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
08 Sep 2016-Cell
TL;DR: In this article, the authors adapted CRISPR/Cas9 to assess the contribution of each gene from the parasite Toxoplasma gondii during infection of human fibroblasts.

548 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Assemblathon 1 competition is described, which aimed to comprehensively assess the state of the art in de novo assembly methods when applied to current sequencing technologies, and it is established that it is possible to assemble the genome to a high level of coverage and accuracy.
Abstract: Low-cost short read sequencing technology has revolutionized genomics, though it is only just becoming practical for the high-quality de novo assembly of a novel large genome We describe the Assemblathon 1 competition, which aimed to comprehensively assess the state of the art in de novo assembly methods when applied to current sequencing technologies In a collaborative effort, teams were asked to assemble a simulated Illumina HiSeq data set of an unknown, simulated diploid genome A total of 41 assemblies from 17 different groups were received Novel haplotype aware assessments of coverage, contiguity, structure, base calling, and copy number were made We establish that within this benchmark: (1) It is possible to assemble the genome to a high level of coverage and accuracy, and that (2) large differences exist between the assemblies, suggesting room for further improvements in current methods The simulated benchmark, including the correct answer, the assemblies, and the code that was used to evaluate the assemblies is now public and freely available from http://wwwassemblathonorg/

548 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
03 Apr 2014-Nature
TL;DR: In this article, a continuous-flow culture apparatus is used to maintain proliferating cancer cells in low-glucose conditions, demonstrating that mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) is essential for optimal proliferation in these conditions; the most sensitive cell lines are defective in OXPHOS upregulation and may therefore be sensitive to current antidiabetic drugs that inhibit OPHOS.
Abstract: New apparatus is used to maintain proliferating cancer cells in low-glucose conditions, demonstrating that mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) is essential for optimal proliferation in these conditions; the most sensitive cell lines are defective in OXPHOS upregulation and may therefore be sensitive to current antidiabetic drugs that inhibit OXPHOS. Using a new continuous-flow culture apparatus called Nutrostat, designed to ensure constant and controlled extracellular nutrient levels, David Sabatini and colleagues screened cancer cell lines for genes important when cells experience low glucose levels. They found that the ability of cells to increase mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation under conditions of low glucose was crucial. Cancer cells unable to do so due to impaired glucose utilization or mitochondrial DNA mutations were particularly sensitive to a class of compounds, biguanides, which are in use to treat diabetes. These findings may lead to new therapeutic applications of these drugs to treat tumours displaying such defects. As the concentrations of highly consumed nutrients, particularly glucose, are generally lower in tumours than in normal tissues1,2, cancer cells must adapt their metabolism to the tumour microenvironment. A better understanding of these adaptations might reveal cancer cell liabilities that can be exploited for therapeutic benefit. Here we developed a continuous-flow culture apparatus (Nutrostat) for maintaining proliferating cells in low-nutrient media for long periods of time, and used it to undertake competitive proliferation assays on a pooled collection of barcoded cancer cell lines cultured in low-glucose conditions. Sensitivity to low glucose varies amongst cell lines, and an RNA interference (RNAi) screen pinpointed mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) as the major pathway required for optimal proliferation in low glucose. We found that cell lines most sensitive to low glucose are defective in the OXPHOS upregulation that is normally caused by glucose limitation as a result of either mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) mutations in complex I genes or impaired glucose utilization. These defects predict sensitivity to biguanides, antidiabetic drugs that inhibit OXPHOS3,4, when cancer cells are grown in low glucose or as tumour xenografts. Notably, the biguanide sensitivity of cancer cells with mtDNA mutations was reversed by ectopic expression of yeast NDI1, a ubiquinone oxidoreductase that allows bypass of complex I function5. Thus, we conclude that mtDNA mutations and impaired glucose utilization are potential biomarkers for identifying tumours with increased sensitivity to OXPHOS inhibitors.

547 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This review collects a series of guidelines, practical detail and learned experiences from a variety of individuals who have contributed to the subject of imputation.
Abstract: Motivated by the overwhelming success of genome-wide association studies, droves of researchers are working vigorously to exchange and to combine genetic data to expediently discover genetic risk factors for common human traits. The primary tools that fuel these new efforts are imputation, allowing researchers who have collected data on a diversity of genotype platforms to share data in a uniformly exchangeable format, and meta-analysis for pooling statistical support for a genotype-phenotype association. As many groups are forming collaborations to engage in these efforts, this review collects a series of guidelines, practical detail and learned experiences from a variety of individuals who have contributed to the subject.

546 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Daniel I. Swerdlow1, David Preiss2, Karoline Kuchenbaecker3, Michael V. Holmes1, Jorgen Engmann1, Tina Shah1, Reecha Sofat1, Stefan Stender4, Paul C. D. Johnson2, Robert A. Scott5, Maarten Leusink6, Niek Verweij, Stephen J. Sharp5, Yiran Guo7, Claudia Giambartolomei1, Christina Chung1, Anne Peasey1, Antoinette Amuzu8, KaWah Li7, Jutta Palmen1, Philip N. Howard1, Jackie A. Cooper1, Fotios Drenos1, Yun Li1, Gordon D.O. Lowe2, John Gallacher9, Marlene C. W. Stewart9, Ioanna Tzoulaki10, Sarah G. Buxbaum4, Daphne L. van der A4, Nita G. Forouhi5, N. Charlotte Onland-Moret4, Yvonne T. van der Schouw4, Renate B. Schnabel11, Jaroslav A. Hubacek12, Ruzena Kubinova13, Migle Baceviciene14, Abdonas Tamosiunas13, Andrzej Pajak15, Romanvan Topor-Madry15, Urszula Stepaniak15, Sofia Malyutina15, Damiano Baldassarre16, Bengt Sennblad17, Elena Tremoli16, Ulf de Faire18, Fabrizio Veglia19, Ian Ford2, J. Wouter Jukema20, Rudi G. J. Westendorp20, Gert J. de Borst4, Pim A. de Jong4, Ale Algra, Wilko Spiering, Anke H. Maitland-van der Zee6, Olaf H. Klungel6, Anthonius de Boer6, Pieter A. Doevendans, Charles B. Eaton21, Jennifer G. Robinson22, David Duggan23, John Kjekshus24, John R. Downs25, Antonio M. Gotto, Anthony C Keech, Roberto Marchioli, Gianni Tognoni26, Peter S. Sever, Neil R Poulter, David D. Waters, Terje R. Pedersen, Pierre Amarenco, Haruo Nakamura, John J.V. McMurray2, James Lewsey3, Daniel I. Chasman27, Paul M. Ridker27, Aldo P. Maggioni28, Luigi Tavazzi28, Kausik K. Ray29, Sreenivasa Rao Kondapally Seshasai29, JoAnn E. Manson27, Jackie F. Price9, Peter H. Whincup30, Richard W Morris1, Debbie A Lawlor31, George Davey Smith31, Yoav Ben-Shlomo31, Pamela J. Schreiner32, Myriam Fornage33, David S. Siscovick34, Mary Cushman35, Meena Kumari1, Nicholas J. Wareham5, W M Monique Verschuren4, Susan Redline36, Sanjay R. Patel36, John C. Whittaker32, Anders Hamsten17, Joseph A.C. Delaney37, Caroline Dale38, Tom R. Gaunt30, Andrew Wong1, Diana Kuh1, Rebecca Hardy1, Sekar Kathiresan, Berta Almoguera Castillo7, Pim van der Harst, Eric J. Brunner1, Anne Tybjærg-Hansen4, Michael Marmot1, Ronald M. Krauss39, Michael Y. Tsai26, Josef Coresh40, Ron C. Hoogeveen40, Bruce M. Psaty34, Leslie A. Lange40, Hakon Hakonarson7, Frank Dudbridge8, Steve E. Humphries1, Philippa J. Talmud1, Mika Kivimäki1, Nicholas J. Timpson31, Claudia Langenberg5, Folkert W. Asselbergs, Mikhail Voevoda15, Martin Bobak1, Hynek Pikhart1, James G. Wilson40, Alexander P. Reiner40, Brendan J. Keating7, Aroon D. Hingorani1, Naveed Sattar2 
TL;DR: The increased risk of type 2 diabetes noted with statins is at least partially explained by HMGCR inhibition.

545 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
2022627
20211,727
20201,534
20191,364
20181,107