1372 results for "fc coins xbox series s Besuche die Website Buyfc26coins.com. Immer beste Preise..CNcP"

in 9.59 milliseconds.

• Submission FAQ

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

• Foregut Microbiome in Development of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

  The distal esophagus is an important anatomical area where gastric acid reflux can cause reflux esophagitis (RE), Barrett's esophagus (BE) (intestinal metaplasia), and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EA). The incidence of EA has increased 6-fold in the U.S. since the 1970s, parallel to a significant increase in the prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux diseases (GERD). Although specific host factors might predispose one to disease risk, such a rapid increase in incidence must be predominantly environmental. The cause remains unknown. Our hypothesis is that changes in the foregut microbiome are associated with EA and its precursors, RE and BE in the GERD sequence. We will conduct a case control study to characterize the microbiome in every stage of the GERD sequence as well as analyze the trend in changes in the microbiome along disease progression toward EA. Specific Aim 1. To conduct a comprehensive population survey of the foregut microbiome and demonstrate its association with GERD sequence, by a 16S rRNA gene survey. We will analyze samples of the foregut microbiome at three anatomic loci: mouth, distal esophagus, and gastric corpus. Changes of the microbiota in the distal esophagus will be correlated with the phenotypes. Spatial relationship between the esophageal microbiota and upstream (mouth) and downstream (stomach) foregut microbiotas as well as temporal stability of the microbiome-disease association will also be examined. Specific Aim 2. To define distal esophageal metagenome and demonstrate its association with GERD sequence, by shotgun metagenomic analysis. We will first classify samples of the metagenome into metagenotypes by between-sample k-mer distance and correlate the metagenotypes with the four phenotypes. Subsequent detailed analyses will include pathway-disease and gene-disease associations. DNA viruses and fungi, if identified, also will be correlated with the phenotypes. A significant association between the foregut microbiome composition and GERD sequence, if demonstrated, will be the first step for eventually testing the causal hypothesis that an abnormal microbiome is required for the development of the sequence of phenotypic changes toward EA. If EA and its precursors represent a microbial ecological disease, treating the cause of GERD might become possible, for example, by normalizing the microbiome through use of antibiotics, probiotics, or prebiotics. Causative therapy for GERD could prevent its progression and reverse the current trend of increasing incidence of EA.

  Study phs000260

• The Effect of the Menstrual Cycle on DNA Expression in the Normal Human Breast Epithelium

  The Susan G. Komen for the Cure® Tissue Bank at the IU Simon Cancer Center [www.komentissuebank.iu.edu] (KTB) was established expressly for the prospective collection of normal, healthy breast tissue from volunteer donors. Blood is also obtained from donors at the time of donation and is processed for serum, plasma and peripheral blood leukocyte DNA. Specimens are annotated and data includes age, race, ethnicity, personal health history, family cancer history, medication usage at the time of donation, and breast cancer risk factors. Premenopausal donors to the KTB were identified by a query of the Bank's database. Hematoxylin and eosin stained sections of the formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue of the identified donors were reviewed and tissue was graded on the basis of the abundance of epithelium within the section. Only tissue containing abundant epithelium was considered for this study. Based on dates, the specimens of nine women in the follicular phase of the menstrual cycle and five in the luteal phase were chosen. Six donors using hormonal contraception at the time of donation were also included. Whole blood obtained from 19 of the 20 donors at the time of tissue donation was available and it was processed for serum. Estradiol, estriol, luteinizing hormone and progesterone concentrations were determined by the Indiana University Health Pathology Laboratory using a Beckman Unicel DxI 800 Immunoassay System. The phase of the menstrual cycle was verified by serum progesterone concentration. The epithelium of these 20 specimens was microdissected from multiple 8 micron frozen tissue sections. Total RNA extracted from the tissue was subsequently depleted of rRNA via locked nucleic acid probes. This enabled profiling of both poly-A and non-poly-A RNA species. Barcoded cDNA libraries from the 20 normal breast epithelia were prepared and sequenced on an Applied Biosystems (AB) SOLiD3 or SOLiD 4 platform. RNA-seq reads for each sample were then mapped to the human genome (hg19) using the LifeScope software version 2.5.1 (Life Technologies, Foster City, CA) and BAM (Binary Alignment/Map) files generated. Read counts for each gene were derived from the output BAM files using the RefSeq database (UCSC Genome Brower) as the gene model.

  Study phs000644

• Region-specific Transcriptome Analysis of the Human Retina and Retinal Pigment Epithelium (RPE)/Choroid

  Proper spatial differentiation of retinal cell types is necessary for normal human vision. Many retinal diseases, such as Best disease and male germ cell associated kinase (MAK)-associated retinitis pigmentosa, preferentially affect distinct topographic regions of the retina. While much is known about the distribution of cell types in the retina, the distribution of molecular components across the posterior pole of the eye has not been well-studied. To investigate regional difference in molecular composition of ocular tissues, we assessed differential gene expression across the temporal, macular, and nasal retina and retinal pigment epithelium (RPE)/choroid of human eyes using RNA-Seq. RNA from temporal, macular, and nasal retina and RPE/choroid from four human donor eyes was extracted, poly-A selected, fragmented, and sequenced as 100 bp read pairs. Digital read files were mapped to the human genome and analyzed for differential expression using the Tuxedo software suite. Retina and RPE/choroid samples were clearly distinguishable at the transcriptome level. Numerous transcription factors were differentially expressed between regions of the retina and RPE/choroid. Photoreceptor-specific genes were enriched in the peripheral samples, while ganglion cell and amacrine cell genes were enriched in the macula. Within the RPE/choroid, RPE-specific genes were upregulated at the periphery while endothelium associated genes were upregulated in the macula. Consistent with previous studies, BEST1 expression was lower in macular than extramacular regions. The MAK gene was expressed at lower levels in macula than in extramacular regions, but did not exhibit a significant difference between nasal and temporal retina. The regional molecular distinction is greatest between macula and periphery and decreases between different peripheral regions within a tissue. Datasets such as these can be used to prioritize candidate genes for possible involvement in retinal diseases with regional phenotypes. Reprinted from Whitmore, S.S., Wagner, A.H., DeLuca, A.P., Drack, A.V., Stone, E.M., Tucker, B.A., Zeng, S., Braun, T.A., Mullins, R.F., Scheetz, T.E., 2014. Transcriptomic analysis across nasal, temporal, and macular regions of human neural retina and RPE/choroid by RNA-Seq. Experimental Eye Research. Used under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license. Additional RNA sequencing was performed on temporal, macular, nasal, inferior, and superior retina from a fifth subject and is included in this dataset. See original publication for details.

  Study phs001151

• NHLBI GO-ESP: Early-Onset Myocardial Infarction Exome Chip (Broad EOMI)

  The NHLBI "Grand Opportunity" Exome Sequencing Project (GO-ESP), a signature project of the NHLBI Recovery Act investment, was designed to identify genetic variants in coding regions (exons) of the human genome (the "exome") that are associated with heart, lung and blood diseases. These and related diseases that are of high impact to public health and individuals from diverse racial and ethnic groups will be studied. These data may help researchers understand the causes of disease, contributing to better ways to prevent, diagnose, and treat diseases, as well as determine whether to tailor prevention and treatments to specific populations. This could lead to more effective treatments and reduce the likelihood of side effects. GO-ESP is comprised of five collaborative components: 3 cohort consortia - HeartGO, LungGO, and WHISP - and 2 sequencing centers - BroadGO and SeattleGO. As part of this initiative, the Broad has performed genotyping on several thousand subjects from 4 different cohorts on Illumina's ExomeChip platform as described below: The Duke Study: The Duke study enrolled cases from the Duke University Medical Center with myocardial infarction or coronary artery stenosis > 50%. Controls were individuals who were > 50 years old without coronary stenosis > 30% and without history of myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass grafting, percutaneous coronary intervention, or heart transplant. The InterMountain Heart Study: The Intermountain Heart Study is an observational registry of individuals with coronary artery disease and healthy controls who received care at participating Intermountain Healthcare facilities. The Ottawa Heart Study: The Ottawa heart study enrolled cases with angiographically confirmed coronary artery disease (> 1 coronary artery with > 50% stenosis) who did not have type 2 diabetes and were ≤ 50 years old for males and ≤ 50 years old for females. Controls were also enrolled who were asymptomatic males > age 65 and females > age 70. PennCATH: PennCATH is a case-control study that recruited individuals undergoing coronary angiography at the University of Pennsylvania Hospital. Cases had angiographically confirmed coronary artery disease (>1 coronary artery with 50% stenosis) and were ≤ 55 years old if male and ≤ 60 years old if female. Controls were men > 40 years old and women > 45 years old with normal coronary angiography.

  Study phs000936

• National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases and Istanbul Faculty of Medicine Genome-wide Association Study of Behçet's Disease (Turkish)

  IntroductionBehçet's disease (BD) is a genetically complex multisystem disease of unknown etiology, characterized by recurrent inflammatory attacks affecting orogenital mucosa, eyes, skin, joints, blood vessels, and less frequently, the central nervous system and gastrointestinal tract. Family studies suggest a genetically complex contribution to BD. With the exception of HLA-B51, which explains less than 20% of the genetic risk, the identities of alleles that are responsible for the complex inheritance of this disease have remained unclear. AimTo identify genes that contribute to BD susceptibility. MethodsA genome-wide association study was undertaken with 311,459 informative and high quality SNPs in a collection of 1215 BD patients and 1278 healthy controls from Turkey using a beadchip microarray assay (Infinium SNP genotype assay, Illumina). HLA-B types were determined with a reverse sequence-specific oligonucleotide method (One Lambda). Regions with evidence for association were fine-mapped using Sequenom iPLEX gold assays. Disease-associated SNPs were genotyped in additional ethnically matched case/control collections from diverse genetic backgrounds, including a total of 2430 cases and 2660 controls, using TaqMan SNP genotype assays. Association data were combined in a meta-analysis of all the collections. ResultsWe confirmed the known association with HLA-B51 and found evidence for a second, independent susceptibility locus in the Class I region of the MHC. In addition, we identified one SNP with genome-wide evidence for disease association (P < 5.0 x 10-8) within the gene encoding the immunoregulatory cytokine, interleukin-10 (IL10). A meta-analysis of the data from all the collections established associations with the IL10 variant (rs1518111, P = 3.54 x 10-18, odds ratio 1.45 with 95% confidence interval 1.34 to 1.58) and with a variant located between the interleukin-23 receptor (IL23R) and interleukin 12 receptor β2 (IL12RB2) genes (rs924080, P = 6.69 x 10-9, odds ratio 1.28 with 95% confidence interval 1.18 to 1.39). The disease-associated IL10 variant was associated with diminished mRNA expression and low protein production by cells obtained from healthy blood donors. ConclusionsThese data suggest that genetically encoded low production of IL-10 increases risk of BD and suggest novel interventional targets in the IL-10 and IL-23 pathways. Note: The submitted data are the genotypes of the 311,459 SNPs in 1215 cases and 1278 controls.

  Study phs000272

• 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

• How to request data

  Request Data Access If you're looking to access data from the EGA for your research, you are in the right documentation page! In this page you will find a step by step guide on how to request data archived at the EGA, as well as some frequently asked questions you might find useful. When requesting data, you'll need to provide information about your research project and intended use of the data. Keep in mind that your data access request may require additional approvals or agreements depending on the datasets and data providers involved. Step by step guide Register yourself as an EGA user. Validate your account. A validation link will be sent to your email to activate your EGA user account. Log into the EGA page. Search the dataset of interest from the dataset catalogue or search bar. Click on “Request access” Add a comment requesting these files and send your request Your request is successfully registered, and the DAC will receive a notification about your request In addition to submitting your request, you should also contact the DAC directly via e-mail. You can access the DAC's contact information from the relevant dataset page. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Which is the role of the EGA in the data access process? The European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA) facilitates the secure distribution under controlled access of personally identifiable genetic and phenotypic data. Data Access Committee (DAC) is a body of one or more individuals who are responsible for data release to external requestors, based on participant consent and/or National Research Ethics terms. How do I request access to multiple datasets? To request access for multiple datasets managed by the same Data Access Committee (DAC), please start by visiting the DAC catalogue to locate the DAC of your choice. Once you've found the relevant DAC, proceed to its dedicated page where you'll find a "Request access" button. After logging in to the EGA website, you'll be presented with a comprehensive list of datasets under the chosen DAC. Select the datasets you're interested in, and then compose a message indicating your access request. Click the "Send" button to submit your request, which will include the chosen datasets. Please be sure to review the data usage policies for the requested datasets, as policies can vary among datasets managed by the same DAC. I am a co-applicant. Will I be given a joint access account? Each applicant needs to create an EGA account themselves, with unique login details. User log-in details are for individual use only and should never be shared, under any circumstances. EGA services are only provided to EGA account holders. Therefore, the co-applicant will send a formal request to the DAC. What happens if a co-applicant leaves or a new member needs to be added to an existing DAC application? The appropriate Data Access Committee (DAC) should be contacted and informed about the required changes so that the application can be updated. I have changed my place of work since my EGA account was created. Can I still have access to data? You must contact the relevant Data Access Committee (DAC). The DAC did not reply to my data access request. How should I proceed? There is no estimated time for DAC response. Please allow up to four weeks for a response. In the meantime, please send them a weekly reminder of the status of your request by emailing them directly.If the DAC becomes unresponsive, meaning that they fail to communicate with a requestor within the specified time frame, please contact the EGA Helpdesk team. I have an account with the EGA and would like access to further datasets. How should I proceed? You need to reapply to the relevant Data Access Committee (DAC). Once the DAC has approved your application your account will be updated and an email will be sent to notify you of a change made to your account. How do I download files of the datasets I have been granted access to? The preferred method for data download and decryption is the EGA Secure Download Client. Please carefully review the provided documentation. How do I download metadata? Metadata is retrieved from the EGA webpage; you will not need to use any download client. Be informed that you will only be able to download metadata of your approved datasets. For such download, you should first log in the EGA webpage with your credentials. Then browse the metadata's dataset you have gained access and you will find a metadata download button. You may also want to have a look our metadata schema. I have forgotten or misplaced my user account password; how do I get a new one? Click on “Log in”, located in the top right corner of the EGA homepage. Then click “Forgot password”, type in your registered institutional email address, and instructions for resetting your password will be sent to you. Please check both regular and junk/spam folders. I was sent a link to set a password for my download account, but it seems like the link has expired. What should I do? The procedure is the same as the one for a forgotten password, explained in the previous question.

  Documentation access/request-data/how-to-request-data

• Parkinson's Disease Cognitive Genetics Consortium (PDCGC) Stage I, NeuroX Dataset

  Cognitive impairment is a common and disabling problem in Parkinson's disease (PD). Identification of genetic variants that influence the presence or severity of cognitive deficits in PD might provide a clearer understanding of the pathophysiology underlying this important nonmotor feature. We are presently undertaking a large-scale, two-stage study designed to identify genetic risk factors for cognitive impairment in PD. The study population is divided into a discovery (Stage I) and a validation (Stage II) sample of patients enrolled in the PD Cognitive Genetics Consortium (PDCGC). Each patient has undergone a detailed neurological evaluation and cognitive testing. Clinical and genetic data for the project are stored and managed at the Coordinating Center at the University of Washington and VA Puget Sound Health Care System in Seattle. Stage I of the project is now complete; 1,219 PD patients were genotyped for 249,336 variants using the NeuroX array. Participants underwent assessments of learning and memory (Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised [HVLT-R]), working memory/executive function (Letter-Number Sequencing and Trail Making Test [TMT] A and B), language processing (semantic and phonemic verbal fluency), visuospatial abilities (Benton Judgment of Line Orientation [JoLO]), and global cognitive function (Montreal Cognitive Assessment). We excluded individuals who were of non-European ancestry, failed genotyping, were missing data for one or more covariates, were related to another participant in the cohort, or failed to complete at least half of the cognitive tests. After these quality control measures were implemented, 1,105 participants remained and were included in all subsequent analyses. For common variants we used linear regression to test for association between genotype and cognitive performance with adjustment for important covariates. Rare variants were analyzed using the optimal unified sequence kernel association test. The significance threshold was defined as a false discovery rate corrected P-value (PFDR) of 0.05. Eighteen common variants in 13 genomic regions exceeded the significance threshold for one of the cognitive tests. These included GBA rs2230288 (E326K; PFDR = 2.7 x 10-4) for JoLO, PARP4 rs9318600 (PFDR = 0.006) and rs9581094 (PFDR = 0.006) for HVLT-R total recall, and MTCL1 rs34877994 (PFDR = 0.01) for TMT B-A. Analysis of rare variants did not yield any significant gene regions. We have conducted the first large-scale PD cognitive genetics analysis and nominated several new putative susceptibility genes for cognitive impairment in PD. These results will require replication in independent PD cohorts, and efforts to validate the findings in PDCGC Stage II are in progress.

  Study phs001664

• Germline and Somatic Genetic Landscape of Pediatric Rhabdomyosarcoma

  Dynamic approaches that integrate population-based research and molecular biology are needed to explain the mechanisms underlying pediatric rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) and to determine novel prevention strategies. RMS, the most common soft-tissue sarcoma in children and adolescents, has one of the poorest 5-year survival rates among all pediatric cancers (less than 65%). One of the strongest risk factors for RMS is having a cancer predisposition syndrome. The syndromes that are most commonly seen among those with RMS are Li-Fraumeni, neurofibromatosis type 1, Costello, Noonan, and DICER1. Based on smaller clinic-based studies, only about 7% of RMS cases are thought to be associated with the genes responsible for these syndromes. However, there have been no population-based assessments to support this estimate. Even in the most recent large-scale evaluations of germline mutations in predisposition genes among children with cancer, very few RMS cases were included (43 cases). Furthermore, no distinctions were made between the major histologic subtypes of RMS: embryonal (eRMS) and alveolar (aRMS), which display differences in terms of age distribution, incidence, and cytogenetics. For instance, nearly 80% of alveolar cases are driven by a chromosomal translocation between either PAX3 or PAX7 and FOXO1, whereas these fusions are not seen in embryonal cases. In fact, RMS research is shifting from categorization based on histology to fusion status (eRMS is overwhelmingly fusion-negative). Another limitation in previous studies has been the inability to evaluate the frequency of de novo germline mutations (DNMs) in cancer predisposition genes due to the absence of any well-characterized cohorts of RMS case-parent trios. Therefore, a major gap in our understanding of the role of cancer predisposition in pediatric RMS that limit translational impact is there have been no population-based assessments to determine the true impact of these mutations on pediatric RMS, which limits clinical sequencing guidelines and surveillance protocols in these children.Overall Project Strategy: The objective of this project is to advance our understanding of the relationship between cancer predisposition genes and pediatric RMS. Our central hypotheses are: 1) mutations in cancer predisposition genes are more common than expected in children with RMS; and 2) children with fusion-negative tumors have a higher burden of germline mutations than those with fusion-positive tumors. The framework for this study relies on >600 well annotated samples collected from newly diagnosed RMS patients and stored in the Children’s Oncology Group (COG) Biopathology Center.

  Study phs002304