Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
1,660
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
1,660 results for “Cancer screening”
Cancer screening attendance rates in transgender and gender-diverse patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
<p>Supplementary Data to support the findings of a systematic review investigating cancer screening rates in transgender and gender-diverse individuals.</p>
Joint AstraZeneca-Cancer Research Horizons Functional Genomics Centre's CRISPRn library benchmark screens: gRNA counts and associated metadata
<p>Genome-wide CRISPR sgRNA libraries have emerged as transformative tools to systematically probe gene function. While these libraries have been iterated over time to be more efficient, their large size limits their use in some applications. Here, we benchmarked publicly available genome-wide single-targeting sgRNA libraries and evaluated dual targeting as a strategy for pooled CRISPR loss-of-function screens. We leveraged this data to design two minimal genome-wide human CRISPR-Cas9 libraries that are 50% smaller than other libraries and that preserve specificity and sensitivity, thus enabling broader deployment at scale. </p>
CRISPR/dCas9-mediated DNA demethylation screen identifies driver epigenetic determinants of colorectal cancer (Processed data)
<p><strong>Background:</strong> Promoter hypermethylation of tumour suppressor genes is frequently observed during the malignant transformation of colorectal cancer (CRC). However, whether this epigenetic mechanism is an actual driver of cancer or is a mere consequence of the carcinogenic process remains to be elucidated.</p> <p><strong>Results: </strong>In this work we performed an integrative multi -omic approach to identify gene candidates with strong correlations between DNA methylation and gene expression in human CRC samples and a set of 8 colon cancer cell lines. As a proof of concept, we combined recent CRISPR-Cas9 epigenome editing tools (dCas9-TET1, dCas9-TET-IM) with a custom arrayed gRNA library to modulate the DNA methylation status of 56 promoters previously linked with strong epigenetic repression in CRC, and we monitored the potential functional consequences of such DNA methylation loss by means of a high-content cell proliferation screen. Overall, the epigenetic modulation of most of these DNA methylated regions had a mild impact in the reactivation of gene expression and in the viability of cancer cells. Interestingly, we found that epigenetic reactivation of RSPO2 in the tumour context was associated with a significant impairment in cell proliferation in p53-/- cancer cell lines and further validation with human samples demonstrated that the epigenetic silencing of RSPO2 is a mid-late event in the adenoma to carcinoma sequence.</p> <p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These results highlight the potential role of DNA methylation as a driver mechanism of CRC and open up the venue for the identification of novel therapeutic windows based on the epigenetic reactivation of certain tumour suppressor genes.</p>
Feasibility and acceptability of personalized breast cancer screening (DECIDO Study): A single-arm proof-of-concept trial
<p>The aim of this study was to assess the acceptability and feasibility of offering risk-based breast cancer screening and its integration into regular clinical practice. A single-arm proof-of-concept trial was conducted with a sample of 387 women aged 40–50 years residing in the city of Lleida (Spain). The study intervention consisted of breast cancer risk estimation, risk communication and screening recommendations, and a follow-up. A polygenic risk score with 83 single nucleotide polymorphisms was used to update the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium risk model and estimate the 5-year absolute risk of breast cancer. The women expressed a positive attitude towards varying the frequency of breast screening according to individual risk and, especially, more frequently inviting women at higher-than-average risk. A lower intensity screening for women at lower risk was not as welcome, although half of the participants would accept it. Knowledge of the benefits and harms of breast screening was low, especially with regard to false positives and overdiagnosis. The women expressed a high understanding of individual risk and screening recommendations. The participants' intention to participate in risk-based screening and satisfaction at 1-year were very high.</p>
Genetically adjusted PSA levels for prostate cancer screening
<p>Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for prostate cancer remains controversial because it increases overdiagnosis and overtreatment of clinically insignificant tumors. Accounting for genetic determinants of constitutive, non-cancer PSA variation has potential to improve screening utility. We discovered 128 genome-wide significant associations (<em>P</em><5×10<sup>-8</sup>) in a multi-ancestry GWAS meta-analysis of 95,768 men and developed a PSA polygenic score (PGS<sub>PSA</sub>) that explains 9.61% of constitutive PSA variation. Here we provide full GWAS summary statistics for the multi-ancestry meta-analysis and ancestry-stratified summary statistics for ~1.2 million variants used to derive a genome-wide PGS<sub>PSA.</sub></p>
Testing an Implementation Science Tool to Increase Cervical Cancer Screening in Mombasa, Kenya
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT03514459. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.
Incorporating Veterans' Preferences Into Lung Cancer Screening Decisions
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT02899754. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 5.
An Evaluation of a Multi-target Stool DNA (Mt-sDNA) Test, Cologuard, for CRC Screening in Individuals Aged 45-49 and at Average Risk for Development of Colorectal Cancer: Act Now
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT03728348. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.
Self-Testing Options in the Era of Primary HPV Screening for Cervical Cancer Trial
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04679675. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 1. Publications: 2.
Promoting Informed Decisions About Cancer Screening in Older Adults
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT03959696. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 1. Publications: 2.
Helping Patients and Providers Make Better Decisions About Colorectal Cancer Screening
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04683731. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.
Paired Promotion of Colorectal Cancer and Social Determinants of Health Screening
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04585919. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 1. Publications: 2.
Assessing consistency across functional screening datasets in cancer cells
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Data from: Screening familial risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Feasibility and acceptability of personalized breast cancer screening (DECIDO Study): A single-arm proof-of-concept trial
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Nationwide real-world implementation of AI for cancer detection in population-based mammography screening (PRAIM)
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Artificial Intelligence (AI), in the Breast Cancer Screening Programme Questionnaire and Data
<p>The goal of this study is to gain insight into the level of trust of women in the Netherlands, in the decisions made by radiologists with the support of different applications of Artificial Intelligence (AI), in the Breast Cancer Screening Programme. Gaining insight into your level of trust in the decisions made by radiologists and AI regarding whether you have breast cancer or not, is of high importance, as this will help to anticipate which steps can be taken by hospitals and software developers, in the near future. The survey consists of 10 introductory questions and 42 statements and takes approximately 10 minutes to complete.</p> <p> </p>
Commonly asked questions for lung cancer screening
<p class="MsoNormal"><strong>Introduction.</strong> Lung cancer screening (LCS) can reduce lung cancer mortality; however, poor understanding of results may impact patient experience and follow-up. We sought to determine whether an informational handout accompanying LCS results can improve patient-reported outcomes and adherence to follow-up.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><strong>Study Design.</strong> This was a prospective alternating intervention pilot trial of a handout to accompany LCS results delivery.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><strong>Setting/Participants.</strong> Patients undergoing LCS in a multisite program over a 6-month period received a mailing containing either: 1) a standardized form letter of LCS results (control) or 2) the LCS results letter and the handout (intervention).</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><strong>Intervention.</strong> A two-sided informational handout on commonly asked questions after LCS was created through iterative mixed-methods evaluation with both LCS patients and providers.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><strong>Outcome Measures.</strong> The primary outcomes of 1)patient understanding of LCS results, 2)correct identification of next steps in screening, and 3)patient distress were measured through survey. Adherence to recommended follow-up after LCS was determined through chart review. Outcomes were compared between the intervention and control group using generalized estimating equations.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><strong>Results.</strong> 389 patients were eligible and enrolled with survey responses from 230 participants (59% response rate). We found no differences in understanding of results, identification of next steps in follow-up or distress but did find higher levels of knowledge and understanding on questions assessing individual components of LCS in the intervention group. Follow-up adherence was overall similar between the two arms, though was higher in the intervention group among those with positive findings (p=0.007).</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><strong>Conclusions.</strong> There were no differences in self-reported outcomes between the groups or overall follow-up adherence. Those receiving the intervention did report greater understanding and knowledge of key LCS components, and those with positive results had a higher rate of follow-up. This may represent a feasible component of a multi-level intervention to address knowledge and follow-up for LCS.</p>
Acceptance of medical AI in skin cancer screening: A Choice-based Conjoint Survey
<p><strong>Background</strong>: There is a great interest in using artificial intelligence (AI) to screen for skin cancer. This is fueled by a rising incidence of skin cancer and an increasing scarcity of trained dermatologists. AI systems, capable of identifying melanoma, could save lives, enable immediate access to screenings, reduce unnecessary care and healthcare costs. While such AI-based systems are useful from a public health perspective, past research has shown that individual patients are very hesitant about being examined by an AI system. <strong>Objective</strong>: The aim of the present study was twofold. First, to determine how important the attributes provider (in-person physician, physician via teledermatology, AI, vs. personalized AI), costs of screening (free, 10€, 25€, vs. 40€) and waiting time (immediate, 1 day, 1 week, 4 weeks) were for patients’ choices of a particular mode of skin cancer screening. Second, to investigate whether sociodemographic characteristics, especially, age, were systematically related to participants’ individual choices. <strong>Methods</strong>: The study used choice-based conjoint-analysis to examine the acceptance of medical AI for a skin cancer screening from the patient's perspective. Participants responded to twelve choice sets, each containing three screening-variants, where each variant was described through attributes; provider, costs and waiting time. Furthermore, sociodemographic characteristics (age, gender, income, job status, educational background) were assessed. <strong>Results</strong>: 126 (33%) respondents completed the online survey. The results from the conjoint analysis showed that the three attributes were more or less equal important for the participant’s choices, with provider being the most important. Inspecting the individual part worths showed that treatment by a physician was most preferred, followed by e-consultation with a physician and personalized AI. The three AI levels scored significantly lower. Concerning the relationship between sociodemographic characteristics and relative importances we found, that only age showed a significant positive association to the important of the attribute provider (r = 0.21; p < .02). Younger participants put a lesser importance on the provider than older participants. All other correlations were not significant. <strong>Conclusions</strong>: The present study adds to the growing body of research using choice-experiments to investigate the acceptance of artificial intelligence in health contexts. Future studies need to explore the reasons <em>why</em> AI is accepted or rejected and whether sociodemographic characteristics are associated this decision.</p> <p> </p>
"iDCNNPred: An interpretable deep learning model for virtual screening and identification of PI3Ka inhibitors against triple-negative breast cancer"
<p>In this study, we proposed a novel interpretable deep convolutional neural network prediction (iDCNNPred) system for classifying molecular bioactivity and identifying predictive potential inhibitors for the PI3Ka isoform protein. This system utilizes 2D molecular image representation as input features, instead of traditional molecular fingerprints or descriptors.</p> <p><strong>The datasets used for model construction, prediction and screening of chemical library are provided in this uploaded data in <a href="../api/records/10947610/draft/files/Molecular_image_Custom_DCNN_datasets.zip/content" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Molecular_image_Custom_DCNN_datasets.zip</a> file for Custom-DCNN models and <a href="../api/records/10947610/draft/files/Molecular_image_pre_trained_datasets.zip/content" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Molecular_image_pre_trained_datasets.zip</a> file for Pre-trained fine-tuned models. </strong><strong>The final run of models results given in file <a href="../api/records/10947610/draft/files/Custom_DCNN_Pre_trained_models.zip/content" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Custom_DCNN_Pre_trained_models.zip</a></strong></p>
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.