| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
-
- 2019
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Mahajan, Anubha, et al.
(author)
-
Multi-ancestry genetic study of type 2 diabetes highlights the power of diverse populations for discovery and translation
- 2022
-
In: Nature Genetics. - : Springer Nature. - 1061-4036 .- 1546-1718. ; 54:5, s. 560-572
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- We assembled an ancestrally diverse collection of genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of type 2 diabetes (T2D) in 180,834 affected individuals and 1,159,055 controls (48.9% non-European descent) through the Diabetes Meta-Analysis of Trans-Ethnic association studies (DIAMANTE) Consortium. Multi-ancestry GWAS meta-analysis identified 237 loci attaining stringent genome-wide significance (P < 5 x 10(-9)), which were delineated to 338 distinct association signals. Fine-mapping of these signals was enhanced by the increased sample size and expanded population diversity of the multi-ancestry meta-analysis, which localized 54.4% of T2D associations to a single variant with >50% posterior probability. This improved fine-mapping enabled systematic assessment of candidate causal genes and molecular mechanisms through which T2D associations are mediated, laying the foundations for functional investigations. Multi-ancestry genetic risk scores enhanced transferability of T2D prediction across diverse populations. Our study provides a step toward more effective clinical translation of T2D GWAS to improve global health for all, irrespective of genetic background. Genome-wide association and fine-mapping analyses in ancestrally diverse populations implicate candidate causal genes and mechanisms underlying type 2 diabetes. Trans-ancestry genetic risk scores enhance transferability across populations.
|
|
| 7. |
- Ablikim, M., et al.
(author)
-
Measurements of (XcJ)-> K+K-K+K- decays
- 2006
-
In: Physics Letters B. - : Elsevier BV. - 0370-2693 .- 1873-2445. ; 642:3, s. 197-202
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Using 14M psi(2S) events taken with the BESII detector, chi(cJ) -> 2(K+K-) decays are studied. For the four-kaon final state, the branching fractions are B(chi(c0,1,2) ->.2(K+K-)) = (3.48 +/- 0.23 +/- 0.47) x 10(-3), (0.70 +/- 0.13 +/- 0.10) x 10(-3), and (2.17 +/- 0.20 +/- 0.31) x 10(-3). For the phi K+K- final state, the branching fractions, which are measured for the first time, are B(chi(c0,1,2) -> phi K+K-) = (1.03 +/- 0.22 +/- 0.15) x 10(-3), (0.46 +/- 0.16 +/- 0.06) x 10(-3), and (1.67 +/- 0.26 +/- 0.24) x 10(-4). For the phi phi final state, B(chi(c0,2) -> phi phi) = (0.94 +/- 0.21 +/- 0.13) x 10(-3) and (1.70 +/- 0.30 +/- 0.25) x 10(-3).
|
|
| 8. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 9. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 10. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 11. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 12. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 13. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 14. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 15. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 16. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 17. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 18. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 19. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 20. |
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 21. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 22. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 23. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 24. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 25. |
- Xiao, Wenming, et al.
(author)
-
Toward best practice in cancer mutation detection with whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing
- 2021
-
In: Nature Biotechnology. - : Springer Nature. - 1087-0156 .- 1546-1696. ; 39:9, s. 1141-1150
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Recommendations are given on optimal read coverage and selection of calling algorithm to maximize the reproducibility of cancer mutation detection in whole-genome or whole-exome sequencing. Clinical applications of precision oncology require accurate tests that can distinguish true cancer-specific mutations from errors introduced at each step of next-generation sequencing (NGS). To date, no bulk sequencing study has addressed the effects of cross-site reproducibility, nor the biological, technical and computational factors that influence variant identification. Here we report a systematic interrogation of somatic mutations in paired tumor-normal cell lines to identify factors affecting detection reproducibility and accuracy at six different centers. Using whole-genome sequencing (WGS) and whole-exome sequencing (WES), we evaluated the reproducibility of different sample types with varying input amount and tumor purity, and multiple library construction protocols, followed by processing with nine bioinformatics pipelines. We found that read coverage and callers affected both WGS and WES reproducibility, but WES performance was influenced by insert fragment size, genomic copy content and the global imbalance score (GIV; G > T/C > A). Finally, taking into account library preparation protocol, tumor content, read coverage and bioinformatics processes concomitantly, we recommend actionable practices to improve the reproducibility and accuracy of NGS experiments for cancer mutation detection.
|
|
| 26. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 27. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 28. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2013
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 29. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 30. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 31. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 32. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 33. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 34. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 35. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 36. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 37. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 38. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 39. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 40. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 41. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 42. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 43. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 44. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2013
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 45. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 46. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 47. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 48. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 49. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2011
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 50. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(author)
-
- 2012
-
swepub:Mat__t (peer-reviewed)
|
|
