16285 results for "free fc coins and points Visit Buyfc26coins.com Alennukset toistuvista ostoista..p4v2"

in 43.45 milliseconds.

• Combined DNA Methylation and Genotyping via scTAMARA-seq (DNA)

  This dataset features single-cell DNA methylation and nuclear genotyping data obtained using the scTAMARA-seq protocol, a combination of SDR-seq and scTAM-seq. The targeted panel, 200 DNA methylation (a subset of the orginal 448 CpG targets) and 167 genotyping targets, were applied to a CD34+ enriched bone marrow sample from patient X.1. The data was generated on the Mission Bio Tapestri platform.

  Dataset EGAD00001015496

• SOX11+ and SOX11- mantle cell lymphoma cell lines RNAseq data

  Fastq transcriptomic sequencing files from Z138 SOX11+ and JVM2 SOX11- mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) cell lines upon SOX11 knock out (KO) and ectopic overexpression, respectively. Dataset includes 3 samples of Z138-SOX11KO, 3 of Z138 control, 3 of JVM2 control and 3 of JVM2-SOX11 MCL cell lines.

  Dataset EGAD00001009421

• RNAseq Atlas in HCC tumors

  The atlas provides a comprehensive exploration of genetic and transcriptomic landscapes within HCC, offering insights into key genomic alterations and gene expression patterns. The integration of DNA sequencing and RNAseq data enhances our understanding of the molecular complexity underlying HCC, potentially paving the way for targeted therapeutic strategies and biomarker discovery in the context of hepatocellular carcinoma.

  Dataset EGAD00001015341

• Human and rat skeletal muscle multiomic profiling sequencing data

  Illumina sequencing data (fastq files) representing single-nucleus (sn) ATAC-seq, snRNA-seq, bulk ATAC-seq, and snATACseq+snRNAseq multiomics data from human and rat skeletal muscle samples (19 libraries total). Includes a README file that describes the relationship between libraries, samples, and files.

  Dataset EGAD00001008323

• Targeted DNA sequencing on bulk bone marrow and peripheral blood

  Targeted DNA sequencing was performed on 195 bone marrow samples to identify cases of clonal haematopoiesis, and on 99 paired peripheral blood samples. The SeqCap EZ HyperCap protocol was followed, and targeted capture performed against a panel of 97 genes recurrently mutated in myeloid malignancies and clonal hematopoiesis. One BAM file (mapped to the hg38 reference genome) is provided per sample.

  Dataset EGAD00001011083

• Prader-Willi Syndrome and Early-onset Morbid Obesity Natural History Protocol

  This observational study will involve the comprehensive assessment of the medical, behavioral and nutritional history and the clinical features of individuals with Prader-Willi syndrome and individuals with features of PWS-like/EMO. A blood sample will be obtained from the participants in order to create a DNA and RNA repository. In those PWS participants with a known deletion a blood sample will be collected for DNA in order to perform array comparative genome hybridization (aCGH) microarray or Methylation-Specific Multiplex Ligation-dependent Probe Amplification (MS-MLPA) studies to characterize the extent of the deletion. DNA samples will be sent to the Consortium Center at Baylor College of Medicine for the performance of the aCGH studies and to either Dr. Driscoll or Dr. Butler lab for MS-MLPA analysis. No drugs or treatments will be administered through this protocol. Our goal is to enroll as many participants as possible over a 8 year period. Currently we have enrolled 297 total subjects of which 265 have PWS and 32 EMO. Our original goal was to have enrolled over the first 5 years a clinical database of 200 individuals with PWS and 100 with EMO. We have exceeded expectations in PWS enrollment, but have fallen short in the enrollment of individuals with EMO. Therefore, we would like to reset our goals. We now propose to have an enrollment goal of 400 total subjects of which 350 will have PWS and 50 will have EMO. Eligible participants will be initially enrolled in the natural history study from the 4 clinic sites currently involved with PWS (University of Florida, Kansas University Medical Center, Vanderbilt University and University of California at Irvine). Participants assessed will serve to provide a background of information and a willing cohort for future interventional studies. All participants will have had standard genetic testing at a commercial laboratory prior to entry into the study. The PWS participants will be classified into one of the 3 main molecular classes (deletion, UPD and ID). The EMO participants will have had laboratory testing ruling out PWS and chromosomal aneuploidy (e.g., trisomy 21, Klinefelter syndrome, etc.). Going forward we feel it is important that all newly recruited EMO subjects have an aCGH as part of their evaluation so we can identify those with discrete deletions, duplications or copy number variants (CNV) and compare them to those without aCGH abnormalities. The participants will be assessed annually (0-3 years of age) or biennially (> 3 years) in the Clinical Research Center (or equivalent facility) using standardized protocol including photographs for documentation purposes to compare the evolution of the clinical phenotype.

  Study phs000575

• GEDI: A Developmental Model of Gene-Environment Interplay in SUDs: Combined Genotype Dataset from the "Great Smoky Mountains Study" and the "Caring for Children in the Community Study".

  1. Great Smoky Mountains Study (GSMS; Costello et al. 1996, 1997) Three cohorts of boys and girls, aged 9, 11, and 13 years at intake in 1993, were selected from a rural population of some 20,000 children using a household equal probability design. A two-phase procedure was used for White and African-American youth to increase power by oversampling children at risk for psychiatric and SUDs. Parents (usually mothers) of the first stage random population sample completed a questionnaire about their child's behavioral problems. Of 4,195 subjects selected, 95% (N=3,896) of parents completed the screen. All children scoring above a predetermined threshold (the top 25% of the total scores), plus a 10% random sample of the remaining 75%, were recruited for detailed interviews. Results can be back-weighted to population levels for analyses. Half of the sample consists of females, and 6% are African Americans, reflecting the population of the study area. The interviewed sample of white and African-American subjects was 1,070 (80% of those recruited). American Indian youth were oversampled (100%) because they are an understudied group known to be at high risk for stressful events, substance disorders, and mood disorders. Of 431 age-eligible children, 350 (81% boys, 49% girls) participated. Thus, the size of total GSMS sample is 1,070 + 350 = 1,420. Data collection is complete for ages 9-26, and age 30 interviews are in progress. By age 26 a total of 9,858 interviews had been completed; the average number of interviews per subject was seven, and by age 26, 97.3% completed two or more interviews. 2. The Caring for Children in the Community Study (CCC; Angold et al., 2002) This representative study of psychiatric illness and service use in African-American and White youth took place in four rural counties in the southeastern USA. The two-stage sampling design and methods are similar to those used in the GSMS. Of 4,500 youth randomly selected from the 17,117 9- to 17-year-olds in the public school's database, 3,613 (80.0%) were successfully contacted and agreed to complete the behavioral screen. Of the 1,302 selected to participate in the study, 920 (70.7%) interviews were completed. Because CCC was also the only study in GEDI to contain more than a very few African-American participants, these were omitted from the multi-site analyses. Reprinted with permission from Cambridge University Press from Costello et al., 2013: PMID: 23461817 References: Costello et al., 1996: PMID: 8956679 Costello et al., 1997: PMID: 9184514 Angold et al., 2002: PMID: 12365876

  Study phs000852

• From research to data sharing: exploring EGA user's experiences

  The Cell Plasticity and Regeneration Group at the Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute-IDIBELL focuses on the process of recruitment of macrophages that takes place in the small intestine during injury and healing. They recently published a paper titled “Mucosal Macrophages Govern Intestinal Regeneration in Response to Injury" in Gastroenterology Journal. As part of the research, some experiments were conducted using human intestinal organoid lines. These cells were processed for RNA sequencing, and the sequencing data were deposited at the EGA to be made available to the scientific community. When dealing with human genomic information, repositories must ensure the availability of the datasets while ensuring data protection. In this context, the European Genome-phenome Archive stands as a service for secure archiving and sharing of genetic, phenotypic and clinical data resulting from biomedical research. Following the recent publication of their paper, we took the opportunity to talk to Ilias Moraitis, first author, and Jordi Guiu, group leader, to find out about their experience with data sharing. Could you explain the focus of your research? In the lab, we study intestinal regeneration and how immune cells participate in this process. We use several techniques: engineered mouse models, image tracing, as well as mouse and human cells intestinal organoids. What challenges do you face regarding data management? We didn’t have a lot of problems. Always the informatic part, the data analysis, can give problems. But everything was smooth and working. We think it’s very important to deposit the data in repositories. For the mouse data it is very straightforward, but for us it was the first time depositing human data, which is sensitive because it comes from patients, and this is legally regulated. That’s why we thought about the EGA, and it was our first time. Why do you think it is important to submit data to repositories such as EGA? Because we think data is important for the science. Nowadays, we are sequencing a lot everywhere worldwide and having these resources shared with the scientific community it’s not only good for science, but it is also saving money and reducing costs. And there is so much data in there that can be used for other projects and for other questions. And it saves time! How was the process of submitting the data to the EGA? The communication worked very well but it was slower than we would like. But I think this is something we learn on the way. People usually wait until the last minute to do this before publication but if you know it in advance, you can start the process earlier. If you had to repeat the process, would you do anything differently? It’s like everything, isn’t it? For the first time you don’t know, you aren’t sure, but for the second time you know the steps, you know what to do and it’s faster. Of course, we would to do it earlier. Also, there were some things related to the control access that we didn’t know how to manage, but it was something more internal to us. Who is going to receive the communications and when, is our ethical committee going to evaluate this? All these technicalities that we didn’t know before starting this process, so we had to think about all these things. Next time it will be faster on our side. Do you have any suggestions for us to improve the submission process? Maybe we’ll need to ask our bioinformatician who did it! He was in charge of this part. Besides that, we think if the process were faster, it would be better for everyone. Also, in science a lot of times you have to do a lot of things at the very last minute, because of the nature of the experiments, or the need to accomplish for submitting a paper. Being faster in the process would be a plus. On your side, we went through the process and were able to find some information, but there were aspects we weren't aware of and weren't sure how to handle. I'm not sure if other institutes have different protocols for managing data requests or how they handle these internally. We believe the main issue lies in how the forms are filled out. Do you have any recommendations for other submitters? The main advice is to do this with enough time. Submit the data when you have the sequences, and don’t wait until the last minute. And then it can be under embargo, so you don’t need to make it public at that moment. As soon as you sequence, upload it and then it will be there for whenever you need to publish. How do you think we could encourage other researchers to submit their data? There are different layers here. One is that it is mandatory. You have to do this. The other is that we belong to a research community, to the same community and sharing this is making our research community stronger and more efficient. And then, also because this gives you visibility. The data is there, other people can analyse your data, and this also will bring citations to your papers. It has many advantages.

  Blog from-research-to-data-sharing

• Sequencing of Cervical Cancer

  Precision mapping of genetic alterations in cancer can enable better selection of therapies and improved outcomes when combined with new sequencing diagnostics. We describe whole-exome sequences from cervical adenocarcinomas and paired normal samples in Hong Kong Chinese women. These data uncover a heterogeneous genomic landscape but identify commonly aberrant loci including FAT1, ARID1A, ERBB2 and PIK3CA that may provide a focus for the development of individualized targeted therapies for Chinese women with cervical adenocarcinoma.

  Study phs000723

• Autosomal recessive

  To define a genetic syndrome of combined immunodeficiency, severe autoimmunity, and developmental delay, 4 patients from two families who had similar syndromic features were studied. To identify disease-causing mutations, we performed whole exome sequencing for one patient and her healthy parent from Family 1 and also for one patient from Family 2. Disease segregated with novel autosomal recessive mutations in a single gene, tripeptidyl-peptidase II (TPP2) gene. The result defines a new human metabolic immunodeficiency.

  Study phs000848