6170 results for "ps4 fc 26 coins Buyfc26coins.com is FC 26 coins official site..zexT"

in 12.69 milliseconds.

• 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

• CCDG CVD: VIRGO - Variation in Recover-Role of Gender on Outcomes of Young Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI) Patients

  The VIRGO study is a four year research project funded by the NHLBI to study young women and men with heart attacks. A total of 2,000 women who are 18 - 55 years of age and a smaller comparison group of 1,000 similarly aged men will be enrolled in this multi-site observational study from approximately 120 different hospitals across the country. Young women have a much greater risk of dying after an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) than similarly aged men. Their mortality risk is markedly higher than that of young men, and limited data on young minority women suggest that they may have the highest risk of any young subgroup. Findings from the small number of published studies of young women with ischemic heart disease suggest that the biology, epidemiology, care, and outcomes of this group are distinct from those of men. To date, there have been no large studies of this population, even as the death toll is comparable to that from breast cancer in this country. This study will help researchers identify key factors that influence recovery from a heart attack and potentially improve the care and outcomes of young women and men with AMI. Specific Aims: To investigate the excess risk in young women with AMI and to identify key demographic, clinical, metabolic, psychosocial, health care delivery, and biological determinants of prognosis, we propose a national, prospective, observational study of 2,000 women who are 55 years or younger with AMI and a smaller comparison group of 1,000 men. Our prior work and preliminary studies indicate that the sex differences are most prominent in this age group and suggest that by 1 year after discharge, there are substantial sex differences in outcomes. We will also develop risk stratification tools that will help clinicians to identify young women with the highest and lowest risk. Specific Aim 1: Determine sex differences in outcomes following AMI. Specific Aim 2: Determine sex differences in the prevalence and prognostic importance of demographic, clinical, and psychosocial risk factors. Specific Aim 3:Determine sex differences in quality of care. Specific Aim 4: Determine sex differences in the prevalence and prognostic importance of selected biochemical biomarkers following AMI. These samples have been whole genome sequenced as part of the NHGRI's Center for Common Disease Genetics at the Broad Institute.

  Study phs001259

• Heart Failure Network Oral Iron Repletion Effects on Oxygen Uptake in Heart Failure (HFN IRONOUT-BioLINCC)

  ObjectivesTo test the hypothesis that, compared to placebo, oral iron repletion in heart failure patients with iron deficiency improves exercise capacity after 16 weeks of therapy.Background Iron deficiency affects approximately one half of patients with symptomatic heart failure. The presence of iron deficiency in patients with heart failure is associated with reduced functional capacity, poorer quality of life, and increased mortality. Despite growing recognition of the significance of iron deficiency, randomized multicenter trials exploring the utility of oral iron supplementation, a therapy that is inexpensive, readily available, and safe, have not been performed in patients with heart failure. Moreover, patient characteristics and biochemical profiles that may influence responsiveness to oral iron in patients with heart failure have not been defined. Results of intravenous iron repletion trials have been favorable, but regularly treating patients with intravenous iron products is expensive and poses logistical challenges for outpatients. Therefore, the HFN-IRONOUT study was initiated to investigate the efficacy of oral iron in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). ParticipantsA total of 225 participants were enrolled, 111 randomized to receive oral iron and 114 randomized to receive the placebo. Design The HFN-IRONOUT study was a phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial that enrolled participants at 23 sites in the United States. Participants were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive either oral iron polysaccharide or placebo with the use of an automated web-based system. A permuted block randomization method (with 4 participants per block) was stratified by enrolling site and anemia status (defined as hemoglobin At baseline, 8 weeks, and 16 weeks participants underwent studies including history and physical examination, cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET), Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ), and 6-minute walk test. CPETs were performed using a 10 Watt/minute incremental ramp protocol and breath-by-breath measures of oxygen uptake were uniformly analyzed by the CPET Core Lab. Participants also underwent phlebotomy for biomarkers. Iron studies, including iron, total iron binding capacity, and ferritin, were measured at baseline and after 16 weeks to determine the extent to which oral iron led to iron repletion. The primary end point was the change in peak oxygen uptake (peak VO2) after 16 weeks of therapy. Conclusions Among participants with HFrEF with iron deficiency, high-dose oral iron did not improve exercise capacity over 16 weeks.

  Study phs003557

• San Francisco Bay Area Latina Breast Cancer Study

  The genome-wide association study (GWAS) includes participants enrolled into two different studies. The first study, the San Francisco Bay Area Cancer Study (SFBCS) is a population-based case-control study of breast cancer conducted in the San Francisco Bay Area and included women ages 35-79 years from three racial/ethnic groups: Non-Hispanic whites, African Americans, and Hispanics/Latinas. For the GWAS, only Hispanic/Latina women were included. Women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer between 1995 and 2002 were identified through the Greater Bay Area Cancer Registry. Controls were identified by random digit dialing and were frequency-matched to cases by age in 5 year increments and by race/ethnicity. Hispanic/Latina ethnicity was assessed by self-report. 175 Hispanic/Latina cases and 307 Hispanic/Latina controls from the SFBCS had given adequate consent and provided biospecimens that were used in the GWAS to be included in this data submission. The second study is the Northern California site of the Breast Cancer Family Registry (NC-BCFR). This population-based family study recruited breast cancer cases ages 18-64 years diagnosed from 1995-2009 that were identified through the Greater Bay Area Cancer Registry. Cases included all women at increased genetic susceptibility for breast cancer who met one or more of the following criteria: (a) being diagnosed with breast cancer at age <35 years; b) having a personal history of ovarian cancer or childhood cancer; (c) being diagnosed with two different breast cancers (bilateral breast cancers), with the first one diagnosed at age <50 years; and d) having one or more first-degree relatives with breast cancer, ovarian cancer or childhood cancer. Cases not meeting these criteria were randomly sampled and racial/ethnic minorities were oversampled. Controls were recruited by random digit dialing and were matched by 5-year age increments and by race/ethnicity. For the current GWAS only Latina/Hispanic cases and controls were included. Latina/Hispanic ethnicity was assessed by self-report. 631 Hispanic/Latina cases and 61 Hispanic/Latina controls from the NC-BCFR had given adequate consent and provided biospecimens that were used in the GWAS to be included in this data submission.

  Study phs000912

• Losartan Effects on Emphysema Progression (LEEP-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. Objectives To evaluate the efficacy of losartan, an angiotensin receptor blocker, to reduce emphysema progression in patients with COPD and mild to moderate emphysema. Background Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a heterogeneous disease comprising chronic bronchitis and emphysema. COPD is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Smoking cessation slows the progression of the disease, and bronchodilators can provide sustained improvement in lung function, but there are no pharmacologic agents that clearly modify emphysema progression. Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) have been suggested as potential drugs to slow the progression of COPD. A few trials have shown that patients treated with ARBs had slower progression of radiographic emphysema. The LEEP study was initiated to test the hypothesis that the ARB losartan would reduce the progression of emphysema in patients with COPD with mild to moderate emphysema.ParticipantsA total of 220 participants were enrolled. 108 participants were randomized to receive losartan, and 112 participants were randomized to receive the placebo.Design LEEP was a randomized, placebo-controlled multicenter trial. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive losartan or placebo. The dose was 50 mg losartan or placebo given as one capsule daily for 2 weeks, and, if well tolerated and the systolic blood pressure was >90 mm Hg, it was increased to two capsules. Participants and site investigators were masked to treatment assignment. Participant responses to the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire, the modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale, the COPD Assessment Test, and the Physical Function–Short Form 20a were collected. The number and severity of COPD exacerbations were recorded. COPD exacerbations were defined as two or more new or worse symptoms for ≥3 days and classified by treatment as mild (neither antibiotics nor oral steroids), moderate (an antibiotic or oral steroid), or severe (hospitalization). The primary outcome measure was the change in quantitative whole-lung emphysema score after 48 weeks measured by the percentage of lung voxels less than -950 Hounsfield units (PCT950) on full inspiratory HRCT. Conclusions Losartan does not prevent progression of emphysema in patients with COPD who have mild to moderate pulmonary emphysema.

  Study phs004313

• Whole Exome Sequencing of Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia Patients and Trios

  Congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) is a common and severe birth defect characterized by structural defects of the diaphragm and by pulmonary hypoplasia. Congenital diaphragmatic hernia patient may present either as an isolated phenotype or together with other congenital anomalies in a complex phenotype. Despite the clinical significance of CDH, the underlying genetic and developmental pathways are incompletely understood. In order to establish a catalog of human genetic variation for this condition, we performed whole exome sequencing (WES) on 275 carefully phenotyped individuals with CDH in the Pediatric Surgical Research Laboratories at the Massachusetts General Hospital (Boston, MA, USA) and Boston Children's Hospital (Boston, MA, USA). The exome data generated are valuable for comparison of candidate genes derived from WES of other CDH cohorts or affected kindreds, and to provide ideal candidates for further functional studies with the ultimate goal of enhancing our understanding of the heterogeneous and, possibly, oligogenic molecular etiology of CDH. While familial clustering has been reported in rare kindreds, the majority of probands with CDH have no family history of CDH leading to the hypothesis that de novo variants are an important and relatively frequent etiological mechanism. In the second version of the study, we performed WES analysis on 87 trios, to assess the contribution of de novo mutations in the etiology of diaphragmatic and pulmonary defects and to identify previously unknown candidate genes. This dbGaP submission includes WES data on: (a) 20 new probands, (b) 9 probands also reported in the previous version (dbGaP accession no. phs000783.v1.p1), (c) 174 unaffected parents, including the parents of 67 previously reported probands. Combined analysis with other available cohorts of congenital diaphragmatic hernia revealed a genome-wide enrichment of likely gene-disrupting de novo variants (i.e., nonsense, frameshift or splice site), and missense de novo variants predicted in silico to be damaging.

  Study phs000783

• FEGA and European GDI: working together to improve human health

  The Federated EGA is a global resource for discovery of and access to sensitive human omics and associated data consented for secondary use, through a network of human data repositories to accelerate biomedical research and improve human health. The Federated EGA network was launched in September 2022 with five inaugural nodes, and since 2023 seven operational nodes can share data across national borders in adherence to European and national laws. A few weeks after FEGA's official launch, in November 2022, the European Genomic Data Infrastructure (GDI) project was kicked-off . This European Commission co-funded project, coordinated by ELIXIR, is aimed to deliver federated, sustainable and secure data infrastructure to access genomic and related phenotypic and clinical data across Europe. This project supports the aim of the 1+MG initiative (25 EU countries, Norway and UK) to enable personalised medicine and health through a shared framework and infrastructure for securely accessing and integrating high quality genomic data and other health data across borders.1+MG will be an integral component of the European Health Data Space (EHDS) for secondary use (Healthdata@EU) as an authorised participant. How are Federated EGA and GDI similar? Given their shared visions, the Federated EGA and European GDI networks have a lot in common. To begin, they share the same overall goal of establishing networks of “nodes” that host sensitive human data within a jurisdiction and connecting these nodes in a global network to support data discovery and promote human genome data access for research and healthcare. FEGA and GDI are both initially focused on enabling access to human genomic data, while FEGA ambition is to expand the scope to clinical research data and other omics data in the future. FEGA and GDI are both built on open and interoperable software solutions, a subset of which are based on the LocalEGA components. FEGA and GDI implementation solutions are based on international community standards, for example those developed by the Global Alliance for Genomics and Health, which contributes to making them interoperable. Both FEGA and GDI allow for the nodes to make use of any solution that is fully compatible. As illustrated in Figure 1, a final key point is the significant overlap of institutions involved in envisioning and operating FEGA and GDI nodes, with the clear wish to keep them interoperable in the future. What distinguishes Federated EGA from GDI? Despite being largely similar, there are some differences between the FEGA and GDI networks, which we aim to clarify in this post. The first difference is the governance model that the nodes will operate to comply with national laws and GDPR. In the FEGA network, nodes have taken inspiration from the EGA data access model, where the infrastructure is a data processor of the hosted data and data controllership remains with the originating Data Access Committees (i.e. Data controllers) for each dataset. On the other hand, in the GDI network the controllership of datasets will be transferred to a 1+MG European Digital Infrastructure Consortium (EDIC) legal entity created by the Member States (MS), who will make data access decisions, with data holders having veto powers for their datasets. Importantly, FEGA nodes have the flexibility to choose another model to fit with their data protection framework, including becoming data controllers for their datasets. The second difference is the inclusion criteria for data. While FEGA nodes are designed to accept almost any type of omics data in need of control access (e.g. genomics, transcriptomics, genotyping, single cells sequencing, patient-tracked metagenomics), GDI nodes are initially, but not only, focused on accepting whole genome and exome sequencing data and affiliated data from sources such as (i) the Genome of Europe use case of the 1+MG initiative which specifically aims to fulfil the mission of building “a European network of national genomic reference cohorts of at least 500,000 citizens”) (ii) data collection of other types of genomic data identified by countries through the 1+MG dashboard and (iii) genomic data coming from data holders which would need to fulfil EHDS requirements. The third difference is the maturity of the software stacks. The FEGA network provides a set of software for data and metadata submission, storage, permissions management, and file distribution (the LocalEGA package). GDI is building a complete set of open source reference for the five functionalities covering the full data life cycle (a few more compared to the LocalEGA) including federated processing (analytics, AI/ML), which is still under active development. Notably, one of the GDI functionalities - storage and interfaces - can be satisfied by using the LocalEGA storage solution, highlighting the ability of FEGA and GDI to be interoperable. In both FEGA and GDI, nodes are allowed to use alternative solutions as long as they are fully interoperable with the networks. Figure 1 provides a simple overview of these described commonalities and differences. Figure1: schematic overview of the main commonalities and difference among a FEGA and a GDI node Can the same institute run a FEGA and a GDI node at the same time? The answer is Yes! We believe this is entirely possible and encouraged. As long as 1+MG requirements are continuously fulfilled in the implementation. The same trained personnel could operate the infrastructure and leverage the same national funding to run a FEGA and a GDI node. Several European nodes, especially GDI vanguard nodes like Norway, Sweden, Finland and Spain are following this model. The idea is that a lot of the work can be reused, given the overlapping scope and the interoperable technology. Thus, the hosted datasets can be discovered via the two catalogues, perhaps accessible under the same or different governance models. From a FEGA node perspective, the GDI datasets could simply be a subset of the datasets hosted in the FEGA node, which have their specific governance as any other. What's next? So, the amazing teams of people building the Federated EGA network and the European GDI network are working together to create infrastructures able to provide secure access to human genomic and associated data around Europe. Because we all know how much human genomics can improve healthcare and precision medicine. And we all want to collaborate to make it happen. This article has been reviewed collectively by members of the EGA and the GDI coordination team.

  Blog fega-and-gdi

• PyEGA3 download client

  PyEGA3 Checks prior to download - Is the dataset available for download? Most datasets are available using the PyEGA3 Download client, except for specific legacy datasets. For these ones, refer to Live Outbox distribution, an alternative way to download these datasets.If the dataset you've been granted access to begins with the ID EGAD5XXXXXXX, please refer to the Live Outbox distribution. If the dataset you have been granted access to contains encrypted data (filename ending in .gpg), contact EGA Helpdesk for detailed information on how to download these files.General Information The PyEGA3 download client is available at its GitHub repository. In its README you will find a step by step guide on how to use it to download files you have been granted access to. PyEGA3 implements the GA4GH-compliant HTSGET protocol supporting requests over genomic ranges. This enables the download of specific regions of interest rather than the entire file. HTSGET is not possible for all the files held by EGA: if the dataset does not contain index files (e.g. filename ending in *.crai), then genomic range requests cannot be performed. The maximum number of connections allowed is 30. If more than 30 connections are used, the download client will encounter 500 errors. The recommended number of connections for maximum output is one. Check out our video tutorial! Frequently Asked Questions General questions How do I download the datasets to which I have been granted access? After setting up your EGA download account, you can proceed to download using the EGA download client – PyEGA3. The pyEGA3 download client is a python-based tool for viewing and downloading files from authorised EGA datasets. This download client is continuously being developed for more user-friendly download experiences. Can I download the dataset’s metadata via the download client? No, the download client cannot be used to download metadata. Registered EGA users can download metadata of an authorised dataset by logging into the EGA webpage and navigating to the dataset of choice. Approximately two thirds down the page you will find the option to download the metadata as a zip file. How do I download large datasets as quickly as possible? The main EGA download client is pyEGA3 download client, a python-based tool for viewing and downloading files from authorised EGA datasets.We could exceptionally consider the option of an Aspera download for users experiencing very slow download rates or facing particular issues.Contact the EGA Helpdesk for further information. Pre-requirement and Installation What are the major requirements for the PyEGA3 download client installation and usage? The PyEGA3 client is compatible with any OS with Python 3.6+ installed. The client requires a connection to the internet, sufficient space on the destination drive, and the EGA download account credentials. Where can I find the PyEGA3 download client installation and download instructions? We strongly recommend checking our video tutorial demonstrating the usage of PyEGA3 from installation to file download. More detailed information is available at PyEGA3 GitHub. What ports are required for the PyEGA3 download client to function? PyEGA3 makes HTTPS calls to the EGA Data API (https://ega.ebi.ac.uk:8443). This port 8443 must be reachable from the location where PyEGA3 is executed to avoid timeouts. PyEGA3 download client How to update the PyEGA3 download client to be on the latest version? Updating the client to the latest version can be achieved by running the following command: pip3 install pyega3 --upgrade I do not have an active EGA account. Can I test the download with the PyEGA3 download client? An EGA download test account (ega-test-data@ebi.ac.uk) has been created for troubleshooting and training purposes. The test account does not require an EGA username and password because it contains publicly accessible files from the 1000 Genomes Project. More information about the use of this account and log in details are available at pyEGA3. I lost my connection while the download was in progress. Does this mean that I have to download the file again from the start? The PyEGA3 download client supports automatic resumption of downloads. To enable quicker download speeds, the API breaks files into up to four segments and downloads them in parallel. With the resume feature, downloads will automatically resume if you encounter any errors or if the connection is interrupted. How can I improve the overall download speed of the PyEGA3 download client? Download speeds can be optimised using the --connections parameter which will parallelise download at the file level. If the --connections parameter is provided, all files >100Mb will be downloaded using the specified number of parallel connections. It is important to note that files are still downloaded sequentially, so using multiple connections does not mean downloading multiple files in parallel. The maximum number of connections allowed is 30. If more than 30 connections are used, the download client will encounter 500 errors. The recommended number of connections for maximum output is one. Why is my file taking a long time to be saved? Please note that when a file is being saved, it goes through two processes. First, the downloaded file "chunks" are pieced back together to reconstruct the original file. Secondly, PyEGA3 calculates the checksum of the file to confirm that the file was downloaded successfully. Larger files will take more time to reconstruct and validate the checksum. Why is the HTSGET protocol not working with my dataset of interest? PyEGA3 implements the GA4GH-compliant htsget protocol for supporting requests over genomic ranges. This exciting new feature means that for data files with accompanying index files (e.g. .crai for CRAM files) users can download specific regions of interest rather than the entire file, saving both time and storage space. Please note that in order for the genomic range requests to work for a BAM, CRAM or VCF file there must be an associated BAI, CRAI or TBI file, respectively. If the dataset does not contain these index files then genomic range requests cannot be performed. After download Do I need to decrypt data files downloaded through the pyEGA3 download client? Files are transferred over secure HTTPS connections and received unencrypted, thus there is no need for decryption after data download. What is the purpose of an MD5 file? After the download completes, file integrity is verified using checksums. The PyEGA3 download client automatically verifies each file’s unencrypted md5 after download to ensure that the file was downloaded correctly from the EGA. Errors Why do I get a “400 Client Error” while trying to access the download client? Ensure that your credentials are formatted correctly. Please contact the EGA Helpdesk if you are unsure about your account’s username (i.e. your email address). Why do I get a “500 Server Error”? It is important to note that files are still downloaded sequentially, so using multiple connections does not mean downloading multiple files in parallel. The maximum number of connections allowed is 30. If more than 30 connections are used, the download client will encounter 500 errors. The recommended number of connections for maximum output is one. Otherwise, 500 server errors are internal server errors from EGA’s end. Retry after some time and, if the 500 error persists: check our homepage or Twitter for any outage information or report it to EGA Helpdesk. Why do I get a “slice error”? This type of error occurs when one slice download was prematurely interrupted. Please re-start the same download. The download client will pick up any partial download and download any missing slices. Why do I get the error “Dataset' EGADXXXXXXXXXXX' is not in the list of your authorised datasets”? Please note that the data access was given to the email (username) provided to the Data Access Committee (DAC) in your official request. Therefore, you shall check that the account that you are using is the same one that you sent to the DAC. Why do I get “ERROR:root:Failed to obtain IP address”? This might mean that the connection ports are blocked. Check that the port 8443 is reachable.In case the port is reachable and the error persists, please try to modify the file pyega3.py on line 44 in the python module installation: Replace endpoint = 'https://ipinfo.io/json' with endpoint = 'https://api.myip.com' Why do I get the error “Invalid username, password or secret key - please check and retry”? Make sure that you are using the correct credentials (username and password) and there is no typo. Contact EGA Helpdesk if the problem persists.

  Documentation access/download/files/pyega3

• National Institute on Aging Genetics of Alzheimer's Disease Data Storage Site (NIAGADS)

  NIAGADS is an NIH controlled-access data repository that collaborates with researchers around the world to facilitate data access and sharing for genomic and associated omics data related to Alzheimer's Disease (AD), Alzheimer's Disease Related Dementias (ADRD), as well as healthy aging. Serving as the data coordinating center for the Alzheimer's Disease Sequencing Project (ADSP), NIAGADS hosts all ADSP-generated whole-exome, whole-genome and associated phenotypes. Other data types hosted by NIAGADS include genotype SNP arrays, functional omics, fluid biomarkers, aggregated imaging data (such as volumetric data for brain regions of interest), and summary statistics. In adherence with NIH security best practices and genome data sharing policies, NIAGADS supports data access requests through review by an NIH-appointed and registered Data Access Committee. Data stored within NIAGADS cannot be requested via dbGaP. Data requests must go through the NIAGADS Data Sharing Service (DSS) via the following NIAGADS url: https://dss.niagads.org/. Questions related to the request of data should be directed to the NIAGADS admin team at: niagads@pennmedicine.upenn.edu. DSS is a FISMA certified platform built by a team of data scientists at the University of Pennsylvania to support the request and access of AD/ADRD data by qualified researchers internationally. Questions related to the use of data hosted in the DSS should be directed to the Portal admin team at: help@niagads.org.

  Study phs004180

• Genetic coupling of enhancer activity and connectivity in gene expression control

  In this study, we investigated whether the genetic effects of eQTLs on enhancer activity and enhancer-promoter contacts (connectivity) are inherently coupled or distinct. To address this, we performed Capture Hi-C targeting ~1100 eQTL loci, along with ATAC-seq and RNA-seq, in monocytes from 34 healthy male donors. Using single-modality and multi-modality Bayesian statistical approaches, we demonstrated that eQTL effects are predominantly shared across enhancer activity, connectivity, and gene expression. However, we also identified a locus where an eQTL disrupts a CTCF binding site at a putative insulator, facilitating contacts between the PCK2 gene promoter and downstream enhancers. To validate these findings, we used 4C-seq to confirm the allelic effects of eQTLs on enhancer-promoter connectivity at the PCK2 locus and another eQTL region associated with THBS1 expression, both of which showed consistent eQTL effects across all three modalities. Additionally, we conducted Hi-C on monocytes from two donors to map reference TADs and performed ChIP-seq to confirm the allelic effects of the PCK2 eQTL on CTCF binding. Together, these data provide comprehensive insights into the genetic coupling of enhancer activity, connectivity, and gene expression.

  Study EGAS50000000756