11092 results for "monedas ultimate team FC 26 Visité Buyfc26coins.com. Servicio premium a un precio estándar. Increíble..XLis"

in 26.56 milliseconds.

• Dataset for RNA sequencing of Glioblastoma samples

  This dataset contains 10x scRNA sequencing of glioblastoma samples. Sequencing was performed on a Illumina HiSeq 4000. The sequencing was always paired.

  Dataset EGAD50000000081

• Methylation profiling of CDS and ES tumor samples

  Methylation profiling of 9 CDS and ES tumor samples, using the approach described in "Patient-derived tumoroids from CIC::DUX4 rearranged sarcoma identify MCL1 as a therapeutic target

  Dataset EGAD00010002760

• Spatial Maps of Prostate Cancer Transcriptomes

  A total of 14 samples that has been analyzed with the Spatial Transcriptomics method. H&E stain can be sent if requested.

  Dataset EGAD00001004121

• Sequencing data for Murtaza et al. Nature Communications 2015 (doi:10.1038/ncomms9760)

  Exome and targeted amplicon sequencing data for tumor, germline and plasma samples from a patient with metastatic breast cancer.

  Dataset EGAD00001002108

• Case Report of a Leukemic Patient with Invasive Mucormycosis

  Whole exome sequencing of germline DNA was performed and subsequent polymorphisms in genes known and putatively involved in the innate immune response to fungi were identified

  Dataset EGAD00001001692

• Plasma-Seq follow-up CSPC4

  We performed serial plasma-Seq analyses on a male who progressed from castration-sensitive to castration-resistant prostate cancer within 10 months following treatment with androgen-deprivation therapy.

  Dataset EGAD00001000396

• Whole exome sequencing study for 8 pairs of primary NSCLCs and distant metastases

  Whole exome sequencing study for 8 pairs of primary NSCLCs and distant metastases. This dataset includes a total of 30 samples.

  Dataset EGAD00001005764

• WGS Study From Pediatrics

  This is a set of 20 10X Genomics Chromium WGS

  Dataset EGAD00001008011

• Richter Syndrome targeted NGS (13 genes)

  Targeted exome sequencing for a panel of 13 CLL driver genes

  Dataset EGAD00001009509

• RNAseq following stent placement and removal in a porcine model 

  This dataset includes 2*76bp RNA-seq reads from 9 pigs sequenced using Illumina NextSeq500.

  Dataset EGAD00001009783

• TDB-mediated activation of NK cells

  transcriptome analysis of NK cells sorted from PBMCs at baseline and after addition of a CD20 (B cell)-targeted T cell dependent bispecific antibody (TDB)

  Dataset EGAD00001010895

• Assessing mitochondrial bioenergetics in coronary artery disease: A translational left ventricular tissue study in humans (The AMBITION study).

  Single nuclei transcriptomic data from the AMBITION study.

  Dataset EGAD00001011078

• Dataset for RNA PCNSL

  RNA sequencing of 19 samples from PCNSL tumors. Sequencing was performed on a HiSeq X Ten using Illumina TruSeq Stranded mRNA Kit. Sequencing was always paired.

  Dataset EGAD00001011119

• RNASeq files for Klco PanAML data

  RNASeq files for paper titled "Proposal of a new genomic framework for categorization of pediatric acute myeloid leukemia associated with prognosis"

  Dataset EGAD00001011294

• WGS files for Klco PanAML data

  WGS files for paper titled "Proposal of a new genomic framework for categorization of pediatric acute myeloid leukemia associated with prognosis"

  Dataset EGAD00001011295

• WXS files for Klco PanAML data

  WXS files for paper titled "Proposal of a new genomic framework for categorization of pediatric acute myeloid leukemia associated with prognosis"

  Dataset EGAD00001011296

• consHLA extra samples for comparison with clinical HLA types

  Samples not in other datasets for the paper titled; consHLA: a Next Generation Sequencing Consensus-based HLA Typing Workflow

  Dataset EGAD00001015625

• Atezolizumab Plus Personalized Neoantigen Vaccination in Patients with Urothelial Cancer: a Phase 1 Trial

  This is a phase 1 single center clinical trial evaluating a multi-peptide personalized neoantigen vaccine, PGV001, in combination with atezolizumab for patients with urothelial cancer. Patients were enrolled in either the adjuvant or metastatic setting. Those in the adjuvant setting included patients considered high risk of recurrence (pathological stage ypT2-T4 or ypN+ for those treated with prior neoadjuvant chemotherapy or pT3-T4 or pN+ for those not treated with prior neoadjuvant chemotherapy). Those in the metastatic setting included patients progressing after prior chemotherapy or those with at least stable disease after chemotherapy treated as “switch maintenance” therapy. The primary endpoint was feasibility (including the number of neoantigens identified per patient, vaccine production time, the proportion of patients consenting to the vaccine development phase for whom a vaccine product was prepared, and the proportion of patients eligible for the treatment phase who completed the priming cycle 1 of PGV001 plus atezolizumab) and safety. Secondary endpoints included the objective response rate, progression-free survival or disease-free survival, overall survival, and immunomodulatory effects of treatment. Urothelial tumor tissue and normal tissue or peripheral blood specimens were utilized for DNA sequencing. HLA typing was performed utilizing genomic DNA isolated from whole blood, and RNA sequencing was performed utilizing tumor tissue specimens. Neoantigen prediction and final selection for incorporation into the vaccine was determined by the OpenVax computational pipeline. 12 patients were initially enrolled into the vaccine development phase and 10 patients initiated the treatment phase. PGV001 was administered with poly-ICLC and tetanus peptide on subsequent days for up to 10 doses, including an initial priming cycle 1. Atezolizumab was administered every 3 weeks for up to 1 year in the adjuvant setting or 2 years in the metastatic setting. The vaccine was feasible and safe, the median vaccine production time was 20.3 weeks, and 100% of patients that initiated the treatment phase completed the priming cycle. The most common treatment-related adverse events were local grade 1 injection site reactions, fever, and fatigue. Three of the 4 patients in the adjuvant setting remained disease-free at median follow-up of 39.5 months. There was a 40% objective response rate among patients with measurable disease in the metastatic setting. The single patient treated as “switch maintenance” therapy remained with no evidence of disease at 39.4 month follow-up. All patients demonstrated on-treatment neoantigen-specific T cell reactivity, as measured by ELISPOT and flow cytometry assays. Overall, PGV001 plus atezolizumab was feasible, safe, and warrants further investigation. Whole exome sequencing from tumor tissue and normal tissue or whole blood specimens and RNA sequencing from tumor tissue specimens will be available through dbGaP.

  Study phs003922

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

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

  Blog from-research-to-data-sharing

• sn-RNAseq profiling of the impact of a cytokine storm model in human cardiac organoids

  We developed conditions to model conditions of diastolic dysfunction caused by inflammatory factors in human cardiac organoids. Our organoid model is based on conditions promoting maturation (Mills et al., PNAS, 2017 and Voges et al., In Revision) and incorporating human pluripotent stem cell derived cardiomyocytes, epicardial cells, fibroblasts, endothelial cells and pericytes. Following 15 days of differentiation (Voges et al., Development, 2017) we formed human cardiac organoids incorporating both our multicellular differentiation (Mills et al., PNAS, 2017) and additional endothelial cells (Voges et al., In Revision). After another 12 days of maturation in 5 days maturation medium and 5 days weaning medium (Voges et al., In Revision) human cardiac organoids were either treated with weaning medium or “cardiac cytokine storm” comprised of 100 ng/ml IFNg, 10 ng/ml IL-1 β and 10 µg/ml poly(I:C). After 48 hours human cardiac organoids were harvested and snap frozen in -80C before nuclei isolation and single nuclei RNA sequencing.Pooled hCO (~40) were homogenized in 4 mL lysis buffer (300 mM sucrose, 10 mM Tris-HCl (pH = 8), 5 mM CaCl2, 5 mM magnesium acetate, 2 mM EDTA, 0.5 mM EGTA, 1 mM DTT)(all Sigma-Aldrich) with 30 strokes of a dounce tissue grinder (Wheaton). Large pieces of hCO were allowed to settle and homogenate was passed through pre-wetted 40 µm cell strainers (Becton Dickinson). Remaining hCO material in the douncer was resuspended in 4 mL and the douncing and filtering steps were repeated twice. All steps of the homogenization were performed on ice. The filtered homogenate was centrifuged at 1500 x g for 5 min at 4oC. Nuclei pellets were then re-suspended in PBS. A fraction of resuspended nuclei were then stained with hoechst nuclear stain (1:500 dilution) and counted on a haemocytometer under fluorescent microscope.The nuclei were then re-centrifuged (1500 x g for 5 min at 4°C) and resuspended at a density to load ~5,000 nuclei per sample. Cell were loaded into the Chromium Controller (10X Genomics) for gel bead emulsion (GEM) formation. Library preparation was conducted according to the manufacturer’s recommended protocol using the Chromium Next GEM Single Cell 3’ GEM, Library & Gel Bead Kit v3.1. Libraries were sequenced on the NextSeq 500/550 v2 (Illumina) with 150 bp reads.In the snRNA-seq we note the lower than expected percentage of non-myocytes and the loss of endothelial cells (Mills et al., PNAS, 2017 and Voges et al., In Revision), indicating the protocol requires further optimization for hCO samples.

  Study EGAS00001005174

• CRU-Ukrainian National Research Center for Radiation Medicine Trio Study

  Data on transgenerational effects following nuclear accidents are important for understanding fully the consequences of parental exposure to ionizing radiation. Few studies to date have had adequate statistical power to detect effects of the magnitude expected based on animal data, and most have not been of low-dose, protracted exposures associated with nuclear accidents and their aftermath. Although, to date, scant use has been made of the new genomic technologies, in Chernobyl-exposed areas of Ukraine and Belarus, excess minisatellite mutations have been seen in children born after the accident. We propose a study of parent-child trios in which at least one parent was exposed to Chernobyl radiation as a clean-up worker (mean dose>=100 mGy) and/or evacuee from a contaminated area (mean >=50 mGy). The specific aims are to investigate the transgenerational and de novo mutation rates of the spectrum of genetic variants in trios, in particular looking at effects in children and mapping them to possible parental origin of the chromsoome. Together with long-term collaborators at the Research Center for Radiation Medicine (RCRM) in Kiev, epidemiologic data will be collected for up to 450 trios of parents with preconceptional doses and their unexposed offspring. We will use state-of-the-art genomic technologies to characterize the landscape of the genomes of the trios to determine whether parental radiation exposure is associated with genetic mutations transmitted to the offspring, by examining de novo mutation rates, minisatellite mutations, copy number alterations, and variations in telomere length. The analysis will be conducted in peripheral blood and/or buccal samples (when blood is not available) from complete father-mother-child trios. Doses to the gonads from the time of the accident to the time of conception will be reconstructed for all parents using existing records supplemented by interview data. Trio subjects will be selected from representative populations exposed to radiation from Chernobyl who are under active follow-up in the Clinico-Epidemiologic Registry at RCRM. To help identify specific effects of paternal and maternal radiation exposure, we will initially select sets of trio subjects in five categories: (1) exposed father, unexposed mother; (2) unexposed father, exposed mother; (3) both parents exposed; (4) both parents unexposed; and (5) a group of high dose "emergency workers" with acute radiation syndrome. All trio members will be invited to the RCRM outpatient clinic for collection of a 20 ml blood sample (or buccal cells for those who refuse phlebotomy). Both parents will be asked to complete a general questionnaire to obtain demographic and lifestyle data. Then one or both will complete detailed dosimetry questionnaires, based on forms used in previous collaborations with RCRM and administered by specially trained interviewers. Once 50 trios have been recruited (10 from each of the 5 exposure categories), we will conduct an interim evaluation of participation rates, sample collection and quality, and dose reconstruction in order to modify the protocol as needed. The analytical approach will be to correlate the extent, especially for de novo events of genetic alterations in the offspring with parental pre-conceptional radiation dose overall and by parental origin. The statistical power in relation to de novo mutations is very high, in excess of 90%, but somewhat lower for trends in minisatellite mutations. Study findings will contribute importantly to knowledge of the heritable effects of moderate- and low-dose radiation exposure in humans and to radiation risk projection. Eventually data from the Trio Study may be shared with the international community through dbGap.

  Study phs001163

• PAK4 inhibition improves PD-1 blockade immunotherapy

  Introduction with rationale and aims for study Immune checkpoint blockade therapies have significantly altered the current landscape of cancer treatment. However, this immunotherapy still fails more often than it succeeds. There are now evidences that the lack of tumour infiltration by immune cells is the main mechanism of primary resistance to PD‐1 blockade therapies for cancer. It has been postulated that cancer cell‐intrinsic mechanisms may actively exclude T cells from tumours, suggesting that the finding of actionable molecules that could be inhibited to increase T cell infiltration may synergize with checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy. With the idea of finding potential drivers of immune exclusion, we performed RNA sequencing analysis of biopsies from melanoma patients and compared the transcriptomic differences of samples that where infiltrated with those that did not have immune infiltration. Methods RNAseq analysis of gene expressions on biopsies from melanoma patients treated with checkpoint blockade were analysed. We focused on the variable of "infiltration: yes or no,", e.g. tumors that were well infiltrated by immune cells with those that kept immune cells out. Sequencing revealed a list of genes whose expression differed between the infiltrated and noninfiltrated tumors. The kinase PAK4 stood out as a good candidate for inhibition treatment in the future as it was consistently enriched in the samples without immune infiltration. To test whether immunotherapy would work better if we deleted PAK4, we first knocked out PAK4, using CRISPR‐Cas9, in the ‐resistant melanoma cell line, B16. Then they injected the melanoma cells into mice and observed that PAK4 KO tumours now responded to PD‐1 blockade. In order to elucidate whether pharmacological inhibition of PAK4 could recapitulate the results observed in the B16 PAK4 KO tumours, we obtained the PAK4 inhibitor, KPT-9274, from Karyopharm Therapeutics. Indeed, inhibiting PAK4 in combination with anti‐PD‐1 immunotherapy significantly slowed the growth of the B16 melanomas more than either drug alone. Results and Conclusions Transcriptomic analysis of melanoma tumors that were well infiltrated by immune cells with those that kept immune cells out revealed a list of genes whose expression differed between the infiltrated and non-infiltrated tumours. The result suggests that p21 activated kinase 4 (PAK4) is enriched in non-responding tumour biopsies with low T cell and dendritic cell infiltration. In addition, PAK4 decreased WNT activity, a signalling pathway that has previously been involved in immune exclusion. In mouse models, genetic deletion of PAK4 increased T cell infiltration and reversed resistance to PD‐1 blockade in a CD8 T cell-dependent manner. Furthermore, combination of with the PAK4 inhibitor, KPT-9274, improved anti‐tumour responses compared to anti‐PD‐1 alone. Therefore, high PAK4 expression is correlated with low T cell and dendritic cell infiltration and lack of response to PD‐1 blockade, which could be reversed with PAK4 inhibition. The data establish a rationale for targeting this kinase with inhibitors in combination with immune checkpoint inhibitors for patients. Future work and data that we can anticipate for this study Oncogenic signalling pathways and specially the WNT signalling pathway, have been associated with lack of immune infiltration and resistance to PD‐1 blockade therapies. Here, we show that PAK4 overcome resistance to PD‐1 blockade while significantly decreases WNT signalling activity. Therefore, it constitutes the first potential druggable target that is able to reverse oncogenic driven immune cell exclusion. However, the fully mechanism whereby PAK4 sensitizes tumours to immunotherapy remains to be fully elucidated. It is necessary to address whether PAK4 inhibition overcomes resistance through WNT signalling inhibition or if other signalling pathways are involved in the observed phenotype.

  Study phs001919

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

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

  Study phs004168

• Korea Epigenome Project(KEP), Korea National Research Institute of Health(KNIH)

  The KEP was launched in 2012 to produce 50 epigenomic sets on Korean chronic diseases related target cells with the participation on Internationsl Human Epigenome Consortium(IHEC) of which focus is constructing 1000 reference epigenome map on 250 human cell type. The objective of the KEP was to provide a comprehensive epigenomic map of Korean chronic disease-related target tissues. Single cells were isolated from the pancreas, fat and kidney. Islet, ductal, acinar, and beta cells from the pancreas were purified into a single homogenous cell type using flow-assisted cell sorting technique. Adipocytes and pre-adipocytes were purified from fat, using Percoll gradient centrifugation technique. Mesangial, distal tubule, proximal tubule, podocytes, and collecting duct cells from the kidney were collected using mechanical sieving and immunostaining methods. Each cell type was derived from normal tissue or those with diabetes, obesity, or chronic kidney disease. Sixty reference epigenome datasets of pancreatic, fat, kidney cells were produced. Cell types such as the islets, and beta from the pancreas, adipocytes, pre-adipocytes from fat tissue, podocyte, mesangial, tubules from kidney were used for primary target to produce a Korean metabolic reference epigenome. And the bisulfite converted-whole genome sequencing, Infinium 450k DNA methylation bead array, mRNA, miRNA-Sequencing were performed to produce a comprehensive epigenomic map. The aim of roadmap reports is preparation of Long-term and Mid-term Technology Roadmaps for Korean Human Epigenome Project towards a competitive execution of International Epigenome Project and successful expansion of the research outcomes. Roadmap reports reviewed on recent technological development of DNA methylation and histone modification analysis, emerging new trends in epigenome medicine, plans for hardware and software analysis systems aimed to epigenome analysis, medical expert opinion on target cells and isolation scheme, bioinformatics expert opinion on analytical tools, new ideas for a putative epigenome studies, trends in single cell epigenome analysis. In conclusion, roadmap report suggested several projects for the future KNIH epigenome research in collaboration with epigenome research group. These are including refocusing the goals of KNIH-driven research in identification of disease mechanism, development of new studies on GWAS-EWA, higher priority on the epigenomic studies of human primary cells, establishment of collaborative relationship with tissue banking centers, establishment of mapping centers and data analysis portals, establishment of Korean Epigenome Research Consortium, establishment of steering committee governing both research and funding, launching of additional funding for epigenomic researches.

  Study EGAS00001001774

• EGA metadata schema

  EGA Schemas In this page, you will find information on how the European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA) manages its metadata standards using both XML Schema Definition (XSD) and JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) formats. If you are not sure what this means, you may want to explore our brief metadata introduction. This information may be of your interest if you are planning to learn more about how the EGA is built and how to wrap around it for other processes. Nevertheless, if you are a common user (e.g. submitter or requester), you would not have to worry about these schemas nor their format, since they are implemented in user-friendly ways for you. Metadata standards are rules that define how to format and structure data of metadata objects (i.e. entities), like EGA's samples or experiments in a consistent manner. These objects are the nodes of the metadata model of the EGA (Figure 1). Figure 1. Diagram of EGA's metadata model. The model's building blocks are objects (e.g. sample), which can reference each other (e.g. an experiment referencing the used samples). Once your files are uploaded, they can also be referenced by Runs and Analyses. The submission object is an object itself that compiles many others. At EGA, we inherit our metadata schemas from the European Nucleotide Archive (ENA), and we have expanded them to include bespoke objects such as "Policy", "Dataset", and "DAC" (Data Access Committee) for our specific use-case: handling sensitive human data. See below a list of all our metadata objects and some context for each. Metadata Object EGA accession Description Examples of metadata fields Study EGAS… Information about the study Study type, study title, study abstract… Sample EGAN… Information about the used samples in the experiment or analysis Taxon ID, scientific name, biological sex, phenotype… Experiment EGAX… Information about the performed experiment Used libraries, sequencing platform, reference to the used samples… Analysis EGAZ… Contains information about the analysis Type of analysis, used assembly, reference sequence… Run EGAR… The run holds information about the files containing the raw reads generated in a run of sequencing Platform, spot descriptor, raw file references… DAC EGAC… Contains information about the Data Access Committee (DAC) DAC contacts, contact emails… Policy EGAP… Contains the Data Access Agreement (DAA) and policy which its usage complies with Policy text, data use ontologies (DUO) codes… Dataset EGAD… Contains the collection of runs/analysis to be subject to controlled access Dataset type, compilation of Run's and Analysis' IDs There are two different sets of schemas, based on their formats, in which the EGA accepts metadata: XSDs (for XML files) and JSON Schemas (for JSON files). EGA's XML Schema Definition . When programmatic submissions are pushed through the European Bioinformatics Institute (EBI) system, XML format is used. The schemas that are applied for this format are defined in XML Schema Definition (XSD) files, which can be found at ENA's GitHub repository. You can find more information on how to validate and submit your data programmatically in our programmatic submission documentation. Furthermore, see at our GitHub repository some XML examples with either made-up values (similar to what you would submit) or descriptive values for each field (just for documentation). EGA's JSON Metadata Schemas . When programmatic submissions are pushed through the Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG) system, JSON format specifications are used instead. See the full JSON specifications for further details. In conclusion, the EGA metadata schemas are crucial for maintaining the quality and consistency of submitted data. By understanding and following the rules outlined in these schemas, you can ensure that your submissions comply with the EGA's standards and contribute to a valuable and accessible genomic resource. Sample checklists Besides the standards in our schemas, we have another layer called Sample checklists. These are another system that the EGA inherits from ENA, and specifies what attributes are required or allowed for a sample object. The EGA uses these checklists to enforce that, for example, a sample object has the three mandatory attributes: subject ID, sex and phenotype of the individual the sample was taken from. When you submit to EGA, our checklist is automatically selected by default.

  Documentation submission/metadata/ega-schema