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

in 19.72 milliseconds.

• Evolution and clinical impact of genetic epistasis within EGFR-mutant lung cancers

  The current understanding of tumorigenesis is largely centered on a monogenic driver oncogene model. This paradigm is incompatible with the prevailing clinical experience in most solid malignancies: monotherapy with a drug directed against an individual oncogenic driver typically results in incomplete clinical responses and eventual tumor progression1-7. By profiling the somatic genetic alterations present in over 2,000 cases of lung cancer, the leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide, we show that combinations of functional genetic alterations, i.e. genetic collectives dominate the landscape of advanced-stage disease. We highlight this polygenic landscape and evolution of advanced-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) through the spatial-temporal genomic profiling of 7 distinct tumor biopsy specimens and 6 plasma specimens obtained from an EGFR-mutant NSCLC patient at (1) initial diagnosis of early-stage disease, (2) metastatic progression, (3) sequential treatment and resistance to 2 EGFR inhibitors, (4) death. The comprehensive genomic analysis of this case, coupled with circulating free (cf) tumor DNA profiling of additional advanced-stage EGFR-mutant NSCLC clinical cohorts with associated treatment responses uncovered features of evolutionary selection for multiple concurrent gene alterations: including the presence of EGFR inhibitor-sensitive (EGFRL858R;EGFRexon19del) or inhibitor-resistant (EGFRT790M;EGFRC797S) forms of oncogenic EGFR along with cell cycle gene alterations (e.g. in CDK4/6, CCNE1, RB1) and activating alterations in WNT/β-catenin and PI3K pathway genes, which our data suggest can cooperatively impart non-redundant functions to limit EGFR targeted therapy response and/or promote tumor progression. Moreover, evidence of an unanticipated parallel evolution of both EGFR T790M and two distinct forms of oncogenic PIK3CA was observed. Our study provides a large-scale clinical and genetic dataset of advanced-stage EGFR-mutant NSCLC, a rationale for specific polytherapy strategies such as EGFR and CDK4/6 inhibitor co-treatment to potentially enhance clinical outcomes, and prompts a re-evaluation of the prevailing paradigm of monogenic-based molecular stratification for targeted therapy. Instead, our findings highlight an alternative model of genetic collectives that operate through epistasis to drive lung cancer progression and therapy resistance.

  Study EGAS00001002604

• Influence of Genomic Landscape on Cancer Immunotherapy for Newly Diagnosed Ovarian Cancer: Biomarker Analyses from the IMagyn050 Randomized Clinical Trial

  The IMagyn050 trial (NCT03038100), which evaluated the efficacy of Atezo vs placebo (Pla) with carboplatin, paclitaxel and bevacizumab (CPB) in front line ovarian cancer patient (pts), did not meet its co-primary endpoints of PFS in ITT or PD-L1+ (Moore et al. JCO 2021). The aim of this exploratory study was to evaluate whether patients with BRCA1/2-mutated or homologous recombination-deficient (HRD) ovarian cancers benefitted from atezolizumab in the phase III IMagyn050 (NCT03038100) trial. Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer were randomized to either atezolizumab or placebo with standard chemotherapy and bevacizumab. PD-L1 status of tumor-infiltrating immune cells was determined centrally (VENTANA SP142 assay). Genomic alterations, including deleterious BRCA1/2 alterations, genomic loss of heterozygosity (gLOH), tumor mutation burden (TMB), and microsatellite instability (MSI), were evaluated using the FoundationOne assay. HRD was defined as gLOH ≥16%, regardless of BRCA1/2 mutation status. Potential associations between progression-free survival (PFS) and genomic biomarkers were evaluated using standard correlation analyses and log-rank of Kaplan-Meier estimates. Results Among biomarker-evaluable samples, 22% (234/1050) harbored BRCA1/2 mutations and 46% (446/980) were HRD. Median TMB was low irrespective of BRCA1/2 or HRD. Only 3% (29/1024) had TMB ≥10 mut/Mb and 0.3% (3/1022) were MSI-high. PFS was better in BRCA2-mutated versus BRCA2-non-mutated tumors and in HRD versus proficient tumors. PD-L1 positivity (≥1% expression on immune cells) was associated with HRD but not BRCA1/2 mutations. PFS was not improved by adding atezolizumab in BRCA2-mutated or HRD tumors; there was a trend toward enhanced PFS with atezolizumab in BRCA1-mutated tumors. Conclusion Most ovarian tumors have low TMB despite BRCA1/2 mutations or HRD. Neither BRCA1/2 mutation nor HRD predicted enhanced benefit from atezolizumab. This is the first randomized double-blind trial in ovarian cancer demonstrating that genomic instability triggered by BRCA1/2 mutation or HRD is not associated with improved sensitivity to immune checkpoint inhibitors.

  Study EGAS00001006838

• ACT-Discover: identifying karyotype heterogeneity in pancreatic cancer evolution using ctDNA

  Background Liquid biopsies, and the dynamic tracking of somatic mutations within circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) can provide insight into the dynamics of cancer evolution and the intra-tumour heterogeneity that fuels treatment resistance. However, identifying and tracking dynamic changes in somatic copy-number alterations (SCNAs), which have been associated with poor outcome and metastasis, using ctDNA is challenging. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is a disease which has been considered to harbour early punctuated events in its evolution, leading to an early fitness peak, with minimal further subclonal evolution. Methods To interrogate the role of SCNAs in pancreatic adenocarcinoma cancer evolution, we applied whole-exome sequencing of 55 longitudinal cell-free DNA (cfDNA) samples taken from 24 patients (including 8 from whom a patient-derived xenograft (PDX) was derived) with metastatic disease prospectively recruited into a clinical trial. We developed a method, Aneuploidy in Circulating Tumour DNA (ACT-Discover), that leverages haplotype phasing of paired tumour biopsies or PDXs to identify SCNAs in cfDNA with greater sensitivity. Results SCNAs were observed within 28 of 47 evaluable cfDNA samples. Of these events, 30% could only be identified by harnessing the haplotype-aware approach leveraged in ACT-Discover. The exceptional purity of PDX tumours enabled near-complete phasing of genomic regions in allelic imbalance, highlighting an important auxiliary function of PDXs. Finally, although the classical model of pancreatic cancer evolution emphasises the importance of early, homogenous somatic events as a key requirement for cancer development, ACT-Discover identified substantial heterogeneity of SCNAs, including parallel focal and arm-level events, affecting different parental alleles within individual tumours. Indeed, ongoing acquisition of SCNAs was identified within tumours throughout the disease course, including within an untreated metastatic tumour. Conclusions This work demonstrates the power of haplotype phasing to study genomic variation in cfDNA samples and reveals undiscovered intra-tumour heterogeneity with important scientific and clinical implications. Implementation of ACT-Discover could lead to important insights from existing cohorts, or underpin future prospective studies seeking to characterise the landscape of tumour evolution through liquid biopsy.

  Study EGAS00001007077

• The British Autozygosity Populations BioResource (2022-04-26)

  This data set contains whole exome sequences of individuals from 8086 (mostly British Pakistani/British Bangladeshi, mostly self-reported parentally related) individuals from the following studies: 1. 5236 British Pakistani/British Bangladeshi adults from East London Genes & Health, now known as Genes & Health 2. 2624 British South Asian mothers from Born in Bradford (mostly Pakistani) 3. 1061 British South Asian adults from Birmingham (mostly Pakistani) This dataset contains all the exome sequence data available for this study on 2022-04-26

  Dataset EGAD00001008736

• Bulk RNA sequencing of day 2 and day 7 biopsies from the tuberculin skin test in people with latent tuberculosis, and of day 2 biopsies from saline controls

  We used the tuberculin skin test (TST) as human challenge model to study the temporal evolution of the immune response to Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) antigens in vivo. Study participants comprised healthy HIV seronegative adults, 18-60 years of age. Latent tuberculosis (TB) infection was defined as immune memory for Mtb-specific antigens identified by positive peripheral blood IFNg release assays, but no clinical or radiological evidence of active TB. Two units tuberculin each were injected intradermally into the contralateral forearms of participants. After 2 days (n=216) or 7 days (n=158), 3 mm skin punch biopsies were taken from the injection sites and processed for whole genome transcriptional profiling by bulk RNA sequencing. The time points reflect maximum clinical inflammation (day 2) and maximum T cell infiltration (day 7) of the TST. TST samples were compared to skin biopsies taken two days after control injection of saline in a separate group of individuals (n=33), comprising healthy volunteers as well as patients with active or latent TB, ranging from 18-75 years of age. This dataset includes 407 samples from 256 individuals (n=33 saline, n=223 with Day 2 and/or Day 7 TST). Skin biopsies were collected into RNAlater (Qiagen) for RNA extraction. Total RNA was obtained with the Precellys Evolution homogenizer (Bertin Instruments) and Qiagen RNeasy mini kit. RNA was subjected to DNase treatment to remove contaminating genomic DNA using a TURBO DNA-free kit (Ambion, Life Technologies). The KAPA mRNA HyperPrep Kit (Roche Diagnostics) was used to construct stranded mRNA-Seq libraries from up to 500 ng intact total RNA. Paired-end sequencing was performed on the Illumina Nextseq using the Nextseq 500/550 High Output 75 cycle kit (Illumina). Runs were demultiplexed using bcl2fastq by Illumina.

  Dataset EGAD50000001208

• scRNAseq data of CAP

  Fastq files from scRNAseq data of cancer associated pericytes-like from 3 patients. CAP were isolated from a total of 3 primary BC (surgical residues prior to any treatment) by using BDFACS ARIA III sorter (BD Biosciences). BC were collected directly from the operating room after surgical specimen macroscopic examination and selection of areas of interest by a pathologist. Samples were cut into small pieces (around 1 mm3) and digested in CO2-independent medium (Gibco #18045-054) supplemented with 150 μg/mL liberase (Roche #05401020001) and Dnase I (Roche #11284932001) for 40 min at 37°C with shaking (180 rpm). After digestion, cells were processed and stained as described above (#Flow Cytometry analysis of BC samples). CAP fibroblasts were then gated on the Live/Dead negative fraction and defined as EPCAM- CD45- CD31- CD235a- FAPMed CD29High. CAP scRNA-seq: Upon isolation, CAP cells were directly collected into RNase-free tubes (Thermo Fisher Scientific, #AM12450) precoated with DMEM (GE Life Sciences, #SH30243.01) supplemented with 10% FBS (Biosera, #1003/500). Single-cell capture, lysis, and cDNA library construction were performed using Chromium system from 10X Genomics, with the following kits: Chromium Single Cell 3′ Library & Gel Bead Kit v2 kit (10X Genomics, #120237) and Chromium Single Cell A Chip Kits (10X Genomics, #1000009). Generation of gel beads in Emulsion (GEM), barcoding, post GEM-reverse transcription cleanup and cDNA amplification were performed according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Cells were loaded accordingly on the Chromium Single cell A chips, and 12 cycles were performed for cDNA amplification. cDNA quality and quantity were checked on Agilent 2100 Bioanalyzer using Agilent High Sensitivity DNA Kit (Agilent, #5067-4626) and library construction followed according to 10X Genomics protocol. Libraries were next run on the Illumina HiSeq (for patients P1) and NovaSeq (for patients P2–3) with a depth of sequencing of 50,000 reads per cell.

  Dataset EGAD50000000321

• HGSC WGS for the study Genomic consequences of aberrant DNA repair mechanisms stratify ovarian cancer histotypes

  HGSC cases in the OvCaRe and CRCHUM Tumour Banks were selected according to the following criteria: (i) were administered platinum taxane based therapy; (ii) relapsed within 12 months (365 days) or had at least longer than 4.5 years (1642.5 days) follow-up data; (iii) had at least 50% tumour content by H&E staining and expert pathology review. All cases were re-reviewed by expert pathologists to confirm the diagnosis of HGSC. Germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 was determined for all patients through hereditary cancer screening programs. The design of cases selection as a discovery cohort was engineered to amplify biological differences by selecting cases from the extremes of the outcome distribution. All HGSC tumours are primary tumour samples. Library construction and sequencing Frozen specimens with >50% tumour cellularity (based on initial slide review) were used for cryosectioning and subsequent nucleic acid extraction. Patient tumour and normal blood samples derived from primary, untreated fresh frozen tumour specimens harvested at diagnosis during standard of care debulking surgery. Germline DNA was provided from peripheral blood buffy coat on all specimens except 13 from Tokyo, where non-cancer frozen tissue was used as a germline source. DNA extraction from both matched normal (blood) and tumour samples (frozen tissue) were performed using the QIAamp Blood and Tissue DNA kit (Qiagen) and quantified using a Qbit fluorometer and reagents (high-sensitivity assay). Three lanes of Illumina HiSeq 2500 v4 chemistry for normal samples and five lanes for tumour samples were obtained. The PCR-free protocol was adopted to eliminate the PCR-induced bias and improve coverage across the genome.

  Dataset EGAD00001003268

• Characterization and clinical relevance of the genomic alterations defining invasive lobular breast cancer

  Background: Invasive lobular breast cancer (ILBC) is the second most common histological subtype after ductal breast cancer (IDBC). In spite of significant clinical and pathological differences, ILBC is still treated as IDBC. Here, we aimed at identifying recurrent genomic alterations in ILBC with potential clinical implications.Methods: Starting from 630 ILBC primary tumors with a median follow up of 10 years, we interrogated oncogenic substitutions and indels of 360 cancer genes and genome-wide copy number alterations in 413 and 170 ILBC samples, respectively, and correlated those findings with clinical, pathological, and outcome features. The Cancer Genome Atlas database was used for comparison of frequency estimates.Results: Besides the high mutation frequency of CDH1 in 65% of the tumors, alterations in one of the three key genes of the PI3K pathway, PIK3CA, PTEN and AKT1, were present in more than half of the cases. ERBB2 and ERBB3 were mutated in 5.1 and 3.6% of the tumors. FOXA1 mutations and ESR1 copy number gains were detected in 9% and 25% of the samples. All these alterations were more frequent in ILBC than IDBC. The histological diversity of ILBC was associated with specific genomic alterations, such as enrichment for ERBB2 mutations in the mixed, non-classic subtype, and for ARID1A mutations and ESR1 gains in the solid subtype. Finally, ERBB2 and AKT1 mutations were associated with short-term risk of relapse, and chromosome 1q and 11p gain with increased and decreased breast cancer free survival, respectively.Conclusion: ERBB2, ERBB3 and AKT1 mutations represent high prevalence therapeutic targets in ILBC. FOXA1 mutations and ESR1 gains urgently deserve dedicated clinical investigation, especially in the context of endocrine treatment.

  Dataset EGAD00001001395

• Clinical Outcomes by Tumor Mutational Burden and Inflammatory Gene Expression With Combined Nivolumab and Ipilimumab or Monotherapy in Advanced Melanoma_CM67-RNASeq

  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.

  Dataset EGAD00001006306

• Clinical Outcomes by Tumor Mutational Burden and Inflammatory Gene Expression With Combined Nivolumab and Ipilimumab or Monotherapy in Advanced Melanoma - CM066-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.

  Dataset EGAD00001006309

• National Cancer Institute Cancer Genome Characterization Initiative (CGCI)

  The Office of Cancer Genomics at the National Cancer Institute sponsored a series of studies as part of the Cancer Genome Characterization Initiative (CGCI) to assess novel emerging sequencing technologies in cancer. The CGCI program included comprehensive characterization of the genetic aberrations found in different pediatric and/or adult tumors. CGCI characterized a number of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas (including diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) from patients with and without HIV+ infection, follicular lymphoma (FL), as well as adult and pediatric Burkitt lymphomas), and additional HIV-associated tumors (including DLBCL, lung, and cervical cancers). All data from these projects is available at the NCI Genomic Data Commons. Individual project descriptions are available by disease on the substudy pages (links are included at the top of this page). Brief summaries are as follows: Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL) - CGCI investigators probed genomic alterations more deeply than had previously been possible by using state-of-the-art RNA sequencing (mRNA-seq) and whole genome shotgun sequencing (WGS) coupled with leading edge bioinformatics, data management and analysis approaches. The project sequenced tumor DNA and/or RNA from 117 NHL tumor samples and 10 cell lines. This included the genomes or exomes of 1 Follicular Lymphoma (FL) and 13 diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) cases, all with matched constitutional DNA sequenced to comparable depths, RNA-sequencing (mRNA-seq) of 92 DLBCL, 12 FL and 8 B-cell NHL cases with other histologies and 10 DLBCL-derived cell lines. The DLBCL cases and cell-lines are from the two major subtypes of DLBCL: germinal center B-cell (GCB) and activated B-cell (ABC). HIV+ Tumor Molecular Characterization Project (HTMCP) - This project was a joint effort of the Office of Cancer Genomics (OCG) and the Office of HIV and AIDS Malignancy (OHAM). Its goals were to characterize HIV-associated cancers (obtained from HIV-infected patients) and compare them to the same types of cancers from patients without HIV infection. Investigators performed 30X genome sequencing of 100 cases of paired tumor and germline DNA, along with transcriptome sequencing in each of 3 types of HIV+ tumors (DLBCL, lung and cervical cancers). These platforms allow discovery of mutations both in coding and non-coding genomic regions, gene expression and genomic alterations (including translocations, insertions and deletions). Comparing tumors of cancer patients both with and without HIV-infection provides insight into the potential function of this virus in certain cancers. Burkitt Lymphoma Genome Sequencing Project (BLGSP) - This project was a collaborative effort between the National Cancer Institute and the Foundation for Burkitt Lymphoma Research to develop a databank of the many alterations found in Burkitt lymphoma (BL), an uncommon type of Non-Hodgkin lymphoma that occurs most often in children and young adults. The goal of the BLGSP was to explore potential genetic changes in patients with BL that could lead to better prevention, detection and treatment of the cancer. The project characterized the alterations of the tumors' genomes (with matched normal as control) and transcriptomes by sequencing the DNA and RNA of each case. Using the data generated, the ultimate goals of the project was to discover the molecular changes that are present in BL patients and then determine how those changes correlate with treatment regimen and outcome. CGCI data is accessible at the NCI's Genomic Data Commons (GDC) via the GDC's Data Portal and from each of the CGCI Publication Pages at the GDC (Please see the "Supplemental Links" section of any CGCI publication's "Publication Information and Associated Data Files page" at the GDC.). Available datasets include raw sequencing data, datasets generated by the original CGCI research teams (fully annotated clinical information and higher-level/analyzed molecular characterization data), as well as higher level data generated by the GDC. Please see the CGCI Use and Publication Guidelines for updated details on the sharing of any CGCI substudy data, including how to cite CGCI.To learn more about the CGCI studies, please visit the CGCI Program website.

  Study phs000235

• Cardiovascular Cell Therapy Research Network (CCTRN): A Phase II, RCT of Mesenchymal Stem Cells & Cardiac Stem Cells in Subjects With Ischemic HF (CONCERT HF-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. ObjectivesTo assess the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of autologous mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) and c-kit positive cardiac cells (CPCs), alone or in combination, in participants with ischemic heart failure.Background The prognosis of heart failure (HF) caused by chronic ischemic cardiomyopathy (coronary artery disease and prior myocardial infarction), hereby referred to as “ischemic HF”, remains poor. Many studies have explored the use of various types of stem or progenitor cells in participants with chronic ischemic HF, with encouraging results. Several clinical trials have suggested that MSCs and CPCs are both safe and beneficial in participants with ischemic HF. At the time of this study, no information was available on the efficacy of MSCs and CPCs in humans, however, both cell types have been shown to attenuate left ventricle (LV) dysfunction in animal models. Preclinical models indicate that combining MSCs and CPCs increases the therapeutic effects, but this had not yet been tested in humans. The CONCERT-HF study was initiated to assess whether autologous MSCs and CPCs, alone or in combination, can be manufactured and delivered to participants with ischemic HF; are well-tolerated; and improve LV function, quality of life, and functional capacity, and/or reduce scar size. Participants A total of 125 participants were randomized with 33 participants randomized to the MSCs and CPCs group, 29 participants to the MSCs alone group, 31 participants to the CPCs alone group, and 32 participants to the placebo group. Design The CONCERT-HF study was a multi-center Phase II, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial designed to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of MSCs alone, CPCs alone, and their combination compared with placebo as well as each other in patients with ischemic HF. In Stage 1 (open label, lead-in study) participants were randomized 1:1 to either a standard-of-care control group (i.e., they did not undergo harvest, mapping, or injection procedures) or combination therapy (MSCs + CPCs, as described for Stage 2) to complete safety assessments. Once approval was granted for Stage 2, participants were randomized (1:1:1:1) to one of four treatments: placebo, autologous MSCs (target dose, 150 × 106 cells), autologous CPCs (target dose, 5 × 106 cells), or a combination of autologous MSCs and CPCs. At the harvest visit, right ventricular endocardial biopsy (EMB) was performed in participants randomized to receive CPCs alone or a combination of MSCs and CPCs. Participants randomized to receive MSCs alone or placebo had a sham procedure (right heart catheterization without EMB). All participants underwent a bone marrow aspiration and approximately 14 weeks later had transendocardial, electromechanically-guided injections of study product. Visits occurred at 1 day, 1 week, and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after study product injection. A telephone contact took place at 24 months to assess the participant's current medications, as well as morbidity and mortality. Study endpoints included measures of safety, feasibility, and efficacy. Safety outcomes included all adverse events grade 2 and higher, including major adverse cardiac events (MACE) related to HF (death, hospitalization for worsening HF, and HF exacerbation not requiring hospitalization). Efficacy endpoints included quality of life, MRI measures of LV function and structure, functional capacity, and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels. Conclusions In patients with ischemic HF, autologous MSCs and CPCs, alone or in combination, are safe and feasible; CPCs were associated with a reduction in the incidence of MACE related to HF compared to placebo; MSCs, either alone or in combination with CPCs, were associated with improved quality of life; these seemingly beneficial effects of CPCs and MSCs on clinical outcome were not associated with changes in LV function or structure; and combination therapy with MSCs and CPCs was associated with the best clinical outcomes with respect to both MACE related to HF and quality of life.

  Study phs004055

• Overcoming Clinical Resistance to EZH2 Inhibition Using Rational Epigenetic Combination Therapy

  Essential epigenetic dependencies have become evident in many cancers. Based on functional antagonism between BAF/SWI/SNF and PRC2 in SMARCB1-deficient sarcomas, we and colleagues recently completed the clinical trial of the EZH2 inhibitor tazemetostat, leading to its FDA approval. However, the principles of tumor response to epigenetic therapy in general and tazemetostat in particular remain unknown. Using functional genomics of patient tumors and diverse experimental models, we defined molecular mechanisms of tazemetostat resistance. We found distinct classes of acquired mutations that converge on the RB1/E2F axis, decoupling EZH2-dependent differentiation and cell cycle control. This allows tumor cells to escape tazemetostat-induced G1 arrest despite EZH2 inhibition and suggests a general mechanism for effective EZH2 therapy. Using RNA-sequencing of patient tumor specimens, we identified specific genes as markers of a deficient RB1/E2F axis, which we propose as prospective biomarkers for therapy stratification. This offers a paradigm for rational epigenetic combination therapy suitable for immediate translation to clinical trials.This study was performed on archived tumor tissue collected as part of the above clinical trial at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Patient tumors were classified into "Response" or "Progression" groups based on RECIST 1.1 criteria. "Response" included tumors exhibiting a complete response, partial response, or stable disease. All other tumors were classified under the "Progression" group. Archived frozen tumor samples were weighed and up to 20-30mg were homogenized in RLT buffer, followed by extraction using the AllPrep DNA/RNA Mini Kit (QIAGEN catalog 80204) according to the manufacturer's instructions. RNA was eluted in 13 μL nuclease-free water. After RiboGreen quantification and quality control by Agilent BioAnalyzer, 1 μg of total RNA with DV200 percentages varying from 78% to 100% underwent ribosomal depletion and library preparation using the TruSeq Stranded Total RNA LT Kit (Illumina catalog RS-122-1202) according to instructions provided by the manufacturer with 8 cycles of PCR. Samples were barcoded and sequenced using NovaSeq 6000 in a PE150 mode, with the NovaSeq 6000 S4 Reagent Kit (Illumina). On average, 84 million paired reads were generated per sample and 70% of the data mapped to mRNA. For analysis, read adaptors were trimmed and quality filtered using 'trim_galore' and mapped to GRCh38/hg19 reference genome using STAR v2.7.9 with default parameters.

  Study phs003188

• Immune-Related Adverse Events after Immune Checkpoint Blockade-Based Therapy are Associated with Improved Survival in Advanced Sarcoma

  Immune activation after immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) can lead to a unique group of adverse events (AEs), which have been associated with improved outcome in many carcinomas. The association between immune-related AEs (irAEs) and outcome in patients with sarcoma is not well studied. This study has two components: (1) a retrospective clinical study of irAEs among 131 patients treated with ICB at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and (2) an analysis of a subset of these patients who have whole transcriptome sequencing available for analysis. In the clinical study portion, we reviewed a cohort of patients with advanced sarcoma treated on prospective clinical trials utilizing ICB-based therapy between April 2017 and January 2020. The objectives were to pool the safety data from each trial, identify irAEs, and correlate them with best overall response by RECIST 1.1, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Association of irAEs with response and survival was assessed using a Cox regression model. A total of 131 patients were included. Forty-two (32%) had at least one irAE of any grade and 16 (12%) had at least one Grade ≥ 3 irAE. On Cox analysis adjusting for clinical covariates that were significant in the univariate setting, the hazard ratio (HR) for an irAE (HR 0.662, 95% CI 0.421 - 1.041) approached, but did not reach statistical significance for PFS (P = 0.074), while patients had a significantly lower HR for OS (HR 0.443, 95% CI 0.246 – 0.798; P = 0.007) compared to those without or before an irAE. Tumor samples with available RNA sequencing data were stratified by presence of an irAE to identify patterns of differential gene expression. In total, 71 unique patients had RNA sequencing available for analysis. The transcriptomes of 31 of these patients have been previously uploaded to dbGaP (phs002852), leaving 36 unique transcriptomes that have not been previously publicly shared. Three patients did not agree for their sequencing to be publicly shared. Therefore, 33 unique patient samples will be uploaded to this dbGaP study. Overall, this study found that gene expression profiling on baseline tumor samples from patients who had an irAE had higher numbers of tumor-infiltrating dendritic cells, CD8+ T cells, and regulatory T cells as well as upregulation of immune and inflammatory pathways.

  Study phs003284

• Comparison of the treated celiac disease microbiome to that of controls

  Coeliac disease (CeD) is an immune-mediated disorder primarily affecting the small intestine, characterised by an inflammatory immune reaction to dietary gluten. CeD onset results from a multifaceted interplay of genetic and environmental factors. While recent data show that alterations in gut microbiome composition could play an important role, many current studies are constrained by small sample sizes and limited resolution. To address these limitations, we analysed faecal gut microbiota from two Dutch cohorts, CeDNN (128 treated CeD patients (tCeD), 106 controls) and the Lifelines Dutch Microbiome Project (24 self-reported tCeD, 654 controls), using shotgun metagenomic sequencing. Self-reported IBS (570 cases, 1710 controls) and IBD (93 cases, 465 controls) were used as comparative conditions of the gastrointestinal tract. Interindividual variation within the case and control groups was calculated at whole microbiome and strain level. Finally, species-specific gene repertoires were analysed in tCeD patients and controls. Within-individual microbiome diversity was decreased in patients with self-reported IBS and IBD but not in tCeD patients. Each condition displayed a unique microbial pattern and, in addition to confirming previously reported microbiome associations, we identify an increase in the levels of Clostridium sp. CAG:253, Roseburia hominis, and Eggerthella lenta, amongst others. We further show that the observed changes can partially be explained by gluten-free diet adherence. We also observe increased interindividual variation of gut microbiome composition among tCeD patients and a higher bacterial mutation frequency in tCeD that contributes to higher interindividual variation at strain level. In addition, the immotile European subspecies of Eubacterium rectale, which has a distinct carbohydrate metabolism potential, was nearly absent in tCeD patients. Our study sheds light on the complex interplay between the gut microbiome and CeD, revealing increased interindividual variation and strain-level variation in tCeD patients. These findings expand our understanding of the microbiome’s role in intestinal health and disease. Note that some of the data in this study belong to the Lifelines cohort. Access to this dataset can be requested via the page of the EGA data access committee EGAC00001001996. The phenotype data can be requested, for a fee, by filling the application form at https://www.lifelines.nl/researcher/how-to-apply/apply-here.

  Study EGAS50000000959

• Clinical outcomes in ctDNA-positive urothelial carcinoma patients treated with adjuvant immunotherapy

  Minimally invasive approaches to detect residual disease after surgery are urgently needed to select patients at highest risk for metastatic relapse for additional therapies. Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) holds promise as a biomarker for molecular residual disease (MRD) and relapse,1-3 but its clinical value has yet to be demonstrated in a randomised clinical trial. We evaluated outcomes in post-surgical ctDNA-positive (+) patients in a randomised phase III trial of adjuvant atezolizumab versus observation. IMvigor010 enrolled 809 patients with muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma and did not meet its primary endpoint of disease-free survival (DFS) in the intent-to-treat population. Within the study, an exploratory planned analysis of prospectively collected plasma was performed, which tested the utility of ctDNA to identify patients who may benefit from adjuvant atezolizumab treatment. ctDNA was measured at the start of therapy (cycle 1 day 1; C1D1) and at week 6 (cycle 3 day 1; C3D1), and 581 patients were evaluable for ctDNA. The prevalence of ctDNA positivity at C1D1 was 37% (n=214), and ctDNA positivity identified patients with poor prognosis (observation arm DFS HR= 6.19 (4.29, 8.91), p<0.0001). Here we show that ctDNA(+) patients had improved DFS and overall survival (OS) with atezolizumab versus observation (DFS HR= 0.56 (0.41-0.77); p=0.0003 and OS HR= 0.58 (0.4-0.86); p=0.0063). No difference in DFS or OS between arms was noted for ctDNA-negative patients. The rate of ctDNA clearance was higher with atezolizumab (18%) versus observation (4%) (p=0.0041). Transcriptomic analysis revealed that tumours from ctDNA(+) patients had higher expression of cell cycle and keratin genes. Within the ctDNA(+) patient population in the atezolizumab arm, non-relapsing patients were further enriched in prominent immune response signatures including PD-L1, IFNG, CXCL9, and high tumour mutational burden, whereas relapse was associated with angiogenesis and fibroblast-transforming growth factor-beta signatures (F-TBRS). TCGA molecular subset analysis revealed increased efficacy of atezolizumab in patients with basal-squamous tumours, consistent with underlying tumour-immune contexture. Together these findings suggest that adjuvant atezolizumab may be associated with improved outcomes compared with observation in this high-risk ctDNA(+) population. These findings, if validated in other settings, would shift approaches to post-operative cancer care.

  Study EGAS00001004997

• Clonal selection after gene therapy in sickle cell disease

  While gene therapy (GT) provides a potentially curative treatment option for patients with sickle cell disease (SCD), the occurrence of myeloid malignancies in clinical trials has prompted concern. To interrogate potential mechanisms underlying increased cancer risk, we used hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) clonal tracking by whole genome sequencing (WGS) to map the somatic mutation and clonal landscape of 2,592 gene modified as well as unmodified single stem and progenitor cells from six SCD patients undergoing gene therapy (7-26 years old, average 12.7× depth). Pre-GT phylogenetic trees in SCD were highly polyclonal and mutation burdens per cell were elevated in some, but not all, patients. Post-GT, no clonal expansions were identified. However, an increased frequency of driver mutations associated with myeloid neoplasms or clonal hematopoiesis (DNMT3A- and EZH2-mutated clones in particular) were seen in both genetically modified and unmodified cells suggested positive selection of mutant clones during gene therapy. This work sheds light on the mutation landscape and HSC clonal dynamics in gene therapy for SCD and highlights enhanced fitness of some HSCs harboring pre-existing driver mutations following gene therapy. Future studies should define the long-term fate of mutant clones including any contribution to expansions associated with myeloid neoplasms.

  Dataset EGAD00001010913

• Phase I Study and Cell-Free DNA Analysis of T-DM1 and Metronomic Temozolomide for Secondary Prevention of HER2-Positive Breast Cancer Brain Metastases

  This study is a phase I trial combining ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) with Temozolomide (TMZ) for the prevention of additional brain metastases after previous occurrence and local treatment in HER2+ breast cancer patients. Twelve patients were enrolled in this study. Data includes whole exome sequencing (WES) from patients' cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and plasma samples. The CSF was collected from each patient at trial entry and after the initial two treatment cycles of TMZ and T-DM1 treatment. Blood was collected through a standard peripheral venipuncture at the following four time points: 1) upon trial entry, 2) after two treatment cycles, 3) the treatment cycle prior to the last follow-up, and 4) most recent follow-up. Whole exome libraries were captured by the SureSelect Human All Exon V8 Kit (Agilent, Santa Clara, CA, USA) and sequenced by NovaSeq 6000 S2 Sequencer in paired-end sequencing mode (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA). Gene mutations in DNMT3A, ELP1, NOTCH4, KMT2B, CRLF2, and KCNJ18 were observed in patients' CSF.

  Study phs003165

• Advancing fast in the analysis of circulating tumour DNA

  In cancer patients, solid tumours also release DNA fragments into the blood, and they are called Circulating Tumours DNA (ctDNA). Nowadays, the standard procedure for cancer monitoring is analysis of surgically obtained biopsies. They generate a big amount of material, but the operation is highly invasive and provide medical doctors with a single-time snapshot of the tumours, which are often highly changeable. Analysis of ctDNA, on the other hand, can provide continuous information regarding the tumour itself without the need of invasive procedures. This is why interest in this method is growing, and with it, the need for its technological optimization. Guanhua Zhu and colleagues, at the Genome Institute of Singapore, developed a methodology to quantify ctDNA burden, which means to estimate the amount of tumours derived circulating DNA among all cell-free DNA in the blood of individuals. Their work, published in Nature Communications in april 2021 and summarized in a sketch below, uses state-of-the art methods to analyse cfDNA degradation patterns at promoters and exon regions, to discern it from the DNA coming from the tumours. The bright point of their approach is that simultaneously enable for profiling of actionable cancer mutations and quantitative estimation of ctDNA burden. Their sequencing data of ctDNA has been deposited in the EGA under the accession number EGAS00001004657. This study sums up to a total of 37 of cfDNA and 36 about ctDNA present up to date in the EGA archive. The existence of cfDNA was firstly described back in 2002, while the use of ctDNA analysis in the oncological field exploded only after 2016. The approach is rapidly evolving, moving in parallel with the ever-improving sequencing technologies. Especially, the possibility to obtain high quality sequences from minimal amount of material is a crucial factor. Being able to alleviate cancer patients of disturbing and often slow-recovery procedures, while at the same time improving the quality of diagnosis and disease monitoring seems like a lot to ask. Thankfully, we are blessed with brilliant and dedicated scientists from all around the world who collaborate to make this a reality, sharing their results, knowledge and data.

  Blog advancing-fast-in-the-analysis-of-circulating-tumour-dna

• Plasma cell‐Free transcriptome profiling in chronic liver disease

  Chronic liver disease (CLD) encompasses a wide range of hepatic disorders that progressively compromise liver function. In order to support the development of non-invasive diagnostic tools and improve patient stratification, we generated a high-throughput extracellular RNA sequencing dataset from blood plasma samples collected from patients at various stages of liver disease. Samples were obtained from two independent cohorts of 112 (cohort 1) and 489 (cohort 2) patients using standardized collection and processing protocols, and profiled using total RNA sequencing (SMARTer Stranded Total RNA-Seq Kit v3 - Pico Input Mammalian), resulting in 112 and 820 extracellular transcriptomic profiles for cohort 1 and 2, respectively. This dataset is provided with full documentation of the preprocessing analysis pipeline and accompanying metadata, enabling its use as an independent validation cohort for biomarker discovery and as a complementary resource for integrative multi-omics studies, even in cases with incomplete data modalities. The publicly available resource is intended to facilitate reproducibility and foster further research in the field of liver disease diagnostics

  Study EGAS50000000545

• Reliable detection of somatic mutations in solid tissues by laser-capture microdissection and low-input DNA sequencing

  Somatic mutations accumulate in healthy tissues as we age, giving rise to cancer and potentially contributing to ageing. To study somatic mutations in non-neoplastic tissues, we developed a series of protocols to sequence the genomes of small populations of cells isolated from histological sections. Here, we describe a complete workflow that combines laser-capture microdissection (LCM) with low-input genome sequencing, whilst circumventing the use of whole-genome amplification (WGA). The protocol is subdivided broadly into 4 steps: tissue processing, LCM, low-input library generation and mutation calling and filtering. The tissue processing and LCM steps are provided as general guidelines which may require tailoring based on the specific requirements of the study at hand. Our protocol for low-input library generation utilises enzymatic rather than acoustic fragmentation to generate WGA-free whole-genome libraries. Finally, the mutation calling and filtering strategy has been adapted from previously published protocols to account for artefacts introduced via library creation. To date, we have used this workflow to perform targeted and whole-genome sequencing of small populations of cells (typically 100-1,000 cells) in thousands of microbiopsies from a wide range of human tissues. The low-input DNA protocol is designed to be compatible with liquid handling platforms and make use of equipment and expertise standard to any core sequencing facility. However, obtaining low-input DNA material via LCM requires specialized equipment and expertise. The entire protocol from tissue reception through whole-genome library generation can be accomplished in as little as a week, though 2-3 weeks would be a more typical turnaround time.

  Dataset EGAD00001006088

• GDAP - Genome Diversity in Africa Project (2021-02-12)

  The Genomic Diversity in Africa Project (GDAP) started with the plan to develop a genomic resource from African populations, characterise genomic diversity and population history, and facilitate clinical studies in Africa. Currently, 25 individuals from 24 ethnolinguistic groups have been whole-genome sequenced at high depth totalling 585 individuals. An additional 41 individuals have been sequenced with 10X Genomics libraries. At this stage, the initial curation of this dataset has been finished and we are performing the analysis in coordination with our collaborators. The current state of the GDAP represents a very diverse panel of African populations that maximizes geographical and ethnic variation and represents a great starting point to achieve the aforementioned goals. However, southern sub-Saharan countries, Bantu speakers and hunter gatherer groups are currently underrepresented, despite being crucial to understand the evolutionary history of the continent. After extensive effort to collate studies documentation, we finally have the opportunity to sequence 600 new individuals from these groups, including countries as Gabon, Rwanda and Zambia, and address these deficiencies. We aim to proceed with the same strategy: to sequence at high depth 25 individuals with standard PCR free libraries, with 2 additional individuals with 10X Genomics Chromium libraries per ethnolinguistic group. The former allows a good representation of variants down to low frequency in any given population, and the latter allows accurate phasing and the analysis of structural variation. By including these new populations, we want to investigate three crucial questions in African history in addition to the initial objectives: the Bantu expansion, the evolutionary history of hunter gatherers and the transatlantic slave trade. Additionally, the expanded dataset will help us better discover the genetic variation present in Africa and characterize the African pangenome. This data is part of a pre-publication release. For information on the proper use of pre-publication data shared by the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute (including details of any publication moratoria), please see http://www.sanger.ac.uk/datasharing/ . This dataset contains all the data available for this study on 2021-02-12.

  Dataset EGAD00001006965

• Development and Use of Network Infrastructure for High-Throughput GWA Studies

  The "Development and Use of Network Infrastructure for High-Throughput GWA Studies" project is collaboration between Group Health Cooperative (GH), the University of Washington (UW), and the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (FHCRC). It is one of 5 sites participating in The Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network funded by the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) with additional funding from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS). The overall eMERGE project is designed to assess whether linking biorepositories of patients in healthcare delivery systems with electronic medical records (EMRs) is an efficient strategy for high-throughput genome wide association (GWA) studies and whether information can be pooled across sites. The primary phenotype in the Group Health/UW Aging and Dementia eMERGE study project is dementia. Phenotyped participants originated from four population-based sources. Seattle-area members of GH (a large integrated health care system in Washington State) consented and enrolled in 1) the University of Washington Alzheimer's Disease Patient Registry (ADPR) and 2) the Adult Changes in Thought (ACT) study, 3) Marshfield Clinic Personalized Medicine Research Project (PMRP), a population-based DNA, plasma and serum biobank of 20,000 adults, 4) Vanderbilt's BioVU, a de-identified DNA biobank. The ADPR (PI: Eric B. Larson; NIH/NIA U01 AG 006781) is a population-based registry of incident dementia cases designed to identify all new dementia cases within GH from 1987 to 1996. Potential dementia cases were identified through referrals from primary care physicians, mental health services, and neurologists, as well as review of CT scans, neurology, emergency room, geriatrician, and mental health clinic logs, and hospital discharge diagnoses. Medical history, physical, laboratory testing, and neuropsychological testing were performed on all consenting potential cases. These data were reviewed by a consensus conference including a neuropsychologist, study physicians, and an epidemiologist. After discussion of the case, dementia status is assigned using DSM-III-R criteria. Alzheimer's disease status was assigned using the National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke-Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders Association (NINCDS-ADRDA) criteria. The study base of the ADPR population was stable with an attrition rate of less than 1%/year. The ACT study (PI: Eric B. Larson; NIH/NIA U01 AG 006781) is an ongoing community-based cohort study designed to determine the incidence of Alzheimer's Disease (AD), other types of dementia, and cognitive impairment and to determine risk factors for these conditions. The original cohort of 2,581 was enrolled in 1994-1996. An expansion cohort of 811 was enrolled in 2000-2002. Continuous enrollment to keep 2,000 persons enrolled and at-risk for dementia outcomes was begun in 2005. To date the study has accrued more than 4,000 participants. Dementia-free participants are enrolled in this cohort and evaluated every two years by study personnel with many evaluations including an assessment of cognitive functioning using the Cognitive Abilities Screening Instrument (CASI), which is an extended version of the Mini-Mental State Examination that has been widely used in epidemiological studies of the elderly. Persons with CASI scores lower than 86 or in whom interviewers suspect unusual cognitive decline are followed up with dementia diagnostic evaluations which include physical and neurological examinations and neuropsychological tests. Medical records are reviewed, and laboratory tests and neuroimaging are obtained if not available. The dementia diagnoses and dementia subtypes are determined during a consensus conference attended by the examining clinicians and other study physicians, a neuropsychologist, and research nurse. After discussion of the case, dementia status is assigned using DSM-IV criteria. Alzheimer's disease status was assigned using NINCDS-ADRDA criteria. Individuals diagnosed with dementia are seen again one year following diagnosis using the same procedures. Individuals not diagnosed with dementia are returned to the pool of at-risk individuals and are seen at their next routinely scheduled biennial visit. The ACT sub-sample is stable; for the original cohort, median enrollment in GH was 19 years prior to joining the ACT study, and 85% of the cohort has ≥ 10 years of GH enrollment. DNA for the ADPR participants were obtained through a companion study, Genetic Differences in Cases and Controls (PI: Walter Kukull; NIH/NIA R01 AG007584). DNA obtained through both studies were extracted from blood using Gentra Systems Puregene methods. DNA concentration is determined by UV optical density. All samples are checked for quality by OD 260/280 ratio. For long-term storage, samples are aliquoted and stored at -70°C. The Marshfield study, Personalized Medicine Research Project (PMRP), a population-based DNA, plasma and serum biobank of 20,000 adults. PMRP was started in 2002 as a 3 Phase project. Completed in April 2004, the objectives of Phase I were to build and develop a large population-based biobank with DNA, plasma and serum samples to facilitate genomics research. Phase 1 was also to educate, inform and consult with the Marshfield Epidemiologic Study Area population and communities concerning potential studies, create the DNA foundation of the personalized medicine database and build the bioinformatics tools to store securely and analyze genotypic and phenotypic data. Phase I tasks included operation of the ethics and security advisory board, scientific advisory board and community advisory group. More than 18,000 residents aged 18 and above from 19 different zip codes surrounding Marshfield, WI were invited to participate in Phase I. After providing written informed consent, participants completed brief questionnaires that included questions about demographics, some environmental exposures, family history of disease, and adverse drug reactions, as well as family members living in the area. Participants provided 50ml of blood from which DNA was extracted and plasma and serum samples were stored. The informed consent process allowed access to electronic medical records and included language about non-disclosure of personal research results. A tick-off box was included so that participants could either allow or decline subsequent recontact for future research studied. The objectives of Phase II are to create the phenotypic database, establish the scientific and administrative infrastructure to support genetic mapping of the DNA and the initial discovery projects and genotype a sufficient portion of the genetic material to support these discovery projects. The objectives of Phase III are to expand the discovery projects, complete the genotyping of the genetic database and expand physician/health care provider education and community consultation. The Vanderbilt BioVU model uses discarded blood leftover from clinical care and de-identified clinical information, both of which are tracked with a Research Unique Identifier that is permanently disconnected from the medical record number used to generate it. The Vanderbilt IRB determined that the project does not qualify as "human subject" research under §46.102(f)(1)(2). The program has been reviewed by OHRP twice (the latest immediately prior to launch), and the determination of the Vanderbilt IRB that the project is consistent with the 8/10/2004 guidance has been validated. The model includes a simple opt out mechanism developed for patients who do not wish to have their samples included. Planning (including community involvement, ethics and IRB discussions, focus groups, development of operating procedures and pilot studies to assess them) began in May 2004, and the resource commenced sample collection in February 2007 and as of May 2009 contains approximately 56,000 samples. The current resource will be available to all Vanderbilt investigators who sign a Data Use Agreement. The resource represents Vanderbilt's broad patient population and thus provides a potential resource for research in a range of common and rare diseases as well as drug response or medication safety. BioVU patient protection model: There has been extensive involvement by the ethics community and the IRB to put in place procedures to provide privacy protection. The overall protection plan is multifaceted and includes a combination of technology and policy: (1) creation of the SD described above; (2) return of only the specific clinical data items requested by investigators (rather than the complete de-identified chart); (3) submission of any specific proposed project to the IRB and to a separate protocol review committee, both of which must approve; (4) implementing a Data Use Agreement that permits only approved queries and data analyses, specifically prohibits attempts at re-identification (at the risk of institutional sanctions), and mandates redeposit of all genetic information generated in a research study back into a genomic database; and (5) tracking and auditing all use.

  Study phs000234

• 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

• The Finland-United States Investigation of NIDDM Genetics (FUSION) Tissue Biopsy Study

  The Finland-United States Investigation of NIDDM Genetics (FUSION) study is a long-term effort to identify genetic variants that predispose to type 2 diabetes (T2D) or that impact the variability of T2D-related quantitative traits (QTs). Most of the variants associated with T2D and related traits (glucose and insulin, anthropometrics, lipids) through genome-wide association studies (GWAS) occur in non-coding regions, suggesting a strong regulatory component to disease susceptibility. Regulatory element activity is often tissue-specific, which further complicates discovery of the causal/functional variation. Therefore, there is a critical need to identify the appropriate cell type, regulatory elements, target genes, and causal variants(s) in T2D-relevant tissues. We hypothesize that a subset of T2D and related variants alter gene expression regulation in skeletal muscle and adipose tissue - two major insulin target tissues and play key roles in insulin resistance. To that end, our study contains a comprehensive survey of genomics, epigenomics and transcriptomics in skeletal muscle and adipose tissue from individuals with glucose tolerance categories ranging from normal to T2D.For this FUSION Tissue Biopsy Study, we obtained RNA-Seq, microRNA (miRNA)-Seq, and DNA methylation (methyl)-Seq data on biopsy samples from 331 individuals from across the range of glucose tolerance: 124 normal glucose tolerance (NGT), 77 impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), 44 impaired fasting glucose (IFG), and 86 newly-diagnosed T2Ds. Participants completed two study visits, two weeks apart. First visits comprised most of the clinical phenotyping, including four-point OGTT (fasting, and 30, 60, and 120 minute post-load); BMI, WHR; lipids; blood pressure; and many other variables. Participants also completed FUSION health history, medication, and lifestyle questionnaires. On the second visit, we obtained ~250mg vastus lateralis skeletal muscle, ~750mg abdominal subcutaneous adipose, and a ~5x15mm section of abdominal skin. Visits were completed in March 2013. RNA isolation is ongoing in the Collins laboratory at the NIH, RNA and miRNA sequencing at the NIH Intramural Sequencing Center (NISC), and genotyping at the Center for Inherited Disease Research (CIDR). Individual-level data is available here for the 306 individuals who consented to data deposit. To focus on evaluation of gene expression and its regulation in skeletal muscle, we analyzed mRNA extracted from vastus lateralis skeletal muscle obtained from 271 of the 331 individual subjects from Finland, along with genome-wide genotypes. Individual-level data is available here for the 250 subjects who consented to the use of their data.Release phs001048.v2.p1 adds muscle data for an additional 42 subjects and data from adipose tissue for 276 subjects. Total RNA was isolated using Trizol extraction in the Collins laboratory at the NIH. The mRNA was poly-A selected, 24-plex libraries were generated using the Illumina TruSeq directional mRNA-seq library protocol and RNA sequencing was performed on HiSeq2000 sequencers using 101bp paired-end reads at NISC. miRNA libraries were prepared from total RNA from 296 muscle and 270 adipose samples, pooled and sequenced 50bp single-end reads on Illumina HiSeq2500. Data for 272 muscle and 251 adipose samples are available here for individuals with consent for data deposit. DNA was extracted from blood in the Collins laboratory, and genotyping on the Illumina Omni2.5M array was performed at CIDR. Genotypes were imputed using the HRC 2016 reference panel. In order to assess regions of open chromatin in skeletal muscle, we obtained muscle tissue from a commercial provider to perform ATAC-seq; these samples were sequenced at the University of Michigan DNA Sequencing Core.Release phs001048.v3.p1 adds single-nucleus (sn) RNA-seq and ATAC-seq data in 287 skeletal muscle samples out of the original 331 individuals. Individual-level data is available here for the 265 subjects who consented to the use of their data. The frozen tissue biopsy samples were processed in ten batches, each consisting of 40-41 samples. These batches were organized using a randomized block design to protect against experimental contrasts of interest including cohort, age, sex, BMI among others. Samples in each batch were pulverized, pooled together followed by nuclei isolation. The nuclei were processed on the 10X Genomics Chromium platform separately for snATAC-seq and snRNA-seq (v. 3.1 chemistry for snRNA-seq).Release phs001048.v4.p1 adds additional phenotypes and provides some corrections to several previous phenotypes.

  Study phs001048