16466 results for "sec+and+unspecified+malignant+neoplasm"

in 57.69 milliseconds.

• Genome and transcriptome sequence data from an appendix cancer patient

  Genome and transcriptome sequence data from an appendix cancer patient, generated as part of the BC Cancer Agency's Personalized OncoGenomics (POG) study

  Dataset EGAD00001001309

• Genome and transcriptome sequence data from a peritoneal mesothelioma patient

  Genome and transcriptome sequence data from a peritoneal mesothelioma patient, generated as part of the BC Cancer Agency's Personalized OncoGenomics (POG) study

  Dataset EGAD00001001310

• Genome and transcriptome sequence data from a breast cancer patient

  Genome and transcriptome sequence data from a breast cancer patient, generated as part of the BC Cancer Agency's Personalized OncoGenomics (POG) study

  Dataset EGAD00001002030

• Genome and transcriptome sequence data from a breast cancer patient

  Genome and transcriptome sequence data from a breast cancer patient, generated as part of the BC Cancer Agency's Personalized OncoGenomics (POG) study

  Dataset EGAD00001002048

• Genome_wide_CRISPR_Cas9_screening_of_Human_Organoids

  In this study we will exploit the bacterial clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR) system to perform a genome-wide single-guide RNA (sgRNA) library to screen for genes required for proliferation and survival in human organoids.

  Study EGAS00001001932

• Dopaminergic neuron differentiation of human embryonic stem cells

  2 replicates of dopaminergic neuron differentiation of human embryonic stem cells from timepoints day 17 and day 28, performed with 10X Genomics single cell RNA-seq. Part of the Ásgrimsdottir et al. (Arenas Lab).

  Study EGAS50000001099

• Programmatic submission based on XML

  Programmatic submissions (XML based) For further information please check our Submission FAQs, submission quickguide as well as submission terms! Introduction Besides the Submitter Portal tool, EGA supports programmatic sequence and clinical data metadata submissions. If you are not sure what this means, you may want to explore our brief metadata introduction. Programmatic submissions are recommended for array-based submission. Moreove, it may be of help if your submission is recurrent or it is difficult to manage manually due to its sheer size. Otherwise, we highly recommend using the Submitter Portal to perform submissions. In this page we will guide you through the required steps to programmatically submit data to the EGA. Programmatic submissions require your metadata to be structured for an easy and straightforward validation and archival. It basically consists in formatting your metadata as Extensible markup language (XML) files and submitting them to the EGA using the WEBIN Before submitting metadata to the EGA, it is important to ensure that the information in your XML files is compliant with our standards. You can see further details on how these standards are maintained at EGA at our EGA Schemas documentation page. Using WEBIN, you can validate your XML files against EGA's schemas to ensure that your metadata is compliant before submission. WEBIN services WEBIN production service WEBIN test service We advise you to submit your metadata to the test service when submitting to the production service for the first time. The test service is identical to the production service except that all submissions will be discarded in the following 24 hours. This allows you to learn about the submission process without having to worry about data being submitted. Authentication Authentication is required each time a submission is made. The submission service uses HTTPS protocol for metadata encryption and identification to provide a secure submission environment. Data file upload Both Runs and Analyses reference files (e.g. FASTQ need to be uploaded to the EGA before these metadata objects are submitted. In other words, if you submit a Run that references a file that we cannot find associated with your account, the metadata submission will fail. See further details on how to upload your files in our File Upload documentation. Metadata model of the EGA Our metadata model is formed by multiple metadata objects. Check further details in our documentation at our EGA Schema documentation page. Working with EGA XMLs files Now that the basic concepts of the EGA metadata have been described, you can start preparing your programmatic submission through XML. Here you will find the guidance on how to prepare the XML files. Programmatic Submission Tutorial Video Take a look at the Programmatic Submission Tutorial Video, which explains the workflow of a programmatic submission and goes over an example metadata submission. Programmatic Submission Tutorial Video. When building your XML files, we recommend using text editors (e.g.Sublime Text or VisualStudio) that allow you to visualise the structure of the XML with ease. Furthermore, these editors constantly check the consistency of the XML structure. Alternatively, and if the submission consists of a big number of objects (specially analyses), you may find the tool star2xml handy. This tool allows for a direct conversion between metadata in a tabular format (e.g. a spreadsheet) into XMLs. Identifying objects: Aliases and center names Every EGA object must be uniquely identified within the submission account using their alias attribute. The aliases can be used in submissions to make references between EGA objects. Let us dig into EGA's use of aliases and center names: alias: every object should have a name that is unique within your submission account. Once submitted successfully, every alias will be assigned a unique and permanent accession (EGA ID). refname: when an object references another by its alias, the alias of the referenced object goes into the "refname" attribute of the referencing object. For example, if a sample has the alias "sample1", and an experiment uses this sample, then the experiment's "EXPERIMENT/SAMPLE/refname" attribute should be "sample1". center_name: The "center_name" attribute is required within the submission XML and, if not provided when the object is submitted, it will be automatically filled using your default EGA account center_name. This element is the "controlled vocabulary acronym or abbreviation that is provided to the account holder when the account is first generated". If the submitter is brokering a submission for another institute, the submitter should use their special broker account name in broker_name while the data centre acronym remains in center_name. Log-in details should have been provided when you requested a submission account. Please contact our Helpdesk team if you have any questions. run_center: Many submitting centers contract out the actual sample sequencing to another center. In these cases, the sequencing center should be acknowledged in the run_center attribute. Again, this is controlled vocabulary and the acronym should be sought from EGA helpdesk before submitting. Please contact our Helpdesk team if you have any questions. Prepare your XMLs The goal of this section is to provide sufficient information to be able to create the metadata XML documents required for programmatic submissions. Please note, the EGA utilises the XML schemas maintained at the European Nucleotide Archive (ENA). It is important due to the fact that by using a similar system, some pieces of documentation from the ENA's programmatic submission can also help you with your programmatic submission to the EGA. For example, you can submit programmatically without using a Submission XML by following the steps at Submission actions without submission XML. A submission does not have to contain all different types of XMLs. For example, it is possible to submit only a few samples; or a study that is later to be referenced. You can submit each object one by one, or submit all in a batch: you choose what method of submission works best for you. We do recommend, nevertheless, that you submit the objects to be referenced (e.g. samples or studies) first, and the objects that reference these (e.g. experiments or datasets) afterwards. You can see a graphical view of these objects and their relationships at our EGA Schemas page. Independently of the submission scenario, you will always require a Dataset XML. The entity of a dataset is what is used to control access to the given data, in the form of runs or analyses. In other words, when a requester is granted access, it is through the dataset and the objects (e.g. runs or analyses) that the dataset contains, granting access to them in one go. Given the nature of the EGA, a dataset XML will always be required for the data access. First, we will differentiate between submissions of "raw" and "processed" data: Runs and Analyses, respectively. Run data submissions Raw data derives from instruments "as is". For example, a plain sequence file (e.g. FASTQ or unaligned BAM files) would be considered raw data. A typical raw (unaligned) sequence read submission consists of 8 XMLs: Submission Study Sample Experiment Run DAC Policy Dataset When technical reads (e.g. barcodes, adaptors or linkers) are included in the submitted raw sequences, a spot descriptor must be submitted to describe the position of the technical reads so that they can be removed. The following data files can be submitted without providing spot descriptor information in the experiment/run XML: BAM files (single reads) SFF files (single reads without barcodes) FastQ files (single reads without any technical reads) Complete Genomics files Analysis data submissions Processed data is, in some way, refined raw data. This includes raw data that has been processed by some form of analysis method (e.g. alignment, noise reduction, etc.). For example, an aligned sequence (e.g. BAM file), that was created using raw FASTQ files, would be a processed file. This category includes most types of data: sequence alignment files (e.g. BAM or CRAM), clinical data (e.g. phenopackets), sequence variation files (e.g. VCF), sequence annotation, etc. A typical EGA analysis data submission consists of 7 EGA XML: Submission Study Sample Analysis DAC Policy Dataset We accept three different types of analysis data submissions: BAM files (for multiple read alignments) VCF files (for sequence variations) Phenotype files (in any format) In anycase, keep in mind that samples must be created in order to be referenced in the analyses. In other words, the provenance of the information within the BAM, VCF and phenotype files Example XMLs Below you can find a non-extensive list of example XMLs with descriptive fields (i.e. explaining what to provide in each field). Furthermore, you can also find real examples (i.e. the true value of the provided fields) in our GitHub repository. Submission XML The submission XML is used to validate, submit or update any number of other objects. The submission XML refers to other XMLs. New submissions use the ADD action to submit new objects. Object updates are done using the MODIFY action and objects can be validated using the VERIFY action. Descriptive submission XML example True values submission XML example Study XML The study XML is used to describe the study containing a title, a study type and abstract as it would appear in a publication. Descriptive study XML example True values study XML example Please use the following notation within the property "STUDY_LINKS" when including PubMed citations in the Study XML: <STUDY_LINKS> <STUDY_LINK> <XREF_LINK> <DB>PUBMED</DB> <ID>18987735</ID> </XREF_LINK> </STUDY_LINK> </STUDY_LINKS> Sample XML The sample XML is used to describe the samples used to obtain the data, whether they were sequenced, measured in any other way, or have an associated phenotype. The mandatory fields include information about the taxonomy of the sample, sex, subject ID and phenotype. For example, the mandatory attribute fields for each sample would look like these, within the array of "SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES": <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES> <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <TAG>subject_id</TAG> <VALUE>free text!</VALUE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <TAG>sex</TAG> <VALUE>female/male/unknown</VALUE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <TAG>phenotype</TAG> <VALUE>Free text, EFO terms (e.g. EFO:0000574) are recommended</VALUE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES> Sample is one of the most important objects to be described biologically, it is highly recommended that “TAG-VALUE” pairs are generated as SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES to describe the sample in as much detail as possible. For example, were we to give the population ancestry of the sample, we could add a new attribute to the array, in which, for example, we would indicate that the sample derives from an individual of "Mende in Sierra Leone" (MSL), with an african ancestry: <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> <TAG>Population</TAG> <VALUE>MSL</VALUE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> Given that VALUE and TAG are free text, the combinations are limitless in order to give you full flexibility on the information you want to provide. We recommend you use the Experimental Factor Ontology (EFO) to describe the phenotypes of your samples. You can provide more than one phenotype by adding more items to the array of SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTES. Phenotypes considered essential for understanding the data submission should be provided. Each phenotype described should be listed as a separate sample attribute <SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE> </SAMPLE_ATTRIBUTE>. There is no limit to the number of phenotypes that can be submitted. If a suitable EFO accession cannot be found for your phenotype attribute, please consider using another controlled ontology database (e.g. HPO, MONDO, etc.) before using free text. Descriptive sample XML example True values sample XML example Experiment XML The experiment XML is used to describe the experimental setup, including instrument platform and model details, library preparation details, and any additional information required to correctly interpret the submitted data. Where any of these values differ between runs, a new experiment object must exist, since runs are grouped by experiments. Each experiment references a study and a sample by alias, or if previously-submitted, by accession. Pooled data must be demultiplexed by barcode for submission. Descriptive experiment ( Illumina paired read ) XML example True values experiment ( Illumina paired read ) XML example Run XML The run XML is used to associate data files with experiments and typically comprises a single data file (e.g. a FASTQ file). Please note that pooled samples should be de-multiplexed prior submission and submitted as different runs. Descriptive run XML example True values run XML example Analysis XML Given that an analysis can be used to submit any type of processed data to the EGA, we will list below an example of each of the three most common types of analysis XMLs submitted to the EGA: sequence alignments (e.g. BAM files); sequence variation (e.g. VCF files); and clinical metadata or phenotypes (e.g. phenopackets). Regardless of the type of processed data submitted in the analysis, the analysis must be associated with a Study and can reference multiple types of other objects, from samples to experiments, if they are available at the EGA. Just like with Runs, whenever a file is submitted to the EGA through an analysis object, the file MD5 checksums must be present, in order for the EGA to validate file integrity upon transfer. This also includes index files when applicable (e.g. .bai.md5 files). Ideally, any analysis that uses a reference sequence for some kind of alignment (e.g. BAM, CRAM or VCF files), would contain metadata about the alignment, such as INSDC reference assemblies and sequences, by either using accessions (e.g. CM000663.1) or common labels (e.g. GRCh37). Read alignment (BAM) Analysis XML The Analysis can be used to submit BAM alignments to EGA. Only one BAM file can be submitted in each analysis and the samples used within the BAM read groups must be associated with Samples. Descriptive bam alignments XML example True values bam alignments XML example Sequence variation (VCF) Analysis XML The Analysis can be used to submit VCF files to EGA. Only one VCF file can be submitted in each analysis and the samples used within the VCF files must be associated with Samples. Download analysis XML (VCF) Phenotype files The Analysis XML can be used to submit phenotype files to the EGA. Only one phenotype file can be submitted in each analysis and the samples used within the phenotype files must be associated with EGA Samples. Download analysis XML (Phenotype) DAC XML The DAC XML describes the Data Access Committee (DAC) affiliated to the data submission. The DAC may consist of a group or a single individual and is responsible for the data access decisions based on the application procedure described in the POLICY.XML. As with any other object, if it was already submitted to the EGA, there is no need to submit it again: you can reference an existing object within the EGA. Hence, A DAC XML does not need to be provided if your submission is affiliated to an existing EGA DAC.. Further information on DACs can be found here, and you can always contact our Helpdesk team if you have further inquiries. Descriptive dac XML example True values dac XML example Policy XML The Policy XML describes the Data Access Agreement (DAA) to be affiliated to the named Data Access Committee. Descriptive policy XML example True values study XML example Dataset XML The dataset XML describes the data files, defined by the Run.XML and Analysis.XML, that make up the dataset and links the collection of data files to a specified Policy. The dataset xml is commonly the last metadata object to be submitted, since it references multiple other entities. Please consider the number of datasets that your submission consists of. For example, a case-control study is likely to consist of at least two datasets. In addition, we suggest that multiple datasets should be described for studies using the same samples but different sequence technologies. Descriptive dataset XML example True values dataset XML example Validating and submitting your EGA Validating EGA's XMLs through Webin After you have ensured that the XMLs are properly formatted and contain all the required information. You can proceed to validate and submit your data. Use the curl command to validate your XML file: Once you have prepared your XML file and asserted you have access to Webin, you can validate your XML file programmatically against EGA's schemas using the curl command. There are multiple ways in which you can validate your XMLs. This variety has to do with the fact that: (1) there are 2 instances of Webin (test and production); and (2) that validation is a default step during submission. In other words, any time that you submit your data through Webin, it will be validated automatically before being accepted. This allows for 4 possible routes of validation, all having the same validation result: validating or submitting to either the production service or the test service of Webin. For example, directly validating a "study" object XML in the testing service (wwwdev…) would look like the following: curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=VALIDATE" "https://wwwdev.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" In this command, you would need to replace <USERNAME> and <PASSWORD> with your EGA account username and password, respectively. You would also replace <INPUT_FILE> with the path to your XML file. A mock example would look like the following: curl -u ega-test-data@ebi.ac.uk:egarocks -F "ACTION=VALIDATE" "https://wwwdev.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" The validation attempt can have different results depending on the given arguments: If your XML file is valid according to EGA's schemas, you will see a message indicating that your XML file is compliant. For example, see below for our mock example, where the "success" was "true" (i.e. no validation errors found). Nevertheless, notice how the "<STUDY accession=" is empty: it is because we were simply validating, so the study did not get an accession or ID. <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="receipt.xsl"?> <RECEIPT receiptDate="2023-04-11T15:19:28.850+01:00" submissionFile="submission-EBI-TEST_1681222768850.xml" success="true"> <STUDY accession="" alias="Mock example" status="PRIVATE"/> <SUBMISSION accession="" alias="SUBMISSION-11-04-2023-15:19:28:840"/> <MESSAGES> <INFO>VALIDATE action has been specified.</INFO> <INFO>Submission has been rolled back.</INFO> <INFO>This submission is a TEST submission and will be discarded within 24 hours</INFO> </MESSAGES> <ACTIONS>VALIDATE</ACTIONS> <ACTIONS>PROTECT</ACTIONS> If there are any errors or warnings, the tool will display them, allowing you to correct them before submitting your data to EGA. For example, in the following response, it is said that the object we were trying to submit was already existing, and therefore the "success" was "false". <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="receipt.xsl"?> <RECEIPT receiptDate="2023-04-11T15:12:35.609+01:00" submissionFile="submission-EBI-TEST_1681222355609.xml" success="false"> <STUDY alias="Example!_Human Microbiome Project SP56J" status="PRIVATE" holdUntilDate="2023-03-11Z"/> <SUBMISSION alias="SUBMISSION-11-04-2023-15:12:35:576"/> <MESSAGES> <ERROR>In study, alias: "Example!_Human Microbiome Project SP56J". The object being added already exists in the submission account with accession: "ERP127584".</ERROR> <INFO>VALIDATE action has been specified.</INFO> <INFO>Submission has been rolled back.</INFO> <INFO>This submission is a TEST submission and will be discarded within 24 hours</INFO> </MESSAGES> <ACTIONS>VALIDATE</ACTIONS> <ACTIONS>PROTECT</ACTIONS> If the curl command retrieves no response at all, please double check if your username and password are correctly provided. Also notice the "ACTION=..." argument passed to the Curl command. This specifies the action to take during the call to Webin, so we do not need a "Submission" XML just for a validation attempt. See more at submission actions without submission XML. Furthermore, validation of multiple files or objects (e.g. sample, experiment, study…) can be done in a single command by adding more arguments (i.e. '-F'). For example: curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=VALIDATE" "https://wwwdev.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" -F "SAMPLE=@sample.xml" -F "DATASET=@dataset.xml" As mentioned above, beside "validate" action in the test environment, you can also validate your metadata by three other methods: "Validate" in the production server. From our example above, you simply need to take the "dev" away from the URL. curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=VALIDATE" "https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" "Add" in the development server. From our example above, you would simply need to replace the action: from "validate" to "add". Whatever is submitted to this service will be discarded in 24h, so whether something gets submitted or not would not matter in the long run. curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=ADD" "https://wwwdev.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" "Add" in the productionserver. A combination of the previous two methods, which would render this attempt into a submission. This path is just to be taken when you are sure your metadata is compliant and what you want to submit. curl -u <USERNAME>:<PASSWORD> -F "ACTION=ADD" "https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/submit/drop-box/submit/" -F "STUDY=@study.xml" What happens after the submission of a dataset XML? Once you have completed the registration of your dataset/s please contact our Helpdesk Team to provide a release date for your study. Please note that all datasets affiliated to unreleased studies are automatically placed on hold until the authorised submitter or DAC contact contact the EGA Helpdesk for the study to be released. We strongly advise you not to delete your data until EGA Helpdesk confirms that your data has been successfully archived.

  Documentation submission/metadata/submission/programmatic-submission-xml

• Germline Mutations and Developmental Mosaicism Underlying EGFR-Mutant Lung Cancer

  We designed this study to examine the etiology of multiple lung tumors in EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer patients who undergo surgical resection. Participants were 52-85 years old never or former smokers, who had at least 2 surgical lung tumor pathology specimens available in the Massachusetts General Hospital biobank, at least one of which had an EGFR mutation by routine clinical genotyping. 10 patients were selected, along with two patients from a family with an inherited EGFR-T790M mutation leading to multiple lung tumors. These patient tumor samples and matched normal lung samples were microdissected to collect DNA.In addition to obtaining clinical histories, we performed whole exome sequencing to evaluate the genetic profile of matched tumor and normal samples. The WES data are available on dbGaP. Our data showed increasing mutational burden and copy number alteration with increasing invasiveness, as compared to normal tissues, for the subset of samples that were assessed for tumor invasiveness. We also observed a range of numbers of shared mutations between tumors in a single patient, indicating different degrees of relatedness between lung tumors. We hope that this resource will help researchers understand non-small cell lung cancer presentations with multiple lung tumors. These data may aid in clinical decision making for such patients.

  Study phs003379

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

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

  Dataset EGAD50000000559

• Allele Balance Bias Identifies Systematic Genotyping Errors and False Disease Associations

  In recent years, Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) has become a cornerstone of clinical genetics and diagnostics. Many clinical applications require high precision, especially if rare events such as somatic mutations in cancer or genetic variants causing rare diseases need to be identified. Although random sequencing errors can be modeled statistically and deep sequencing minimizes their impact, systematic errors remain a problem even at high depth of coverage. Understanding their source is crucial to increase precision of clinical NGS applications. In this work, we studied the relation between recurrent biases in allele balance (AB), systematic errors and false positive variant calls across a large cohort of human samples analyzed by whole exome sequencing (WES). We have modeled the allele balance distribution for biallelic genotypes in 987 WES samples in order to identify positions recurrently deviating significantly from the expectation, a phenomenon we termed allele balance bias (ABB). Furthermore, we have developed a genotype callability score based on ABB for all positions of the human exome, which detects false positive variant calls that passed state-of-the-art filters. Finally, we demonstrate the use of ABB for detection of false associations proposed by rare variant association studies (RVAS).

  Study EGAS00001003027

• Genome-wide DNA-methylation assessment by MethylCap-seq and Infinium HumanMethylation450 BeadChips: an independent large-scale comparison

  DNA-methylation is an important epigenetic feature in health and disease. Two cost-efficient genome-scale methodologies to assess DNA-methylation are MethylCap-seq and Illumina's Infinium HumanMethylation450 BeadChips (HM450). However, objective information regarding the best-suited methodology for a specific research question is scant. Therefore, we performed a large-scale evaluation on a set of 70 brain tissue samples obtained from 65 glioblastoma and 5 non-tumoral brain tissues, using a gold standard free Bayesian modeling procedure. While conditional specificity was adequate for both approaches, conditional sensitivity was systematically higher for HM450. Also the genome-wide characteristics were compared, revealing that the HM450 probes assess less than 10% of the regions identified as methylated by MethylCap-seq. Hence the latter method may detect more potentially relevant DNA-methylation, defined by either functional location or previously reported differentially methylated candidate regions. Our results therefore indicate that – at least for the tissue under study - both methodologies are complementary, with a higher sensitivity for HM450, but a far larger genome-wide coverage for MethylCap-seq. Note that here only the relevant MethylCap-seq data is deposited, for the HM450 data we refer to GEO (GSE60274).

  Study EGAS00001001191

• Bisulfite-converted duplexes for the strand-specific detection and quantification of rare mutations

  The identification of mutations that are present at low frequencies in clinical samples is an essential component of precision medicine. The development of molecular barcoding for next generation sequencing has greatly enhanced the sensitivity of detecting such mutations by massively parallel sequencing. However, further improvements in specificity would be useful for a variety of applications. We herein describe a technology (BiSeqS) that can increase the specificity of sequencing by at least two orders of magnitude over and above that achieved with molecular barcoding and can be applied to any massively parallel sequencing instrument. BiSeqS employs bisulfite treatment to distinguish the two strands of molecularly barcoded DNA; its specificity arises from the requirement for the same mutation to be identified in both strands. Because no library preparation is required, the technology permits very efficient use of the template DNA as well as sequence reads, which are nearly all confined to the amplicons of interest. Such efficiency is critical for clinical samples, such as plasma, in which only tiny amounts of DNA are often available. We show here that BiSeqS can be applied to evaluate transversions, as well as small insertions or deletions, and can reliably detect one mutation among &gt;10,000 wild type molecules.

  Study EGAS00001002406

• Data Access Commitee for schizophrenia and control cases sequencing data

  Dac EGAC00001002810

• Walter and Eliza Hall Institute Research Data Access Committee

  Dac EGAC00001003372

• Data access committee for the head and neck project

  Dac EGAC00001000374

• DAC for WGS data Romanians and Roma/Rroma (Romania)

  Dac EGAC00001001184

• Latency and interval therapy affect the evolution in metastatic colorectal cancer.

  Dac EGAC00001001198

• DNA mate pair and RNAseq data of conventional osteosarcomas DAC

  Dac EGAC00001001306

• MTLE small RNA-sequencing and RNA-sequencing Data Access Committee

  Dac EGAC00001001427

• SEGA RNA-sequencing and small RNA-sequencing Data Access Commitee

  Dac EGAC00001001467

• Tytgat Institute for Liver and Intestinal Research Data Access Committee

  Dac EGAC00001001483

• Tytgat Institute for Liver and Intestinal Research Data Access Committee

  Dac EGAC00001001485

• Tytgat Institute for Liver and Intestinal Research Data Access Committee

  Dac EGAC00001001615

• Phase Ib of olaparib and capivasertib data access committee

  Dac EGAC00001001887

• Patient-derived gene and protein expression signatures of NGLY1 deficiency

  Dac EGAC00001002287

• Tytgat Institute for Liver and Intestinal Research Data Access Committee

  Dac EGAC00001002437

• Garvan/St Vincent’s Prostate Cancer Tissue and Data Access Committee

  Dac EGAC00001002769

• Lymphoma Biology and Survival / Applied Tumor Genomics / University of Helsinki

  Dac EGAC00001002849

• EGAD00000000121

  Genotypes at MITF E318K variant

  Dataset EGAD00000000121

• USA-BSTN

  Cases and controls from USA

  Dataset EGAD00010002024

• EGAD00010000371

  Case and control samples (Genotypes)

  Dataset EGAD00010000371

• Greece

  Greek cases and controls

  Dataset EGAD00010002021

• Human Throid Cancer and CDK4/6 inhibition Data Access Commitee

  Dac EGAC00001003446

• Data access committee for neural retina and retinal organoid data

  Dac EGAC50000000019

• Centre for Drug Repurposing and Medicines Research Data Access Committee

  Dac EGAC00001002764

• Developmental and Stem Cell Biology department - Hospital for Sick Children

  Dac EGAC00001002951

• WGBS and oxBS-seq for APL

  Study EGAS00001005610

• RNA sequencing of AD, MCI and control ONS cells

  Study EGAS00001006594

• Evolutionary histories of breast cancer and related clones

  Study EGAS00001006282

• Whole exome and genome sequencing investigations of perinatal death

  Study EGAS00001006295

• microRNA and isomiR profiling of Stage 1 epithelial ovarian carcinoma

  Study EGAS00001006617

• LUMC Department Pathology, Bone and Soft Tissue Tumor Group

  Dac EGAC50000000763

• Phenotype data

  Phenotype and covariates

  Dataset EGAD00001009966

• LUMC Department Cell and Chemistry Biology, Ten Dijke group

  Dac EGAC50000000585

• Comparison of Custom Capture for Targeted Next Generation DNA Sequencing

  Targeted, capture-based DNA sequencing is an economical way to sequence a customized region of the genome. Several targeted sequencing kits are available, but the efficacies of these kits have not been compared. We appraised four targeted DNA technologies for next generation sequencing, considering on-target sequencing, uniformity, and single nucleotide variation and copy number variation discovery. The technologies which utilized sonication to fragment genomic material showed impressive uniformity of capture. The other two had shorter preparation times, but sacrificed uniformity. One of those technologies, which needs transposase to fragment genomic material, has a weakness that requires all samples be pooled and the final one, which uses restriction enzyme digestion, is limited depending on restriction enzymes digest sites. Naturally, all technologies showed some concordance for calling SNVs, the kits that used restriction enzymes or transposase missed several SNVs, due, in large part, to lack of coverage. All technologies showed high integrity for copy number variant calling when compared to SNP arrays. This study aids laboratories in their decision of the proper technology to use for their intended applications.

  Study phs000811

• Circulating Tumor Cell Heterogeneity in Neuroendocrine Prostate Cancer by Single Cell Copy Number Analysis

  Neuroendocrine prostate cancer (NEPC) is an aggressive variant of prostate cancer that may arise de novo or develop from pre-existing prostate adenocarcinoma as a mechanism of treatment resistance. Combined loss of tumor suppressors RB1, TP53, PTEN are frequent in NEPC but also present in a subset of prostate adenocarcinomas. Most clinical and preclinical studies support a trans-differentiation process, whereby NEPC arises clonally from a prostate adenocarcinoma precursor during the course of treatment resistance. Here we highlight a case of NEPC with significant intra-patient heterogeneity observed across metastases. We further demonstrate how single-cell genomic analysis of circulating tumor cells combined with phenotypic evaluation of cellular diversity can be considered as a window into tumor heterogeneity in patients with advanced prostate cancer. We performed whole genome sequencing of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) from patients with castration resistant adenocarcinoma (n=4) and neuroendocrine prostate cancer (n=8). CTCs were collected via Epic Sciences platform and single CTC genomic data (n=215) generated via Illumina NextSeq500.&nbsp;

  Study phs002462

• The Northern Manhattan Family Study - a Sub-Study of the Epidemiologic Study of Stroke Outcome in 3 Ethnic Groups: The Northern Manhattan Study

  The Northern Manhattan Family Study is a sub-study of the Northern Manhattan Study (NOMAS), a population-based cohort study investigating stroke and stroke risk factors among individuals from three ethnic groups residing in northern Manhattan. The overall goal for the Northern Manhattan Family Study was to determine the genetic factors associated with stroke precursor phenotypes. A subset of Caribbean Hispanic probands from the NOMAS Study were selected for inclusion in the family study. Selected probands were at high risk for cardiovascular disease, defined as either 1. Having a sibling with a history of myocardial infarction or stroke, or 2. Having two of the following three risk phenotypes above the 75th percentile in NOMAS; maximal carotid plaque thickness, left ventricular mass or homocysteine level. Probands for the family study were enrolled in northern Manhattan and family members were enrolled at two locations: New York at Columbia University and in the Dominican Republic (DR) at the Clinicas Corazones Unidos in Santo Domingo. A subset of Caribbean Hispanic NOMAS participants were included as a replication sample.

  Study phs002406

• Tumor Fraction Guided Cell-Free DNA Profiling in Metastatic Cancer Patients

  Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) profiling is increasingly used to guide cancer care, yet mutations are not always identified. The ability to detect somatic mutations in plasma depends on both assay sensitivity and the fraction of circulating DNA in plasma that is tumor-derived (i.e cfDNA tumor fraction). We hypothesized that cfDNA tumor fraction could inform the interpretation of negative cfDNA results and guide the choice of subsequent assays of greater genomic breadth or depth. Plasma samples collected from 118 metastatic cancer patients were analyzed with cf-IMPACT, a modified version of the FDA-authorized MSK-IMPACT tumor test that can detect genomic alterations in 410 cancer-associated genes. Shallow whole genome sequencing (sWGS) was also performed in the same samples to estimate cfDNA tumor fraction based on genome-wide copy number alterations using z-score statistics. The results show that cfDNA tumor fraction can inform the interpretation of negative cfDNA results and guide the selection of subsequent sequencing platforms that are most likely to identify clinically-relevant genomic alterations.

  Study phs002290

• NHLBI TOPMed: Whole Genome Sequencing of Venous Thromboembolism (WGS of VTE)

  This study consists of 338 VTE cases from an inception cohort of Olmsted County, MN residents (OC) with a first lifetime objectively-diagnosed idiopathic VTE during the 40-year study period, 1966-2005. All living study subjects were invited to provide a whole blood sample at the Mayo Clinical Research Unit for leukocyte genomic DNA and plasma collection. For living study subjects who did not provide a blood sample, we retrieved any leftover blood ("waste" blood) from samples collected as part of routine clinical diagnostic testing and used this to extract DNA after obtaining patient consent. For deceased cases, with IRB approval, we extracted DNA from any available stored tissue within the Mayo Tissue Archive. This "tissue" DNA has been successfully genotyped in prior studies. Three trained and experienced study nurse abstractors reviewed the complete medical records in the community of all potential cases. Note: WGS sample IDs for the previous GENEVA study cases (phs000289) are included in this dataset. The phenotypes for the GENEVA study are located under the above phs number.

  Study phs001402

• Retinoblastoma Aqueous Humor Liquid Biopsy Repository

  This study involves the use of the aqueous humor (AH, the clear fluid in the front of the eye) as an organ specific liquid biopsy for retinoblastoma. This relatively new liquid biopsy platform was started at CHLA/USC and was developed to overcome the lack of tumor tissue -- due to contraindication to biopsy -- for this cancer. We have demonstrated that the aqueous humor is an enriched source of tumor DNA. Previously tumoral information was only available after the eye was removed for treatment failure. Due to the AH liquid biopsy, we are now able to assay tumor derived molecular information from these eyes at diagnosis and longitudinally during treatment -- as opposed to only eyes that have failed therapy. We have demonstrated that using the platform we can identify the specific mutations in the RB1 gene that initiate tumorigenesis in this cancer as well as the secondary chromosomal alterations the drive further tumor growth. This database will provide sequencing information as well as associated clinical information and globe salvage outcomes.

  Study phs003077