17291 results for "the best way to get coins in fc 26 Navštivte Buyfc26coins.com Společnost známá transparentními transakcemi..CQ2q"

in 14.16 milliseconds.

• A Comparative Analysis of Algorithms for Somatic SNV Detection in Cancer

  Four recently published algorithms for the detection of somatic SNV sites in matched cancer-normal sequencing datasets are VarScan, SomaticSniper, JointSNVMix and Strelka. In this analysis, we apply these four SNV calling algorithms to cancer- normal Illumina exome sequencing of a chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) patient. The candidate SNV sites returned by each algorithm are filtered to remove likely false positives, then characterised and compared to investigate the strengths and weaknesses of each SNV calling algorithm.

  Study EGAS00001000927

• Whole genome sequencing of glioblastoma reveals enrichment of non-coding constraint mutations in known and novel genes

  Glioblastoma (GBM) has one of the worst five-year survival rates of all cancers. While genomic studies of the disease have been performed, alterations in the non-coding regulatory regions of GBM have largely remained unexplored. We apply whole-genome sequencing (WGS) to identify non-coding mutations, with regulatory potential in GBM, under the hypothesis that regions of evolutionary constraint are likely to be functional, and somatic mutations are likely more damaging than in unconstrained regions.

  Study EGAS00001004379

• Reading about genomic analysis of pan-neuroblastoma

  There are virtually no research fields that do not benefit from the large-scale genomic analysis that are so popular nowadays. For research into diseases with highly diverse clinical behavior like pediatric neuroblastoma, nevertheless, this type of approach has been a game-changer. Samuel W. Brady and colleagues, from St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, have gathered data from 702 neuroblastomas which were profiled by whole genome sequencing (WGS, n = 205), whole exome sequencing (WES, n = 539), and/or RNA-Seq. Less than half of the samples were generated during this study, while the others were obtained from previous work. Part of the WES data was indeed deposited in EGA in 2012 (EGA study EGAS00001000213). A scratchy summary about the huge work from Samuel W. Brady and colleagues, published in Nature Communications this October 2020 “These findings suggest that the sympathetic nervous system, the tissue from which neuroblastoma arises, is susceptible to different oncogenic insults at different times during development, which could be explored in future investigations using animal models.” Conclude the authors, highlighting the importance of their findings. Pediatric neuroblastomas are classified according to clinical and molecular features into low, intermediate, and high risk. Age plays a critical role in the classification, with younger children having an overall better prognosis. The samples included in this study belonged to all ages and risk-groups: the aim of such set up is the identification of age-associated molecular aberrations. The authors defined a mutational landscape of pediatric neuroblastoma including rare driver events, impossible to pick with a smaller data set. Interestingly, most driver mutations' frequency was found to be age-related. Those include alterations on MYCN, TERT, PTPRD, and Ras pathway, in addition to the previously reported ATRX. In addition, the large data set allowed the authors to define co-existence relations between the mutations (mutual exclusion or co-occurrence) which is a crucial puzzle piece to unravel the mechanisms driving the pathogenesis. Enjoy this really interesting article, open source on Pubmed.

  Blog genomic-analysis-of-pan-neuroblastoma

• Characterization of a human iPSC-derived islet differentiation model

  To explore the contribution of islet development to T2D pathogenesis, we characterised the transcriptomes of 3 human iPSC lines (from independent donors) differentiated along the islet development lineage. Whole transcriptome RNA-seq was performed at 7 developmental stages: definitive endoderm, primitive gut tube, posterior foregut (PF), pancreatic endoderm, endocrine progenitors, endocrine-like cells, and beta-like cells (BLC). Differentially-expressed (ΔExp) genes were assigned to the stage in which they were most upregulated (versus baseline iPSC profile), and used to assess the enrichment of T2D GWAS genes, as well as to predict the upstream transcription factors at each developmental stage.We found 9409 ΔExp genes across all stages, including known markers of islet development (NEUROG3, INS). Genes ΔExp in the most-differentiated (BLC) stage were significantly enriched for genes within the 99% credible sets of T2D GWAS loci. Despite this enrichment in BLC only, over 70% of genes mapping within the credible sets were ΔExp before this stage, highlighting the relevance of key T2D GWAS genes in islet development: e.g. expression of TCF7L2 peaked during the PF stage (log2FC=1.2; q=8.5×10-10). REST and LMNA are also highlighted by the analyses as having a potential function in islet development, considering their pattern of expression and those of the genes they regulate. Transcriptomic signatures derived from this iPSC differentiation model highlight T2D-associated GWAS loci, monogenic diabetes genes and potential master regulators of gene networks with plausible function in islet development. All these provide clues for developmental mechanisms contributing to T2D diabetes pathology.

  Study EGAS00001002721

• 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

• Prediction of homologous recombination deficiency identifies colorectal tumors sensitive to PARP inhibition

  BRCAness is a well-established feature in breast, ovarian, prostate and pancreatic carcinomas, our recent findings indicate that up to 15% of colorectal cancers (CRC) also harbor defects in the HR pathway, presenting promising opportunities for innovative therapeutic strategies in CRC patients. We developed a new tool called HRDirect, which builds upon the HRDetect algorithm and is able to predict HRD from reference-free tumor samples. We validated HRDirect using matched breast cancer and CRC patient samples. Subsequently, we assessed its efficacy in predicting response to the PARP inhibitor olaparib by comparing it with two other commercial assays: AmoyDx HRD by Amoy Diagnostics and the TruSight Oncology (TSO) _500 HRD panel by Illumina NGS technology. While all three approaches successfully identified the most PARPi-sensitive CRC models, HRDirect demonstrated superior precision in distinguishing resistant models compared to AmoyDX and TSO500-HRD, which exhibited overlapping scores between sensitive and resistant cells. Furthermore, we propose integrating HRDirect scoring with ATM immunohistochemical analysis as part of our "composite biomarker approach" to enhance the identification of HRD tumors, with an immediate translational and clinical impact for CRC personalized treatment.

  Study EGAS50000000426

• Joint Addiction, Aging, and Mental Health (JAAMH) Data Access Committee General Research Use Datasets

  This collection contains all the Joint Addiction, Aging, and Mental Health (JAAMH) Data Access Committee General Research Use Datasets authorized individual-level genomic datasets currently in dbGaP that are approved for General Research Use (GRU) and have no further limitations beyond those outlined in the model Data Use Certification Agreement. The public posting of Genomic Summary Results is allowed. Access to this study collection will include additional authorized individual-level GRU datasets that become available. Renewal of this study collection is required annually. To request access to this study collection, select phs003202 in the dbGaP Authorized Access System.

  Study phs003202

• Joint Addiction, Aging, and Mental Health Data Access Committee General Research Use Datasets (GSR Restricted) Collection

  This collection contains the Joint Addiction, Aging, and Mental Health Data Access Committee's authorized individual-level genomic datasets currently in dbGaP that are approved for General Research Use (GRU) and have no further limitations beyond those outlined in the model Data Use Certification Agreement. The public posting of Genomic Summary Results are not allowed. Access to this study collection will include additional authorized individual-level GRU datasets that become available. Renewal of this study collection is required annually. To request access to this study collection, select phs003421 in the dbGaP Authorized Access System.

  Study phs003421

• Epidemiologic Architecture for Genes Linked to Environment (EAGLE) MetaboChip Study

  The Epidemiologic Architecture for Genes Linked to Environment (EAGLE) study is a study site of the larger Population Architecture using Genomics and Epidemiology (PAGE) I study.  EAGLE accessed two data resources during the course of study: the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES) and BioVU, the Vanderbilt University Medical Center biorepository linked to de-identified electronic health records.The EAGLE MetaboChip Study, also known as EAGLE BioVU in the literature, is a data resource of Illumina MetaboChip genotypes for ~15,000 DNA samples from African American/Black, Hispanic, and Asian patients in BioVU (PMID: 26201699). Several EAGLE BioVU and PAGE I study phenotypes were extracted using structured and unstructured data available in de-identified electronic health records linked to the DNA samples. 

  Study phs002767

• Genome-Wide Environment Interaction Study on Neurodevelopment in Children from Mexico and Bangladesh

  Cognitive development is known to be highly heritable, but various genome wide association studies (GWAS) have failed to find common single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) which can explain a large proportion of the variance in cognitive ability. We hypothesized that an interaction between genes and exposure to potentially toxic metals may account for some proportion of this missing heritability. We genotyped 749 infants in Mexico and 636 infants in Bangladesh. Criteria for inclusion into the study are given below. We then performed a Genome Wide Environmental Interaction Study (GWEIS) with neurodevelopment outcomes. There were 552,487 SNPs in common between the two cohorts.

  Study phs000996