The total number of consented subjects in this study is 182. Study 2. Isolated Phenotype: Varied response with anti-VEGF treatment is a significant limiting factor for better clinical outcomes. We quantify the response to anti-VEGF treatment based on visual acuity changes and anatomic features of DME assessed by optical coherence tomography (OCT). Depending on the response at one month following three monthly intravitreal anti-VEGF injections, we have observed two phenotypes: 1) Good responders: Participants were considered "good responders" if the anatomical outcome to anti-VEGF treatment resulted in a significant reduction of baseline central retinal thickness (CRT) > 25% after three anti-VEGF injections. 2) Poor Responders: Participants were classified as "poor responders" if the outcome of anti-VEGF treatment resulted in a reduction of CRT < 20% or in any increase in CRT after three monthly injections. The total number of consented subjects in this study is 17.

  Study phs002501

• Data upcycling, powered by EGA

  In 2012 a collaborative effort headed by the teams of Carlos Caldas in Cambridge, UK and Samuel Aparicio, Canada, produced a pivotal study aimed at defining the mutational landscape of breast cancer. They gathered a collection of over 2000 breast cancer samples (METABRIC) associated with long-term clinical follow-up. They delineated an array of inherited and somatically acquired genetic variants and associated them to gene expression. This led to the identification of putative cancer-driving events and improved stratification of breast cancer patients. The study elicited huge attention and was tackled as herculean effort by fellow researchers. Cristina Curtis and her colleagues deposited the data in the EGA archive (EGAS00000000083). What they probably could not foresee is that their data would be reused more than 100 times, becoming one of the most downloaded datasets at EGA. In 2015, Frederik S. Varn and colleagues accessed the above-mentioned data from the New Hampshire, USA, to correlate it to transcriptional programs of hematopoietic cells infiltrated in breast tumours and found that those can influence patients' prognosis. Their findings, published in Nature Communications, improved the understanding of the interplay between immune system and cancer. Again, in 2017 the dataset was downloaded by an Italian/Polish collaboration and used to corroborate their mechanistic study that demonstrate how a long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) is aberrantly localized into the chromatin, where it modulates oncogenic isoforms expression, thus contributing to breast cancer. To date, the METABRIC dataset has been reused to contribute to 147 publications. Its impact on breast cancer research is incalculable, and it even spread beyond that, with recent contributions to the understanding of pan-cancer mechanisms and features. Some of the publications are translating into improvements in diagnosis and treatment of different types of breast cancer. This is just an example of how data upcycling can amplify the potential of any dataset, well past the scope of its creation, the imagination of its owners and any geographical border. At EGA, we are proud to empower such fruitful worldwide cycles of knowledge, providing a platform that enables safe sharing of sensitive genetic data.

  Blog data-upcycling-powered-by-ega

• Molecular characterization of invasive lobular carcinoma

  Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) is the second most common histological subtype of breast cancer accounting for 10-15% of cases. ILC differs from invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC)with respect to epidemiology, histology, and clinical presentation. Moreover, ILC is lesssensitive to chemotherapy, more frequently bilateral, and more prone to form gastrointestinal, peritoneal, and ovarian metastases than IDCs. In contrast to IDC, the prognostic value ofhistological grade (HG) in ILC is controversial. One of the three major components of histological grading (tubule formation) is missing in ILC which hinders the process of gradingin this histological subtype and results in the classification of approximately two thirds of ILC as HG 2.Over the last decade, a number of gene expression signatures have shed light onto breast cancer classification, allowing breast cancer care to become more personalized. Withrespect to the management of estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer, several gene expression signatures provide prognostic and/or predictive information beyond what is possible with current classical clinico-pathological parameters alone. Nevertheless, most studies using gene expression signature have not considered different histologic subtypesseparately. Recently, a comprehensive research program has elucidated some of the biological underpinnings of invasive lobular carcinoma. Genetic material extracted from 200 ILC tumor samples were studied using gene expression profiling and identified ILCmolecular subtypes. These proliferation-driven gene signatures of ILC appear to have prognostic significance. In particular, the Genomic Grade (GG) gene signature improved upon HG in ILC and added prognostic value to classic clinico-pathologic factors. In addition this study demonstrated that most ILC are molecularly characterized as luminal-A (~75%)followed by luminal-B (~20%) and HER2-positve tumors (~5%). Moreover, we investigated the prognostic value of known gene signatures/ gene modules in the same cohort of ILC. As a second step within the scope of this project, we aim to investigate the interactionsbetween somatic ILC tumor mutations to observed transcriptome findings. To this end, we aim to perform somatic mutation analysis for the ILC tumors for which Affymetrix gene expression profiling is available. To this end, we will use a gene screen assay, which specifically interrogates the mutational status of a few hundreds of cancer genes. We believe that this pioneering effort will be fundamental for a tailored treatment of ILC withimprovement in patients' outcome.

  Dataset EGAD00001000288

• GAW16 Framingham and Simulated Data

  Important links to apply for individual-level data Genetic Analysis Workshop Instructions to Request Authorized Access Data Use Certification Requirements (DUC) Apply here for controlled access to individual level data Research Use Statement Questions regarding GAW16 should be directed to Vanessa Olmo at vanessa@business-endeavors.com. Problem 2: Description of the Framingham Heart Study In GAW16, we use data drawn from the Framingham Heart Study. The Framingham Heart Study — under the direction of National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; NHLBI — began in 1948 with the recruitment of adults from the town of Framingham, Massachusetts. At the time, little was known about the general causes of heart disease and stroke, but the death rates for cardiovascular disease (CVD) had been increasing steadily since the beginning of the 20th century and had become an American epidemic. The Framingham Heart Study is now conducted in collaboration with Boston University. The objective of the Framingham Heart Study was to identify the common factors or characteristics that contribute to CVD by following its development over a long period of time in a large group of participants who had not yet developed overt symptoms of CVD or suffered a heart attack or stroke. Between 1948 and 1953 the researchers recruited 5,209 subjects (2,336 men and 2,873 women) between the ages of 29 and 62 from the town of Framingham, Massachusetts and began the first round of extensive physical examinations and lifestyle interviews that they would later analyze for common patterns related to CVD development. Subjects were recruited from lists of addresses recorded for the town. Two out of every three households were approached for participation in the study. While there was no intention to recruit families for family studies, the plan was to recruit all household members in the ages 30-60 within each house that was selected for study. Hence, many biologically related individuals were recruited, including 1644 spouse pairs. Since 1948, these participants have returned to the study every two years for a detailed medical history, physical examination, and laboratory tests. Now in 2008 at 60 years of follow up, there remain about 500 participants from this cohort. Between 1971 and 1975 the study enrolled a second-generation group — 5,124 of the original participants' children and the spouses of these children — to participate in similar examinations. 2,616 subjects are offspring of the original spouse pairs and 34 are stepchildren. A total of 898 offspring are children of cohort members where only one parent was a study participant and 1,576 are spouses of the offspring. The Offspring Cohort has been followed every four years through 2001 (except between Exams 1 and 2 with an intervening 8 years) using protocols similar to those used for study of the Original Cohort. Between 2002 and 2005 the study enrolled the third generation (Gen3) of the Framingham Heart Study - 4095 offspring of the second generation. None of their spouses were recruited. An additional 103 parents of this third generation, who were not recruited between 1971 and 1975, were also recruited at this time. The latter group is not included in the GAW16 data. With the recruitment of this third generation, the study has increasingly focused on genetic factors associated with the development of cardiovascular disease and its associated risk factors. To date, there is only one examination of this generation of participants. A description of the recruitment of this third generation and comparison with the earlier generations at their initial recruitment is presented in Splansky GL et al., 2007. Further information on the Study can be found at http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/about/framingham/index.html. Genome-wide Dense SNP Scan in Framingham Heart Study Genetic studies did not begin in the FHS until the 1990s. In the late 1980s and through the 1990s DNA was extracted from blood samples of surviving FHS participants. In 2007, the FHS entered a new phase with the conduct of genotyping for the FHS SHARe (SNP Health Association Resource) project, for which dense SNP genotyping was performed using approximately 550,000 SNPs (GeneChip® Human Mapping 500K Array Set and the 50K Human Gene Focused Panel) in 10,775 samples (some duplicates) from the three generations of subjects (including over 900 pedigrees). Affymetrix conducted all genotyping for the FHS SHARe project, using the 250K Sty, 250K Nsp, and the supplemental 50K platforms. Eighty-nine percent of the DNA samples were collected during the 1990s. To maximize the power of the study, we also extracted DNA from 1133 blood samples, drawn from subjects who had no DNA, to include in the SHARe project. These samples had been sitting in our refrigerators for some time, a few as far back as the 1970s. We refer to these DNA samples as the legacy samples. These samples had a higher failure rate in the genotyping process (40%) than the other eighty-nine percent (3%). Affymetrix invoked its own criteria for a sample to succeed in genotyping. All non-legacy samples must succeed on all three platforms, while legacy samples needed to pass on at least one platform. When a sample failed, additional attempts were made. Samples that repeatedly failed 2-4 times were called failures. Other samples failed due to issues of genotyped sex identification not matching our records or low SNP concordance among SNPs common across arrays or contamination. Eighty-nine percent of the legacy samples for which genotyping results are available passed all three platforms. The genotyping data from the 10,043 samples from 9354 subjects that passed the Affymetrix criteria were additionally checked for gender consistency and consistency with family structure, resulting in genotyping data for 9,274 participants in FHS SHARe. Genotype calls were made with the BRLMM algorithm. The SHARe database is housed at the National Center for Biotechnology Information database of genotypes and phenotypes (NCBI dbGaP) and contains all ~550,000 SNPs. This genome-wide dense SNP scan and a subset of phenotypes from the Framingham Heart Study are the focus of the Genetic Analysis Workshop 16. Further information on the specific variables in the Problem 2 dataset can be found by clicking on the Documents tab at the top of the page. Problem 3: Description of the Simulated Data Set The focus of this simulation is gene discovery in genome-wide association scans (GWAS). The Framingham Heart Study data set (distributed as "Problem 2") is the basis for the FHS* simulated data. The pedigree structures are derived from the data distributed for Problem 2, and we distribute an accompanying triplet file (triplet_sim) containing person ID, father ID, mother ID, to ensure the identical subjects, pedigrees, and singletons are used in the simulated data analysis. Consistent with standard practice, founders and singletons are designated as subjects with both fshare and mshare equal to zero (missing). The simulated data includes a total of 6,479 subjects with both phenotype and genotype data, in 942 pedigrees distributed among 3 generations and 188 singletons. Data inclusion is consistent with the subjects' consent for use by both for-profit and not-for-profit researchers. The genotypes for all Problem 3 replicates are fixed as measured and distributed for Problem 2 for both the genomewide scan and the additional candidate gene SNPs, for a total of approximately 550,000 SNPs (GeneChip® Human Mapping 500K Array Set and the 50K Human Gene Focused Panel). Thus, to analyze the Problem 3 simulated data you also will need to download the Problem 2 genotypes. Note that there are slight discrepancies in counts between Problems 2 and 3 due to a change in consents between the two datasets. Several phenotypes that contribute to coronary heart disease (CHD) were simulated for all individuals with genotypes across three different time points, 10 years apart. All genotyped individuals have complete data; the effects of missing values can be investigated by user-specified missing value patterns. There are 200 longitudinal datasets created, based on the generating model, and each replication is found in a separate dataset. We suggest that if only one replication is to be analyzed, that it be replication 1 to enable more precise comparisons among analytical approaches. The 'shareid' will allow you to merge the simulated phenotype data with the Problem 2 genotype data, and reconstruction of the pedigrees using the distributed 'triplet_sim' file or for larger families' relationships with the triplet distributed with the Problem 2. The simulated data problem is further described in the associated readme file, and a data dictionary is provided defining all the variables. For disclosure of the generating model for these data, please contact Jean MacCluer at jean@sfbrgenetics.org.

  Study phs000128

• Long read single cell whole genome sequencing

  Human brain single nuclei amplifed by Droplet MDA. Nanopore long read whole genome sequencing. Two cases of multiple system atrophy, one control.

  Dataset EGAD50000001652

• WGBS of melanoma patients

  This dataset contains WGBS of seven melanoma patients and one cultured primary melanocyte sample.

  Dataset EGAD50000001319