Geographic and age-related variations in mutational processes in colorectal cancer - filtered vcf files (Mutographs)
What is a DAC? Given the complexity, scale, and diversity of global submitters and studies, the EGA operates a distributed data access model in which requests are made to the data controller, not to the EGA. The European Commission defines a data controller, in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), as the person that determines the purposes for which and the means by which personal data is processed. A Data Access Committees, commonly referred to as DACs, comprise on or more individuals (or data controllers) that review data access requests and make decisions on who can access personally identifiable genetic, phenotypic, and clinical data deposited at the EGA. Therefore, the members of a DAC should be individuals who have the authority to approve data access requests. The animation describes how you can authorise access to your sensitive data with the help of Data Access Committee and Authorisation tool. Acknowledgement to CSC - IT Center for Finland, Elixir Finland, Elixir Europe. Frequently Asked Questions How can I create a Data Access Committee? How can I create a Data Access Committee? The members of a DAC can come from different areas of expertise, such as data management, data analysis, information technology, legal and compliance, subject matter experts, privacy and security, and representatives from the organisations or individuals that provide data to the DAC. The specific members of a DAC can vary depending on the needs of the organisation and the type of data being managed. The EGA strongly suggests checking with your organisation to align with its regulations How should a DAC be named? The chosen name must be informative to the applicant. For example, internal identifiers, such as grant numbers, should not be used. Individual PI names should also not be used. DAC's are often named after the organisation or department of the data source. Browse the full list of DAC names currently in the EGA. How can I become an EGA DAC contact? To register a DAC at the EGA you must create first as an EGA user. Once your EGA user has been approved by the Helpdesk team, you will be able to log in to the DAC Portal. How can I register a DAC? To register a DAC, follow the DAC Portal instructions. You will be required to provide a DAC name, name of the individual(s) that make up your DAC and contact details for your DAC including your Institutional email(s). Wherever possible, the DAC should make sure that all points of contact are readily available and able to answer any initial data requests/queries in < 2 weeks. Once your DAC is registered, you will have to wait upon the validation from our Helpdesk team. As soon as all the validations have been completed, your DAC will be activated. Alternatively, you can also establish a DAC at the EGA during a programmatic submission through Webin API. Which are the possible roles of a DAC contact? There are two possible roles for DAC contacts: member and admin. An admin has additional privileges compared to a member: An “admin” can manage data requests, create and edit policies, edit the content of the DAC, add or remove contacts, and decide the role of each contact. A “member” can manage data requests and create policies. However, a member does not have permission to modify DAC details, edit information from policies where they are not admins, or add/remove contacts. There is no limit to the number of admins in a DAC, and each admin is responsible for deciding who should have editing privileges. This allows for a more decentralised and democratic approach to managing the DAC. How can I modify the information of a DAC? To modify a DAC, follow the instructions here. Keep in mind that only DAC contact with an admin role can modify the information of a DAC. If your DAC was registered before the lauch of the DAC Portal, and its ID is EGAC0 (not EGAC5), you must use the programmatic submission to modify it. Please, do not hesitate to contact our Helpdesk team if you need help with this! To prevent potential data breaches and ensure adherence to GDPR regulations, it is essential that the European Genome-Phenome Archive (EGA) is informed via the Helpdesk team of any changes to the Data Access Committee (DAC). This should be done in addition to any changes being made on the DAC portal. Data Controllers (as per the definition in the DPA) are also responsible for notifying the previous DAC of any modifications. Without proper notification, changes might not be automatically updated in our system, leading to the risk of incorrect permissions being applied and potential data access issues. Therefore, it is imperative that all Data Controllers follow this protocol to maintain data integrity and security. What’s the link between DAC, policy and dataset? A dataset is linked to one single policy. At the same time, one policy has a one to one relationship with a DAC. In this example, you can see that in this dataset page, we are only showing the information of one DAC (1 dataset - 1 DAC). However, the ratio of objects does not work the same in the other direction. One DAC can own multiple policy objects. And each policy object can be reused in several datasets. Thus, one DAC can manage one or more datasets. In this example, you can see that in this DAC page, we are showing all the datasets that are managed by one DAC (1 DAC - >400 datasets). EGA Data Access Committee Best Practices Which are the EGA DAC best practices? Refer to DAC Best Practices What happens if a DAC member changes institutions? EGA is committed to the protection and ownership of the data stored in our systems. We respect the institution's ownership of the data, and as such, if a DAC member changes institutions, the ownership of the data will not be transferred to the new institution. Therefore, before changing institutions, we request that the DAC contact add a new member who will replace them once they no longer work at the institution. This ensures that the data remains protected and is accessible to authorised personnel at the institution. To prevent potential data breaches and ensure adherence to GDPR regulations, it is essential that the European Genome-Phenome Archive (EGA) is informed via the Helpdesk team of any changes to the Data Access Committee (DAC). This should be done in addition to any changes being made on the DAC portal. Data Controllers (as per the definition in the DPA) are also responsible for notifying the previous DAC of any modifications. Without proper notification, changes might not be automatically updated in our system, leading to the risk of incorrect permissions being applied and potential data access issues. Therefore, it is imperative that all Data Controllers follow this protocol to maintain data integrity and security. What happens if EGA detects an unresponsive DAC? EGA defines an unresponsive DAC as a DAC with one or more contacts who do not respond to data access requests. EGA has procedures in place to identify these types of DACs, escalate the issue, and attempt to reassign the DAC to a responsive contact. This is a crucial step in ensuring that data can be accessed and utilised by researchers. If EGA identifies an unresponsive DAC, the organisation will first try to resolve the issue by escalating it to the appropriate parties. This may involve attempting to reassign the DAC to a more responsive contact. Unfortunately, in situations where we cannot reassign the DAC, the dataset will be withdrawn from the public website and the files will be removed from our system. If an EGA ID is referenced in a publication, the EGA will take extra steps to ensure that the public is made aware of the data's unavailability. I don't want to receive an email notification for pending requests. How can I do that? If you are an EGA DAC with pending requests, you will always receive emails for new data access requests. However, the EGA understands that a request resolution can take some time, for this reason, if you add a comment (make sure you save it by clicking the APPLY button!) we will filter those requests at the time of sending the notification! How can I manage data access requests? What documentation does the DAC need to provide? Each dataset that is submitted to the EGA must be linked to a policy object. The policy is a Data Access Agreement (DAA), which defines the terms and conditions of using the dataset, such as how the data files should be stored once downloaded or details of publication embargoes that should be observed by the approved user. As part of the Data Access Agreement, information regarding the application can be captured to help inform the DAC when making its decision. For example, requestors could be asked to provide a proposed title for their research and a proposal of how the data will be used. By asking for provision of such information the DAC can be assured that the requestor fully understands any consents associated with the data. It is important that accounts created at the EGA, are created solely for those individuals that will be downloading the data from the EGA. As part of the data access request, we strongly encourage you to identify individuals that will need an account at the EGA in order to prevent sharing of login details, which is strictly prohibited under EGA user account policy. Such information can easily be captured in the DAA. NOTICE The data access agreement template below is provided for guidance only and should be adapted as you see fit to suit your own purpose. In the interest of promoting data sharing, we suggest that if an agreement cannot be met around clause 19 in this example that both parties should agree to remain silent, and that the clause should be removed from the agreement. Example DAA How can the DAC provide the DAA? The DAC should provide their own DAA when registering a policy. Data requestors will download this document and should fill it in and send it back to the DAC. Data access decisions should be based on such documentation. The DAA can be downloaded through the request data webpage. Once it has been filled in, the signed copy of the DAA can be uploaded back to the request data webpage and sent to the DAC for review. How can I grant access to the data? Once you receive a data access request, you can login to the DAC Portal. In this portal you will see all your pending requests and will be able to grant or decline access to the requestors. I am a member of the Data Access Committee. Could I approve somebody else to deal with the requests on my behalf? If you want to delegate data access decisions to someone else, make sure that the individual's account is officially registered as a member of the DAC. Remember that a DAC contact with an "admin" role can always add new members to an existing DAC, remove members, and modify contact details through the DAC Portal. Can I automatise the process of managing data access requests? The answer is yes! You can use a programmatic approach using our DAC API! Check out the DAC API specification! Data Breach What should a DAC do if they suspect a breach? If a DAC suspects a data breach of one or more of their datasets, they should immediately contact the EGA Helpdesk team at this link. The DAC must provide the following information when contacting the EGA Helpdesk team: A list of affected datasets An estimated date of the data breach (or interval of dates) A list of unauthorised users who accessed the data (if available). Otherwise, they can provide a list of authorised users for the affected datasets Any observations they would like to raise to the EGA team Once the DAC has contacted the EGA team, we will respond within 48 hours (please allow some leeway during peak times) and activate our data breach protocol. What can I expect from the EGA if they detect a breach? Once the EGA determines that a security incident has occurred, we will notify all DAC members that a data breach has been detected, and take steps to contain the incident. Containment approaches may include: Revoking a data provider's access to the EGA resources, such as by changing passwords. Removing affected EGA datasets from distribution, such as by withdrawing a dataset. Disabling certain functions or services, such as the EGA ingestion pipeline. Shutting down the system or disconnecting it from the network. After the incident has been contained, the EGA will determine whether it is necessary to eradicate components related to the incident. Finally, the EGA will enable recovery of the service to normal operation and confirm that all services are functioning normally.
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.
MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are regulatory noncoding RNAs that affect the production of a significant fraction of human mRNAs via post-transcriptional regulation. Interindividual variation of the miRNA expression levels is likely to influence the expression of miRNA target genes and may therefore contribute to phenotypic differences in humans, including susceptibility to common disorders. The extent to which miRNA levels are genetically controlled is largely unknown. In this report, we assayed the expression levels of miRNAs in primary fibroblasts from 180 European newborns of the GenCord project and performed association analysis to identify eQTLs (expression quantitative traits loci). We detected robust expression for 121 miRNAs out of 365 interrogated. We have identified significant cis- (10%) and trans- (11%) eQTLs. Furthermore, we detected one genomic locus (rs1522653) that influences the expression levels of five miRNAs, thus unraveling a novel mechanism for coregulation of miRNA expression
Rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) is the most common soft tissue sarcoma in children. While these malignancies display aberrant myogenic differentiation, relatively little is known about genetic susceptibility to RMS, or how genetic variants influence subsequent somatic events and may be used in risk stratification strategies. A small percentage of cases are associated with mutations in TP53 (Li-Fraumeni syndrome), HRAS (Costello syndrome), and PTCH1 (nevoid basal cell carcinoma syndrome/Gorlin syndrome), suggesting the genetic origins of childhood RMS. In spite of this, little work has been done to characterize genetic susceptibility to this malignancy. We plan to leverage samples collected as part of D9902 to conduct one of the largest germline genomic studies of RMS. We anticipate that once genetic associations are identified, researchers can use the information to develop better strategies to detect, treat, and prevent childhood RMS.
As part of an effort to correlate molecular copy number variation determinations with state of the art karyotype analyses, 716 samples derived from 697 individuals from the Chromosomal Aberrations and Inherited Disorders collections of the NIGMS Human Genetic Cell Repository were genotyped and analyzed for CNV determination by the Microarray Center at the Coriell Institute for Medical Research. Karyotyping is performed on all cell cultures in the Repository with reported chromosome abnormalities. The samples chosen for genotyping in this study are intended to represent a diverse set of copy number variants, but the selection was also weighted to over-sample commonly manifested types of aberrations. When available, the ISCN description of the sample based on G-banding and FISH analysis is included in the phenotypic data. Karyotypes for these cells can be viewed in the online Repository catalog (http://ccr.coriell.org/Sections/Collections/NIGMS/?SsId=8).
The goal of this project is to develop both contact tracing and secure data exchange tools. The contact tracing solution securely combines data from a variety of sources (including manual self-report data and mobile device surveys) to enable tracing of contacts with individuals that have tested positive for COVID-19 or have been exposed to COVID-19. The data exchange solution is a secure mechanism that empowers users to control the data they share in the course of their return to work, including the ability to provide a verifiable health status claim. These tools are being used by an employer to evaluate the risk of allowing individuals to return to normal activities, and also the ability to trace user contact with individuals diagnosed with or suspected of having contracted COVID-19. DOI: https://rapids.ll.mit.edu/10.57895/h0an-m559
This study of DNA and RNA sequencing of 5 parent-offspring trios is a single center study. The goal of this study is to characterize X chromosome inactivation (XCI) ratio in females using phased genomic variations obtained through whole genome or exome sequencing in trios, followed by allele-specific expression analysis of the phased, heterozygous alleles in the mRNA of the female offspring, and to apply this method to clinical diagnosis. The distribution of allele ratios across X obtained from mRNA sequencing allows for the estimation of X inactivation status of inherited X chromosomes, and the parameters of each parental allele distributions in the offspring's mRNA data can be used as determinants for XCI ratio. This approach was used to evaluate the contribution of skewed XCI ratio to phenotypic heterogeneity in an undiagnosed, mild neurological condition.
We study a patient with dMMR lung cancer refractory to immunotherapy. Post-treatment tumor demonstrated compound heterozygous frameshift deletions located upstream of the kinase domain in the gene encoding JAK1 protein, downregulation of JAK1 and mediators of its signal transduction, and total loss of JAK1 phosphorylation. Importantly, one of the JAK1 mutations, despite not being detected in the pre-treatment tumor, was found at low variant allele frequency in the pre-treatment circulating tumor DNA, suggesting clonal selection of the mutation. This report provides the most detailed look yet of defective JAK1 signaling in the context of dMMR and immunotherapy-resistance. Together with observations of JAK1 frameshift indels being enriched in dMMR compared with MMR-proficient tumors, our findings demonstrate the critical function of JAK1 in immunological surveillance of dMMR cancer.
The Molecular Profiling to Predict Response to Treatment (MP2PRT) program is part of the NCI's Cancer Moonshot Initiative. The aim of this program is the retrospective characterization and analysis of biospecimens collected from completed NCI-sponsored trials of the National Clinical Trials Network and the NCI Community Oncology Research Program. This study, titled "Identification of Genetic Changes Associated with Relapse and/or Adaptive Resistance in Patients Registered as Favorable Histology Wilms Tumor on AREN03B2", performs genomic characterization (WGS 30X, Total RNAseq, miRNAseq) on a discovery set of 70 trio cases (normal tissue, tumor tissue at time of diagnosis, tumor tissue at time of relapse) from patients who relapsed with Favorable Histology Wilms Tumor. Prioritized findings from the discovery set will be validated using Targeted Sequencing in an independent validation set of 47 relapse samples.
