Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 14668234

The MUSC DNA Microarray Database.

Gary L Argraves·Jeremy L Barth·W Scott Argraves
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

SUMMARY: The Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) DNA Microarray Database is a web-accessible archive of DNA microarray data. The database was developed using the DNA microarray project/data management system, micro ArrayDB. Annotations for each DNA microarray project and associated cRNA target information are stored in a MySQL relational database and linked to array hybridization data (raw and normalized). At the discretion of investigators, data are placed into the public domain where they can be interrogated and downloaded through a web browser. In addition to serving as an online resource of gene expression data, the MUSC DNA Microarray Database is a model for other academic DNA microarray data repositories. AVAILABILITY: Browsing and downloading of MUSC DNA Microarray Database information can be done after registration at http://proteogenomics.musc.edu/pss/home.php.

Explore related subjects

Academic Medical CentersDatabase Management SystemsDatabases, Nucleic AcidInformation DisseminationInformation Storage and RetrievalInternetOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisSouth CarolinaJournal ArticleResearch Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Gary L Argraves, Jeremy L Barth, W Scott Argraves. 2003-12-12. The MUSC DNA Microarray Database.. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics%2Fbtg325

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2005

University-based science and biotechnology products: defining the boundaries of intellectual property.

The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have long relied on patenting as the primary means of allocating ownership and control over new discoveries. Yet, patent protection is a double-edged sword that has major implications for the future of innovation in biomedical science in the United States. Excessive "upstream" patenting of genes and molecular targets could hinder further research by creating a need for expensive and inefficient cross-licensing. However, limiting such basic science patenting could allow private entities to use the results of years of costly publicly funded research to produce and market lucrative products without compensating university- or public sector-based innovators. Academic and other nonprofit research centers would, therefore, be deprived of revenue for pursuing novel therapeutics or other seminal research work that may not be patentable. Recent court cases illustrate the inherent conflicts in allocating ownership and control of basic biomedical discoveries. Several options exist to avoid the complex problems of overlapping basic science patents while still rewarding pivotal discoveries and encouraging further innovation. These include establishing basic science patent pools and mandating arbitration arrangements that would assign credit and royalties for biotechnology innovations that depend on prior research that was performed, financed, or both in the public sector.

Academic Medical Centers↗
PubMed2005

Lipid management in patients with unstable angina pectoris and non-ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (from CRUSADE).

We sought to characterize current patterns of care for lipid testing and management in a sample of patients in the Can Rapid Risk Stratification of Unstable Angina Patients Suppress Adverse Outcomes With Early Implementation of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines Quality Improvement Initiative and to determine the most important predictors of lipid testing and management at discharge. We evaluated data from >40,000 patients who had been hospitalized in United States hospitals from March 2000 to March 2003 and had a principal discharge diagnosis of unstable angina pectoris or non-ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction as part of the initiative.

Academic Medical Centers↗
PubMed2005

Do the Brain Attack Coalition's criteria for stroke centers improve care for ischemic stroke?

BACKGROUND: In 2000, the Brain Attack Coalition (BAC) recommended 11 major criteria for the establishment of primary stroke centers. The BAC relied heavily on expert opinion because evidence supporting the criteria was sparse. OBJECTIVE: To assess primary stroke center elements, based on the criteria proposed by the BAC, with a questionnaire at 34 academic medical centers. METHODS: Patient characteristics and outcomes were collected for all patients (n = 16,853) admitted with ischemic stroke to each hospital from 1999 to 2001. Stroke center elements were evaluated as predictors of treatment with tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) and outcomes after adjustment for patient characteristics. RESULTS: The in-hospital mortality rate was 6.3% (n = 1,062), and 2.4% (n = 399) of patients received tPA. None of the 11 major stroke center elements was associated with decreased in-hospital mortality or increased frequency of discharge home. However, four elements predicted increased tPA use, including written care protocols, integrated emergency medical services, organized emergency departments, and continuing medical/public education in stroke (each odds ratio [OR] > 2.0, p < 0.05). Use of tPA also tended to be greater at centers with an acute stroke team, a stroke unit, or rapid neuroimaging (each OR > 2.0, p < 0.10). Institutions with a greater number of major stroke center elements used tPA more frequently. CONCLUSIONS: Of the 11 stroke center elements recommended by the BAC, 7 were associated with increased tPA use. Institutions with a greater number of these seven features used tPA more often, suggesting these key elements may be most important for primary stroke center designation, at least in terms of identifying centers that deliver IV tPA frequently.

Academic Medical Centers↗