scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Broad Institute

NonprofitCambridge, Massachusetts, United States
About: Broad Institute is a nonprofit organization based out in Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Genome-wide association study. The organization has 6584 authors who have published 11618 publications receiving 1522743 citations. The organization is also known as: Eli and Edythe L. Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Five C to T (or G to A) base editors that use natural and engineered Cas9 variants with different protospacer-adjacent motif (PAM) specificities to expand the number of sites that can be targeted by base editing 2.5-fold are reported.
Abstract: Base editing induces single-nucleotide changes in the DNA of living cells using a fusion protein containing a catalytically defective Streptococcus pyogenes Cas9, a cytidine deaminase, and an inhibitor of base excision repair. This genome editing approach has the advantage that it does not require formation of double-stranded DNA breaks or provision of a donor DNA template. Here we report the development of five C to T (or G to A) base editors that use natural and engineered Cas9 variants with different protospacer-adjacent motif (PAM) specificities to expand the number of sites that can be targeted by base editing 2.5-fold. Additionally, we engineered base editors containing mutated cytidine deaminase domains that narrow the width of the editing window from ∼5 nucleotides to as little as 1-2 nucleotides. We thereby enabled discrimination of neighboring C nucleotides, which would otherwise be edited with similar efficiency, and doubled the number of disease-associated target Cs able to be corrected preferentially over nearby non-target Cs.

605 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Keith Bradnam, Joseph Fass, Anton Alexandrov, Paul Baranay1, Michael Bechner, Inanc Birol2, Sébastien Boisvert3, Jarrod Chapman4, Guillaume Chapuis5, Guillaume Chapuis6, Rayan Chikhi5, Rayan Chikhi6, Hamidreza Chitsaz7, Wen-Chi Chou8, Jacques Corbeil3, Cristian Del Fabbro, Roderick R. Docking2, Richard Durbin9, Dent Earl10, Scott J. Emrich11, Pavel Fedotov, Nuno A. Fonseca12, Ganeshkumar Ganapathy13, Richard A. Gibbs14, Sante Gnerre15, Elenie Godzaridis3, Steve Goldstein, Matthias Haimel12, Giles Hall15, David Haussler10, Joseph B. Hiatt16, Isaac Ho4, Jason T. Howard13, Martin Hunt9, Shaun D. Jackman2, David B. Jaffe15, Erich D. Jarvis13, Huaiyang Jiang14, Sergey Kazakov, Paul J. Kersey12, Jacob O. Kitzman16, James R. Knight, Sergey Koren17, Tak-Wah Lam18, Dominique Lavenier5, Dominique Lavenier19, Dominique Lavenier6, François Laviolette3, Yingrui Li18, Zhenyu Li, Binghang Liu, Yue Liu14, Ruibang Luo18, Iain MacCallum15, Matthew D. MacManes20, Nicolas Maillet19, Nicolas Maillet6, Sergey Melnikov, Delphine Naquin6, Delphine Naquin19, Zemin Ning9, Thomas D. Otto9, Benedict Paten10, Octávio S. Paulo21, Adam M. Phillippy17, Francisco Pina-Martins21, Michael Place, Dariusz Przybylski15, Xiang Qin14, Carson Qu14, Filipe J. Ribeiro, Stephen Richards14, Daniel S. Rokhsar22, Daniel S. Rokhsar4, J. Graham Ruby23, J. Graham Ruby24, Simone Scalabrin, Michael C. Schatz25, David C. Schwartz, Alexey Sergushichev, Ted Sharpe15, Timothy I. Shaw8, Jay Shendure16, Yujian Shi, Jared T. Simpson9, Henry Song14, Fedor Tsarev, Francesco Vezzi26, Riccardo Vicedomini27, Bruno Vieira21, Jun Wang, Kim C. Worley14, Shuangye Yin15, Siu-Ming Yiu18, Jianying Yuan, Guojie Zhang, Hao Zhang, Shiguo Zhou, Ian F Korf 
TL;DR: The Assemblathon 2 as discussed by the authors presented a variety of sequence data to be assembled for three vertebrate species (a bird, a fish, and a snake) from 21 participating teams.
Abstract: Background: The process of generating raw genome sequence data continues to become cheaper, faster, and more accurate. However, assembly of such data into high-quality, finished genome sequences remains challenging. Many genome assembly tools are available, but they differ greatly in terms of their performance (speed, scalability, hardware requirements, acceptance of newer read technologies) and in their final output (composition of assembled sequence). More importantly, it remains largely unclear how to best assess the quality of assembled genome sequences. The Assemblathon competitions are intended to assess current state-of-the-art methods in genome assembly. Results: In Assemblathon 2, we provided a variety of sequence data to be assembled for three vertebrate species (a bird, a fish, and snake). This resulted in a total of 43 submitted assemblies from 21 participating teams. We evaluated these assemblies using a combination of optical map data, Fosmid sequences, and several statistical methods. From over 100 different metrics, we chose ten key measures by which to assess the overall quality of the assemblies. (Continued on next page)

602 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This work proposes here the C-alpha test statistic as a novel approach for testing for the presence of this mixture of effects across a set of rare variants, and demonstrates good power relative to existing methods that assess the burden of rare variant in individuals.
Abstract: Technological advances make it possible to use high-throughput sequencing as a primary discovery tool of medical genetics, specifically for assaying rare variation. Still this approach faces the analytic challenge that the influence of very rare variants can only be evaluated effectively as a group. A further complication is that any given rare variant could have no effect, could increase risk, or could be protective. We propose here the C-alpha test statistic as a novel approach for testing for the presence of this mixture of effects across a set of rare variants. Unlike existing burden tests, C-alpha, by testing the variance rather than the mean, maintains consistent power when the target set contains both risk and protective variants. Through simulations and analysis of case/control data, we demonstrate good power relative to existing methods that assess the burden of rare variants in individuals.

601 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Robert A. Scott1, Laura J. Scott2, Reedik Mägi3, Letizia Marullo4  +213 moreInstitutions (66)
01 Nov 2017-Diabetes
TL;DR: This article conducted a meta-analysis of genome-wide association data from 26,676 T2D case and 132,532 control subjects of European ancestry after imputation using the 1000 Genomes multiethnic reference panel.
Abstract: To characterize type 2 diabetes (T2D)-associated variation across the allele frequency spectrum, we conducted a meta-analysis of genome-wide association data from 26,676 T2D case and 132,532 control subjects of European ancestry after imputation using the 1000 Genomes multiethnic reference panel Promising association signals were followed up in additional data sets (of 14,545 or 7,397 T2D case and 38,994 or 71,604 control subjects) We identified 13 novel T2D-associated loci (P < 5 × 10-8), including variants near the GLP2R, GIP, and HLA-DQA1 genes Our analysis brought the total number of independent T2D associations to 128 distinct signals at 113 loci Despite substantially increased sample size and more complete coverage of low-frequency variation, all novel associations were driven by common single nucleotide variants Credible sets of potentially causal variants were generally larger than those based on imputation with earlier reference panels, consistent with resolution of causal signals to common risk haplotypes Stratification of T2D-associated loci based on T2D-related quantitative trait associations revealed tissue-specific enrichment of regulatory annotations in pancreatic islet enhancers for loci influencing insulin secretion and in adipocytes, monocytes, and hepatocytes for insulin action-associated loci These findings highlight the predominant role played by common variants of modest effect and the diversity of biological mechanisms influencing T2D pathophysiology

601 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
08 Aug 2018-Nature
TL;DR: The extent, origins and consequences of genetic variation within human cell lines are studied, providing a framework for researchers to measure such variation in efforts to support maximally reproducible cancer research.
Abstract: Human cancer cell lines are the workhorse of cancer research. Although cell lines are known to evolve in culture, the extent of the resultant genetic and transcriptional heterogeneity and its functional consequences remain understudied. Here we use genomic analyses of 106 human cell lines grown in two laboratories to show extensive clonal diversity. Further comprehensive genomic characterization of 27 strains of the common breast cancer cell line MCF7 uncovered rapid genetic diversification. Similar results were obtained with multiple strains of 13 additional cell lines. Notably, genetic changes were associated with differential activation of gene expression programs and marked differences in cell morphology and proliferation. Barcoding experiments showed that cell line evolution occurs as a result of positive clonal selection that is highly sensitive to culture conditions. Analyses of single-cell-derived clones demonstrated that continuous instability quickly translates into heterogeneity of the cell line. When the 27 MCF7 strains were tested against 321 anti-cancer compounds, we uncovered considerably different drug responses: at least 75% of compounds that strongly inhibited some strains were completely inactive in others. This study documents the extent, origins and consequences of genetic variation within cell lines, and provides a framework for researchers to measure such variation in efforts to support maximally reproducible cancer research.

601 citations


Authors

Showing all 7146 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Eric S. Lander301826525976
Albert Hofman2672530321405
Frank B. Hu2501675253464
David J. Hunter2131836207050
Kari Stefansson206794174819
Mark J. Daly204763304452
Lewis C. Cantley196748169037
Matthew Meyerson194553243726
Gad Getz189520247560
Stacey Gabriel187383294284
Stuart H. Orkin186715112182
Ralph Weissleder1841160142508
Chris Sander178713233287
Michael I. Jordan1761016216204
Richard A. Young173520126642
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
Howard Hughes Medical Institute
34.6K papers, 5.2M citations

96% related

Salk Institute for Biological Studies
13.1K papers, 1.6M citations

94% related

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
30.9K papers, 2.2M citations

93% related

Scripps Research Institute
32.8K papers, 2.9M citations

93% related

Genentech
17.1K papers, 1.4M citations

93% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
202337
2022628
20211,727
20201,534
20191,364
20181,107