1277 results for "get free coins fc 26 Visit Buyfc26coins.com Bardzo pod wrażeniem jakości usług..VZcl"

in 10.53 milliseconds.

• Tumor-specific expression of let-7i and miR-192 is associated with resistance to cisplatin-based chemoradiotherapy in patients with larynx and hypopharynx cancer

  Background: The majority of patients with locally advanced larynx or hypopharynx squamous cell carcinoma are treated with organ preserving chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Clinical outcome following CRT varies greatly. We hypothesized tumor microRNA (miRNA) expression is predictive for outcome following CRT. Methods: Next-generation sequencing (NGS) miRNA profiling was performed on 37 formalin fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) tumor samples. Patients with a recurrence free survival (RFS) of less than 2 years (“poor outcome”) and patients without recurrence within 2 years (“good outcome”) were compared by differential expression analysis. Tumor-specific miRNAs were selected based on normal mucosa miRNA expression data from The Cancer Genome Atlas database. A model was constructed to predict outcome using group-regularized penalized logistic ridge regression. Candidate miRNAs were validated in the initial sample set by RT-qPCR as well as in 46 additional tumor samples.Results: 1,938 known mature miRNAs were detected. Thirteen miRNAs were differentially expressed (p<0.05, FDR<0.1) according to outcome group. Initial class prediction in the NGS cohort (n=37) resulted in a model combining five miRNAs and disease stage, able to predict CRT outcome with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.82. In the RT-qPCR cohort (n=83), 25 patients (30%) experienced early recurrence (median RFS 8 months; median follow-up 42 months). Class prediction resulted in a model combining let-7i-5p and miR-192-5p and disease stage, able to discriminate with an AUC of 0.80 patients with good versus poor clinical outcome.Conclusion: The combined miRNA expression and disease stage prediction model is superior to using either factor alone. ¬¬¬This study indicates NGS miRNA profiling using FFPE specimens is feasible, resulting in clinically relevant biomarkers.

  Study EGAS00001004001

• Persistence of circulating tumor DNA in breast cancer patients during neoadjuvant treatment is a significant predictor of poor tumor response

  Purpose:Accurate assessment of response during neoadjuvant systemic treatment (NST) poses a major clinical challenge. Therefore, a minimally-invasive assessment of tumor response based on cell-free circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) may be beneficial to guide treatment decisions.Experimental Design: We profiled 93 genes in tissue from 193 early breast cancer patients. Patient-specific assays were designed to track ctDNA during NST from 145 patients with available plasma. ctDNA presence and levels were correlated with complete pathological response (pCR) and residual cancer burden (RCB) as well as with clinicopathologic characteristics of the tumor to identify potential proxies for ctDNA release. Moreover, we tested the predictive value of driver events identified in the tumor.Results:At baseline, ctDNA could be detected in 63/145 (43.4%) patients and persisted in 25/63 (39.7%) patients at mid-therapy (MT) and 15/63 (23.8%) patients at the end of treatment. ctDNA detection at MT was significantly associated with higher RCB (OR 0.062, 95% CI 0.01-0.48, P=0.0077). Out of 31 patients with detectable ctDNA at MT, 30 patients (96.8%) were non-responders (RCB II, n=8; RCB III, n=22) and only one patient responded to the treatment (RCB I). Considering all 145 patients with baseline (BL) plasma, none of the patients with RCB 0 and only 6.7% of patients with RCB I had ctDNA detectable at MT, while 30.6% and 29.6% of patients with RCB II/III, respectively, had a positive ctDNA result. Conclusion:Overall, our results demonstrate that the detection and persistence of ctDNA at mid-therapy may have the potential to negatively predict response to neoadjuvant treatment and identify patients who will not achieve pCR or be classified with RCB II/III.

  Study EGAS00001005798

• Clinical Outcomes by Tumor Mutational Burden and Inflammatory Gene Expression With Combined Nivolumab and Ipilimumab or Monotherapy in Advanced Melanoma - CM67 WES

  Purpose Exploratory analyses of CheckMate 066 and 067 trials were conducted to investigate associations of tumor mutational burden (TMB), a 4-gene inflammatory gene expression signature, and BRAF mutation status with tumor response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced melanoma. Patients and Methods Patients with known programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and BRAF mutation status received nivolumab (NIVO) or dacarbazine in CheckMate 066 and either NIVO, ipilimumab (IPI), or NIVO+IPI in CheckMate 067. Whole exome sequencing and RNA sequencing were used to determine TMB and inflammatory gene expression signature scores, respectively. These biomarkers were evaluated in terms of their association with PFS and OS. Results In the NIVO, NIVO+IPI, and IPI arms of CheckMate 067, longer survival was associated with high (> median) versus low (≤ median) TMB with hazard ratios (HRs) (95% confidence interval [CI]) for PFS of 0.45 (0.30–0.65), 0.55 (0.38–0.81), and 0.60 (0.43–0.82), and for OS of 0.46 (0.30–0.71), 0.53 (0.34–0.82), and 0.52 (0.36–0.74), respectively. For NIVO-treated patients, these results were confirmed in CheckMate 066. A survival benefit was observed with high TMB and absence of BRAF mutation. Survival was associated with high versus low inflammatory signature scores with HRs (95% CI) for PFS of 0.56 (0.34–0.94), 0.40 (0.23–0.72), and 0.43 (0.27–0.70), and for OS of 0.37 (0.20–0.66), 0.38 (0.19–0.74), and 0.46 (0.27–0.79), in the NIVO, NIVO+IPI, and IPI arms, respectively. Weak correlations were observed between PD-L1, TMB, and the inflammatory signature. Conclusions Combined assessment of TMB, inflammatory gene expression signature, and BRAF mutation status may be predictive for response to immunotherapy in advanced melanoma.

  Study EGAS00001004555

• Combination of CDK4/6 with BET-bromodomain and PI3K/mTOR inhibitors in medulloblastoma in vitro and in vivo

  Despite improvement in the treatment of medulloblastoma (MB) over the last years, numerous patients with MYC- and MYCN-driven tumors still fail the current therapeutic regimen. The retinoblastoma (RB) pathway is often compromised in MB with RB remaining intact suggesting that CDK4/6 inhibition might represent a therapeutic strategy for which drug combination remains understudied. Using tumor lines grown in stem cell conditions referred as tumorspheres as well as tumor cells freshly dissociated from the brain of mice harboring intracranial patient-derived xenografts (PDX) of Group3 (G3) and Sonic Hedgehog (SHH) MB, we conducted high throughput drug combination screens using the CDK4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i) ribociclib as an anchor and 87 oncology drugs approved by FDA or currently in clinical trials. Bromodomain and extra terminal (BET) and PI3K/mTOR inhibitors potentiated ribociclib’s inhibition of proliferation in G3 and SHH MB. A reverse combination screen using BET inhibitor JQ1 as the anchor, revealed the three FDA approved CDK4/6i as the most potentiating drugs. Those synergistic combinations were tested in vivo in mice intracranially implanted with G3 and SHH MB tumor cells. Ribociclib showed single agent activity in several in vivo MB models. However, despite in vitro synergy, combinations of ribociclib with JQ1 and ribociclib with the PI3K/mTOR inhibitor paxalisib failed to improve the survival of MB bearing mice compared to ribociclib alone. Our data illustrates the difficulty in translating in vitro findings to in vivo for brain tumors partly due to insufficient free brain concentration and altered signaling pathways activation in vitro compared to in vivo.

  Study EGAS00001006286

• Whole genome sequencing of 108 epileptic patients from CENet cohort

  Epileptic patients have been sequenced as part of the CENet cohort which is composed of patients with Genetic Generalized Epilepsy (GGE) or Non-Acquired Focal Epilepsy (NAFE) collected in CHUM Research Center in Montreal. Patients were diagnosed by epileptologists. The clinical epilepsy phenotype was classified according to the current classification by the International League against Epilepsy (ILAE). Libraries preparation and whole-genome sequencing: gDNA was cleaned up using ZR-96 DNA Clean & ConcentratorTM-5 Kit (Zymo) prior to being quantified using the Quant-iTTM PicoGreen dsDNA Assay Kit (Life Technologies) and its integrity assessed on agarose gels. Libraries were generated using the TruSeq DNA PCR-Free Library Preparation Kit (Illumina) according to the manufacturer’s recommendations. Libraries were quantified using the Quant-iTTM PicoGreen dsDNA Assay Kit (Life Technologies) and the Kapa Illumina GA with Revised Primers-SYBR Fast Universal kit (Kapa Biosystems). Average size fragment was determined using a LabChip GX (PerkinElmer) instrument. The libraries were denatured in 0.05N NaOH and diluted to 8pM using HT1 buffer. The clustering was done on a Illumina cBot and the flowcell was ran on a HiSeq 2500 for 2x125 cycles (paired-end mode) using v4 chemistry and following the manufacturer's instructions. A phiX library was used as a control and mixed with libraries at 0.01 level. Bioinformatics: The Illumina control software was HCS 2.2.58, the real-time analysis program was RTA v. 1.18.64. Program bcl2fastq v1.8.4 was used to demultiplex samples and generate fastq reads. The filtered reads were aligned to reference Homo_sapiens assembly b37. Each readset was aligned to create a .cram file.

  Study EGAS00001007507

• Multi-Layered Molecular Profiling Informs the Diagnosis and Targeted Therapy of Desmoplastic Small Round Cell Tumor

  Desmoplastic small round cell tumor (DSRCT) is an ultra-rare soft tissue sarcoma with dismal prognosis and limited therapeutic options. Here, we identified individual therapeutic targets in a cohort of 30 DSRCT patients by use of multilayered molecular profiling (genomic, transcriptomic, and (phospho-)proteomic analyses) within the DKFZ NCT DKTK MASTER program. 28 of the 30 patients received at least one personalized treatment recommendation. In line with the observation that DSRCTs are an entity with a low mutational load, most of the treatment recommendations were based on target gene or -protein expression. 13 patients received a recommended therapy, resulting in four partial responses, four stable diseases, and five progressive diseases. Eight of 13 patients received the multi tyrosine kinase inhibitor pazopanib, with mixed response. Based on high ERBB2 expression levels, two patients received the antibody drug conjugate trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd), showed exceptional, long-lasting responses and are currently (8/2024) still on treatment and progression-free. We detected high ERBB2 protein expression in all DSRCT samples with proteome data (n = 9), which suggests that ERBB2 may be a particularly useful therapeutic target for DSRCT patients. For one of the two exceptional responders we did not detect a substantial ERBB2/HER2 overexpression, which may indicate that T-DXd could also be efficacious in DSRCT patients with low levels of HER2, as also described for breast cancer patients. In conclusion, multi-omic molecular profiling revealed personalized therapeutic targets in patients with DSRCT with HER2 targeting, with T-DXd as a promising therapeutic option for this ultra-rare and difficult-to-treat tumor entity.

  Study EGAS00001007934

• Whole genome sequencing of tumor samples from advanced pre-treated NSCLC patients recruited in a phase I/II single-arm trial utilising CVA21, an oncolytic coxsackie virus, in combination with pembrolizumab.

  Acquired or de novo resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors occurs in the majority of advanced non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC). There is an unmet need to improve outcomes for patients with this condition. Oncolytic viruses represent an attractive treatment approach due to their dual activity in inducing tumor cell lysis directly and potentially augmenting anti-tumor immunity. Here, we present the safety, efficacy and translational findings from a phase I/II single-arm trial utilising CVA21, an oncolytic coxsackie virus, in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with advanced pre-treated NSCLC. We performed paired biopsies pre- and post-treatment in 10 patients who received intravenous CVA21 and pembrolizumab, 8 of whom had prior treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. Whole genome sequencing and spatial proteomics were performed to comprehensively characterise the response to CVA21. Combination CVA21/pembrolizumab (anti PD-1) therapy was well tolerated with no serious treatment-related adverse events. Partial responses were seen in two patients with prior acquired anti-PD-1 resistance and disease stabilisation in 6 patients, giving a clinical benefit rate of 80%. High baseline tumor mutational burden and PD-L1 expression were observed in patients with better response to treatment. Interestingly, an increase in antigen presentation and CD8+ T cell infiltration was observed on treatment compared with baseline in patients with better progression-free survival. This study demonstrates the potential of CVA21 to modulate the immunogenicity of tumor cells and remodelling the tumor microenvironment, providing novel insights for patient selection for trials involving novel immunotherapeutic approaches.

  Study EGAS00001008258

• Single cell RNAseq of stenotic, inflamed and non-inflamed transmural lesions from patients with Crohn's disease

  This dataset contains a gene-cell matrix derived from single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) data of ileal tissue from Crohn's disease (CD) patients and colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. It includes: Crohn's Disease Patients: A trio of transmural lesions (stenotic, inflamed, and non-inflamed) from each patient. Colorectal Cancer Patients: Unaffected ileal tissue used as external non-inflamed control. Cell Level Metadata: The dataset includes relevant cell-level metadata such as cell type annotations used in the study. Experimental Details: Platform: 10x Genomics Chromium Single Cell 3' GEX Sequencing: Illumina NovaSeq Processing: Data processed with Cell Ranger software. Resulting count matrices were merged for downstream analysis, including integration and dimensionality reduction. Dataset Composition: Crohn's Disease Patients: 10 patients with 3 samples each (non-inflamed, inflamed, stenotic), totaling 30 samples. Colorectal Cancer Patients: 5 patients with 1 sample each of unaffected tissue, totaling 5 samples. Data Provided: Merged Raw Count Matrix: The final merged raw count matrix used for downstream analysis. Cell Metadata File: Contains details of sample, tissue, and patient for each cell in the count matrix. Barcodes File: Indicate each cell barcode which also encodes the sample, tissue, and patient details for each cell. CD.S_Inf: Stenotic Corhn's disease inflamed samples CD.S_Sten: Stenotic CD patient stenosis sample CD.S_Prox: Stenotic CD Patient - proximal non-inflamed sample CC.C_Prox: CRC Patient proximal unaffected sample eg: A barcode 'CC.C_1_Prox_AAGTCGTAGACCCTTA' indicates CRC Patient unaffected proximal sampe from CRC Patient no.1 and the nucleic acid sequence indicate a unique cell from this sample. Total Samples: Crohn's Disease (CD) Patients: 30 samples Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Patients: 5 samples Patient_no Sample Sample_type 1 CC.C_1 CC.C_1_Prox CC.C_Prox 2 CD.S_1 CD.S_1_Prox CD.S_Prox 3 CD.S_1 CD.S_1_Infl CD.S_Infl 4 CD.S_1 CD.S_1_Sten CD.S_Sten 5 CC.C_2 CC.C_2_Prox CC.C_Prox 6 CD.S_2 CD.S_2_Prox CD.S_Prox 7 CD.S_2 CD.S_2_Infl CD.S_Infl 8 CD.S_2 CD.S_2_Sten CD.S_Sten 9 CC.C_3 CC.C_3_Prox CC.C_Prox 10 CC.C_4 CC.C_4_Prox CC.C_Prox 11 CD.S_3 CD.S_3_Prox CD.S_Prox 12 CD.S_3 CD.S_3_Infl CD.S_Infl 13 CD.S_3 CD.S_3_Sten CD.S_Sten 14 CD.S_4 CD.S_4_Prox CD.S_Prox 15 CD.S_4 CD.S_4_Infl CD.S_Infl 16 CD.S_4 CD.S_4_Sten CD.S_Sten 17 CC.C_5 CC.C_5_Prox CC.C_Prox 18 CD.S_5 CD.S_5_Prox CD.S_Prox 19 CD.S_5 CD.S_5_Infl CD.S_Infl 20 CD.S_5 CD.S_5_Sten CD.S_Sten 21 CD.S_6 CD.S_6_Prox CD.S_Prox 22 CD.S_6 CD.S_6_Infl CD.S_Infl 23 CD.S_6 CD.S_6_Sten CD.S_Sten 24 CD.S_7 CD.S_7_Prox CD.S_Prox 25 CD.S_7 CD.S_7_Infl CD.S_Infl 26 CD.S_7 CD.S_7_Sten CD.S_Sten 27 CD.S_8 CD.S_8_Prox CD.S_Prox 28 CD.S_8 CD.S_8_Infl CD.S_Infl 29 CD.S_8 CD.S_8_Sten CD.S_Sten 30 CD.S_9 CD.S_9_Prox CD.S_Prox 31 CD.S_9 CD.S_9_Infl CD.S_Infl 32 CD.S_9 CD.S_9_Sten CD.S_Sten 33 CD.S_10 CD.S_10_Prox CD.S_Prox 34 CD.S_10 CD.S_10_Infl CD.S_Infl 35 CD.S_10 CD.S_10_Sten CD.S_Sten

  Dataset EGAD50000000559

• How to use EGA Webin?

  EGA Webin EGA Webin serves as a platform for registering metadata for array based submissions, large scale sequence submission as well as for legacy EGA submission accounts (ega-box-XXXX). For large scale submitters of sequence data you have also the option to submit metadata via XMLS programmatic submission, while new submitters are advised to utilise the Submitter Portal for their submissions. You can request a legacy EGA submission account (ega-box-XXXX) by populating this form. Please, allow two business days for our Helpdesk team to contact you after populating this form. WEBIN actions: Register metadata for a sequence submission Register study, samples, experiments, runs, DAC, policy and dataset/s after file upload. Register components for your array-based metadata submission Register study, samples, DAC or policy before uploading files. Edit existing submission metadata Change or update previously submitted metadata. Register metadata for a sequence submission Ensure that all sequence files have been encrypted before uploading them to your submission account using the EgaCryptor. Go to the EGA Webin and log in using your submission account name (ega-box-XXX) and password. Register components of your metadata submission Study Samples Data Access Committee (DAC) Data access policy Dataset For array-base submissions: Study, Samples, Data Access Committee (DAC) and Data access policy may all be registered BEFORE file upload and dataset registration through the array-base template. Register your Study Go to the “Studies (Projects)” box Click on “Register Study” and fill in the information related to your study. Click on “Submit”, this will save the information and generate an EGA study ID. To use the study accession number in a publication, the study has to be previously released on the EGA website, we suggest the following format: "Sequence 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 on https://ega-archive.org and “The European Genome-phenome Archive in 202 "(10.1093/nar/gkab1059)" Register your Samples Go to the “Samples” box Click on “Register Samples” Select “Download spreadsheet to register samples” and customise your template, there is a default EGA template (EGA default checklist) but more attributes can be added if required. For the EGA default checklist, there are mandatory,recommended and optional attributes. As well custom fields which can be added if required. Mandatory attributes Field Name Description tax_id Taxonomy ID of the organism as in the NCBI Taxonomy database. Entries in the NCBI Taxonomy database have integer taxon IDs. See our tips for sample taxonomy here scientific_name Scientific name of the organism as in the NCBI Taxonomy database. Scientific names typically follow the binomial nomenclature. For example, the scientific name for humans is Homo sapiens. sample_alias Unique name of the sample. If not selected system will auto generate an unique alias sample_title Title of the sample sample_description Description of the sample phenotype *** Where possible, please use the Experimental Factor Ontology (EFO) to describe your phenotypes. Recommended attributes Field Name Description subject_id Identifier for the subject where the sample has been derived from gender * Sex Optional attributes Field Name Description sex sex of the organism from which the sample was obtained disease_site Affected organ sample type Affected organ donor_id ** Identifier of the donor where the sample has been derived from *Gender should be described as 'male', 'female' or 'unknown'. If 'unknown' due to a known sex chromosome aneuploidy, please create a user defined attribute called 'Sex chromosome karyotype' and add the appropriate value, for example, 'XXY'. **Donor id (Subject id) should be a de-identified subject handle. If unknown, please add 'unknown' to the field. ***Phenotypes should, where possible, be an Experimental Factor Ontology accession. If a term cannot be found to describe your phenotype please use free text. All sample phenotypes considered important for further analysis of the data should be provided (for example, tumour type), additional phenotype attributes can be created by defining your own attributes; use the notion 'phenotype2', 'phenotype3', etc. After you have customised the fields for the sample submission, download the template and fill in the information. Example of the sample template: Finally upload the sample template to get the EGA accession IDs for the samples. Register your Data Access Committee (DAC) Further information on the role of your DAC Go to the “Data Access” box Click on “Register Dacs” Input the information about the DAC and register at least one main DAC contact. Register your Data Access Policy Your Data Access Policy provides the terms and conditions of data use, this is also referred to as the Data Access Agreement (DAA). Completion of a DAA by the applicant/s should form part of the application process to the Data Access Committee (DAC). Go to the “Data Access” box Click on “Register Policies” Select the DAC to which this policy will be linked to and fill in the policy information. Submitting your Runs and Analyses This section is only for sequence data submission, for array-based submission it can be skipped. Please refer to our Submitting array based metadata Runs Registration Go to the “Raw Reads (Experiments and Runs)” box Click on “Submit Reads” Select “Download spreadsheet template for Read submission” Select the template corresponding to your submission type For the templates you have the option to customise the optional fields. To check their description click on “Show Description “ Download the template and fill in the required information. Example of the runs template: We recommend that Fastq, BAM, and CRAM read files are submitted using Webin-CLI When using this interface instead of Webin-CLI, raw sequences must be uploaded in one of the supported data formats before they can be submitted. The files can be uploaded using FTP or Aspera. The study and the sequenced samples must be pre-registered before the raw reads are submitted. Please note that each individual study and sample should be registered only once. You will be asked to provide information about the sequencing libraries and instruments. Submitting your Dataset This section is only for sequence data submissions, for array based submissions it can be skipped. Please refer to our Submitting array based metadata The dataset describes the data files, defined by the run (EGARXXXXXXXXXXX) and analysis (EGAZXXXXXXXXXXX) accessions that make up the dataset and links the collection of data files to a specified Data Access Committee and Data Access Policy. As a result, you must have registered your Reads and experiments, Data Access Committee (DAC) and Data access policy before submitting your Dataset. Please consider the number of datasets that your submission consists of, for example, a case control study is likely to consist of at least two datasets. In addition, we suggest that multiple datasets should be described for studies using the same samples but different sequence technologies. Please contact EGA Helpdesk for further assistance. Go to the “Data Access” box Click on “Register Dataset” Select the Data Access Committee (DAC) and Data access policy Register your dataset After submitting your dataset you should contact the EGA Helpdesk to provide a release date for your dataset. Datasets are automatically held (i.e. not released) unless they are affiliated to a study that has already been released. Edit/update existing submission metadata Go to the “Report” section of the object you would like to edit. Locate the object and click on the arrow under action. An option menu will be displayed. Objects can be edited through their XML or with the WEBIN menu. After an object has been edited, changes would be available on the website until the submission is released again. Please contact the EGA Helpdesk if you require further assistance.

  Documentation submission/metadata/submission/EGA_webin

• A Study to Assess the Cardiovascular, Cognitive, and Subjective Effects of Atomoxetine in Combination with Intravenous Methamphetamine

  The Study to Assess the Cardiovascular, Cognitive, and Subjective Effects of Atomoxetine in Combination with Intravenous Methamphetamine started in 2007 and ended in 2011. It was a small pilot study that included methamphetamine abusing individuals and healthy control participants aged 18-50 years. Participants who qualified over the telephone were scheduled to visit the London Laboratory at the UCLA Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior for the In-Person Screening Phase. The screening procedures, usually scheduled over two visits, determined if participants were eligible to complete the subsequent study visits. Both groups completed identical screening procedures, including a SCID diagnostic interview to rule out any major psychiatric disorders. Methamphetamine users also answered questionnaires specific to their drug use. Urine toxicology for marijuana, opiates, cocaine, methamphetamine, and benzodiazepines were monitored at the beginning and throughout the study. Additionally, participants had blood samples to test for Rapid Plasma Reagin (exposure to syphilis), purified protein derivative (PPD), HIV and Hepatitis-C (HCV). Positive test results were relayed by a study physician and resulted in termination from continuing in the study. The inpatient portion of the study lasted a total of 24 days. To confirm compliance with abstinence from illicit and prescription drug use for the duration of the study, urine and breath alcohol testing was performed for both inpatient (methamphetamine users) and outpatient (healthy control) groups. Each subject was randomized to receive either atomoxetine (80 mg daily) or placebo. During inpatient days of the study, a study physician oversaw research subjects daily and experimental procedures were conducted in the General Clinical Research Center (GCRC). During drug administration sessions, heart rate and blood pressure were assessed at frequent intervals. Experimental sessions lasted around three hours and were conducted at approximately the same time of day for a given participant. Lunch was provided to participants at 11:30am with the prohibition of caffeine on study days involving methamphetamine administration. Participants were provided with smoke breaks as needed to assure that acute nicotine withdrawal did not negatively impact performance on cognitive testing. The following outlines the day to day procedures for a methamphetamine inpatient: Phase I Inpatient Study (15 days total) Days 1-3: On the day of admission, participants received blood tests and an EKG in order to determine that they had no occult medical conditions which would make their participation in the study medically contraindicated. A three day washout period was provided at the beginning of the study to establish an appropriate methamphetamine-free baseline for testing. Days 4-6: Participants completed cognitive test batteries to assess inhibitory control including self-report measures and cognitive testing, as well as up to three MRI scanning sessions. Day 7: On day 7, at 9AM and 1PM, participants received methamphetamine in a single-blinded condition. It was administered as two IV infusions of 15mg separated by a 60min break. The total dose of IV methamphetamine was 30mg. Participants were clinically evaluated by continuous cardiac telemetry, serial EKG and measurement of vital signs, during and after infusions, in order to determine the medical safety of methamphetamine infusion in the absence of study medication. Day 8: On day 8 we evaluated the safety and residual effects of the methamphetamine administered on the previous day. Days 9-10: After demonstrating medical and psychiatric stability of the initial methamphetamine infusion, participants were then randomized to receive placebo or atomoxetine (0 or 40mg) under double-blind conditions, which would be given at 8AM on both study days. Days 11-12: On days 11 and 12, participants remained in the GCRC and took two doses of test compound atomoxetine (0 or 40mg) at 8AM and 8PM. On the morning of day 12, participants completed a series of cognitive testing. Day 13: On day 13, participants remained in the GCRC, and took two doses of the test compound atomoxetine (0 or 40mg) at 8AM and 8PM. At 9AM and noon, they received methamphetamine under double-blind conditions administered non-contingently as two infusions of 0 or 15mg by IV (intravenously), with each infusion separated by 60min. The total dose of IV methamphetamine that each participant received was 30mg. As before, participants were clinically evaluated by continuous cardiac telemetry, serial EKG and measurement of vital signs, during and after infusions, in order to determine the medical safety of methamphetamine infusion in those participants receiving study medication. Day 14: On day 14 at 8AM, participants received their final dosing of the first test compound (atomoxetine 0 or 40mg). At 9AM and 1PM, participants selected between methamphetamine infusion or money using double-blind conditions in a multiple-choice self-administration paradigm. Participants were able to take up to two infusions of 0 or 15mg of methamphetamine, separated by 60min. The total dose of IV methamphetamine that each participant received on day 14 was 30mg. Participants were clinically evaluated by continuous cardiac telemetry, serial EKG and measurement of vital signs, during and after infusions, in order to determine the medical safety of methamphetamine infusion in those participants receiving study medication. At 5pm on day 14 discharge laboratory studies were drawn. Day 15: On day 15, a final EKG was performed as well as a review of discharge laboratory studies, including review of the EKG and continued medical and psychiatric stability. Upon clearance from a physician, participants were discharged on day 15. Participants spent at least 2 weeks (14 days) out of the hospital prior to returning to the UCLA GCRC for inpatient Phase II. Phase II Inpatient Study (9 days total) Day 1-2: On the day of re-admission, participants received blood tests and an EKG. A two day washout period was provided at the beginning of the study to establish an appropriate methamphetamine free condition for safe administration of the second test compound condition. Days 3-4: On days 3 and 4, given medical stability, participants were then switched to the opposite test compound (atomoxetine 0 or 40mg) under double-blind conditions, in the same manner as in Days 9-10 in Phase I. Days 5-6: Same procedure as in Days 11-12 in Phase I but with opposite medication condition. Day 7: Same procedure as in Day13 in Phase I but with opposite medication condition. Day 8: Same procedure as in Day14 in Phase I but with opposite medication condition. Day 9: Same procedure as in Day14 in Phase I but with opposite medication condition. For healthy control participants, the study consisted of 30 days or fewer of out-patient testing. Healthy control participants had an extensive screening, including a history and physical exam performed by a study physician, an EKG, and laboratory studies performed to assess for medical or psychiatric conditions. Control participants meeting criteria were invited back to UCLA to undergo cognitive testing, and some participants received fMRI scans. Participants were required to refrain from illicit and prescription drug use for the duration of the study, which was confirmed with urine toxicology and breath alcohol level testing on examination days. Caffeine was restricted on study days for least 2 hours prior to cognitive testing and MRI scans. Participants were permitted to drink their normal daily intake of caffeine, given the caveat above. On study days, cigarette smoking was permitted to match conditions used with methamphetamine users. The incorporation of smoke breaks during the test day assured that acute nicotine withdrawal did not negatively impact performance on cognitive tests or neuroimaging. The following outlines procedures for healthy control participants: For normal controls, participation involved one day of outpatient screening, and one day of baseline cognitive testing and possible MRI scans. After these procedures were completed, participants were randomized to the first test compound (atomoxetine 40mg or placebo), to be taken once daily in the morning for 2 days. It was then increased to twice daily for the next 3 days, followed by a final dose (40mg or placebo) on the sixth day of study medication. Participants were also asked to bring their pill packages to assess compliance with the study medication. Additionally, control participants completed a series of repeated-measures cognitive testing (on placebo or atomoxetine, respectively) and possibly two fMRI sessions (separated by a short break). After at least a four-day washout period, control participants were instructed to start the opposite test compound (atomoxetine 40mg or placebo), again to be taken once daily in the morning for two days, then twice daily for 3 days, reaching the final dose (40mg or placebo) of the second test compound in the morning. Participants were again asked to bring their pill packages to assess compliance and had blood drawn to assess atomoxetine levels. Control participants then completed another series of cognitive testing and fMRI testing sessions. They were subsequently discharged from the study. Normal control participants returned two weeks after completion of both study phases in order to complete assessments to their physical and psychological status following treatment.

  Study phs001195