@article{JiangOronClarketal.2016,
  author    = {Jiang, Yuxiang and Oron, Tal Ronnen and Clark, Wyatt T. and Bankapur, Asma R. and D'Andrea, Daniel and Lepore, Rosalba and Funk, Christopher S. and Kahanda, Indika and Verspoor, Karin M. and Ben-Hur, Asa and Koo, Da Chen Emily and Penfold-Brown, Duncan and Shasha, Dennis and Youngs, Noah and Bonneau, Richard and Lin, Alexandra and Sahraeian, Sayed M. E. and Martelli, Pier Luigi and Profiti, Giuseppe and Casadio, Rita and Cao, Renzhi and Zhong, Zhaolong and Cheng, Jianlin and Altenhoff, Adrian and Skunca, Nives and Dessimoz, Christophe and Dogan, Tunca and Hakala, Kai and Kaewphan, Suwisa and Mehryary, Farrokh and Salakoski, Tapio and Ginter, Filip and Fang, Hai and Smithers, Ben and Oates, Matt and Gough, Julian and T{\"o}r{\"o}nen, Petri and Koskinen, Patrik and Holm, Liisa and Chen, Ching-Tai and Hsu, Wen-Lian and Bryson, Kevin and Cozzetto, Domenico and Minneci, Federico and Jones, David T. and Chapman, Samuel and BKC, Dukka and Khan, Ishita K. and Kihara, Daisuke and Ofer, Dan and Rappoport, Nadav and Stern, Amos and Cibrian-Uhalte, Elena and Denny, Paul and Foulger, Rebecca E. and Hieta, Reija and Legge, Duncan and Lovering, Ruth C. and Magrane, Michele and Melidoni, Anna N. and Mutowo-Meullenet, Prudence and Pichler, Klemens and Shypitsyna, Aleksandra and Li, Biao and Zakeri, Pooya and ElShal, Sarah and Tranchevent, L{\´e}on-Charles and Das, Sayoni and Dawson, Natalie L. and Lee, David and Lees, Jonathan G. and Sillitoe, Ian and Bhat, Prajwal and Nepusz, Tam{\´a}s and Romero, Alfonso E. and Sasidharan, Rajkumar and Yang, Haixuan and Paccanaro, Alberto and Gillis, Jesse and Sede{\~n}o-Cort{\´e}s, Adriana E. and Pavlidis, Paul and Feng, Shou and Cejuela, Juan M. and Goldberg, Tatyana and Hamp, Tobias and Richter, Lothar and Salamov, Asaf and Gabaldon, Toni and Marcet-Houben, Marina and Supek, Fran and Gong, Qingtian and Ning, Wei and Zhou, Yuanpeng and Tian, Weidong and Falda, Marco and Fontana, Paolo and Lavezzo, Enrico and Toppo, Stefano and Ferrari, Carlo and Giollo, Manuel and Piovesan, Damiano and Tosatto, Silvio C. E. and del Pozo, Angela and Fern{\´a}ndez, Jos{\´e} M. and Maietta, Paolo and Valencia, Alfonso and Tress, Michael L. and Benso, Alfredo and Di Carlo, Stefano and Politano, Gianfranco and Savino, Alessandro and Rehman, Hafeez Ur and Re, Matteo and Mesiti, Marco and Valentini, Giorgio and Bargsten, Joachim W. and van Dijk, Aalt D. J. and Gemovic, Branislava and Glisic, Sanja and Perovic, Vladmir and Veljkovic, Veljko and Almeida-e-Silva, Danillo C. and Vencio, Ricardo Z. N. and Sharan, Malvika and Vogel, J{\"o}rg and Kansakar, Lakesh and Zhang, Shanshan and Vucetic, Slobodan and Wang, Zheng and Sternberg, Michael J. E. and Wass, Mark N. and Huntley, Rachael P. and Martin, Maria J. and O'Donovan, Claire and Robinson, Peter N. and Moreau, Yves and Tramontano, Anna and Babbitt, Patricia C. and Brenner, Steven E. and Linial, Michal and Orengo, Christine A. and Rost, Burkhard and Greene, Casey S. and Mooney, Sean D. and Friedberg, Iddo and Radivojac, Predrag and Veljkovic, Nevena},
  title     = {An expanded evaluation of protein function prediction methods shows an improvement in accuracy},
  series = {Genome Biology},
  volume    = {17},
  journal   = {Genome Biology},
  number    = {184},
  doi       = {10.1186/s13059-016-1037-6},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-166293},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Background A major bottleneck in our understanding of the molecular underpinnings of life is the assignment of function to proteins. While molecular experiments provide the most reliable annotation of proteins, their relatively low throughput and restricted purview have led to an increasing role for computational function prediction. However, assessing methods for protein function prediction and tracking progress in the field remain challenging. Results We conducted the second critical assessment of functional annotation (CAFA), a timed challenge to assess computational methods that automatically assign protein function. We evaluated 126 methods from 56 research groups for their ability to predict biological functions using Gene Ontology and gene-disease associations using Human Phenotype Ontology on a set of 3681 proteins from 18 species. CAFA2 featured expanded analysis compared with CAFA1, with regards to data set size, variety, and assessment metrics. To review progress in the field, the analysis compared the best methods from CAFA1 to those of CAFA2. Conclusions The top-performing methods in CAFA2 outperformed those from CAFA1. This increased accuracy can be attributed to a combination of the growing number of experimental annotations and improved methods for function prediction. The assessment also revealed that the definition of top-performing algorithms is ontology specific, that different performance metrics can be used to probe the nature of accurate predictions, and the relative diversity of predictions in the biological process and human phenotype ontologies. While there was methodological improvement between CAFA1 and CAFA2, the interpretation of results and usefulness of individual methods remain context-dependent.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{AlbertAndreAnghinolfietal.2019,
  author    = {Albert, A. and Andr{\´e}, M. and Anghinolfi, M. and Anton, G. and Ardid, M. and Aubert, J.-J. and Aublin, J. and Avgitas, T. and Baret, B. and Barrios-Mart{\´i}t, J. and Basa, S. and Belhorma, B. and Bertin, V. and Biagi, S. and Bormuth, R. and Boumaaza, J and Bourret, S. and Bouwhuis, M. C. and Br{\^a}nzas, H. and Bruijn, R. and Brunner, J. and Busto, J. and Capone, A. and Caramete, L. and Carr, J. and Celli, S. and Chabab, M. and Cherkaoui El Moursli, R. and Chiarusi, T. and Circella, M. and Coelho, J. A. B. and Coleiro, A. and Colomer, M and Coniglione, R. and Costantini, H. and Coyle, P. and Creusot, A. and D{\´i}az, A. F. and Deschamps, A. and Distefano, C. and Di Palma, I. and Domi, A. and Donzaud, C. and Dornic, D. and Drouhin, D. and Eberl, T. and El Bojaddaini, I. and El Khayati, N. and Els{\"a}sser, D. and Enzenh{\"o}fer, A. and Ettahiri, A. and Fassi, F. and Felis, I. and Fermani, P. and Ferrara, G. and Fusco, L. A. and Gay, P. and Glotin, H. and Gr{\´e}goire, T. and Gracia Ruiz, R. and Graf, K. and Hallmann, S. and van Haren, H. and Heijboer, A. J. and Hello, Y. and Hern{\´a}ndez-Rey, J. J. and H{\"o}ßl, J. and Hofest{\"a}dt, J. and Illuminati, G. and de Jong, M. and Jongen, M. and Kadler, M. and Kalekin, O. and Katz, U. and Khan-Chowdhury, N. R. and Kouchner, A. and Kreter, M. and Kreykenbohm, I. and Kulikovskiy, V. and Lachaud, C. and Lahmann, R. and Lef{\`e}vre, D. and Leonora, E. and Levi, G. and Lotze, M. and Loucatos, S. and Marcelin, M. and Margiotta, A. and Marinelli, A. and Mart{\´i}nez-Mora, J. A. and Mele, R. and Melis, K. and Migliozzi, P. and Moussa, A. and Navas, S. and Nezri, E. and Nu{\~n}ez, A. and Organokov, M. and Pavalas, G. E. and Pellegrino, C. and Piattelli, P. and Popa, V. and Pradier, T. and Quinn, L. and Racca, C. and Randazzo, N. and Riccobene, G. and S{\´a}nchez-Losa, A. and Salda{\~n}a, M. and Salvadori, I. and Samtleben, D. F. E. and Sanguineti, M. and Sapienza, P. and Sch{\"u}ssler, F. and Spurio, M. and Stolarczyk, Th. and Taiuti, M. and Tayalati, Y. and Trovato, A. and Vallage, B. and Van Elewyck, V. and Versari, F. and Vivolo, D. and Wilms, J. and Zaborov, D. and Zornoza, J. D. and Z{\´u}{\~n}iga, J.},
  title     = {The cosmic ray shadow of the Moon observed with the ANTARES neutrino telescope},
  series = {European Physical Journal C},
  volume    = {78},
  journal   = {European Physical Journal C},
  doi       = {10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-6451-3},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-227802},
  pages     = {1-9},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {One of the main objectives of the ANTARES telescope is the search for point- like neutrino sources. Both the pointing accuracy and the angular resolution of the detector are important in this context and a reliableway to evaluate this performance is needed. In order to measure the pointing accuracy of the detector, one possibility is to study the shadow of the Moon, i. e. the deficit of the atmospheric muon flux from the direction of the Moon induced by the absorption of cosmic rays. Analysing the data taken between 2007 and 2016, theMoon shadow is observed with 3.5s statistical significance. The detector angular resolution for downwardgoing muons is 0.73. +/- 0.14.. The resulting pointing performance is consistent with the expectations. An independent check of the telescope pointing accuracy is realised with the data collected by a shower array detector onboard of a ship temporarily moving around the ANTARES location.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{VigoritoKuchenbaeckerBeesleyetal.2016,
  author    = {Vigorito, Elena and Kuchenbaecker, Karoline B. and Beesley, Jonathan and Adlard, Julian and Agnarsson, Bjarni A. and Andrulis, Irene L. and Arun, Banu K. and Barjhoux, Laure and Belotti, Muriel and Benitez, Javier and Berger, Andreas and Bojesen, Anders and Bonanni, Bernardo and Brewer, Carole and Caldes, Trinidad and Caligo, Maria A. and Campbell, Ian and Chan, Salina B. and Claes, Kathleen B. M. and Cohn, David E. and Cook, Jackie and Daly, Mary B. and Damiola, Francesca and Davidson, Rosemarie and de Pauw, Antoine and Delnatte, Capucine and Diez, Orland and Domchek, Susan M. and Dumont, Martine and Durda, Katarzyna and Dworniczak, Bernd and Easton, Douglas F. and Eccles, Diana and Ardnor, Christina Edwinsdotter and Eeles, Ros and Ejlertsen, Bent and Ellis, Steve and Evans, D. Gareth and Feliubadalo, Lidia and Fostira, Florentia and Foulkes, William D. and Friedman, Eitan and Frost, Debra and Gaddam, Pragna and Ganz, Patricia A. and Garber, Judy and Garcia-Barberan, Vanesa and Gauthier-Villars, Marion and Gehrig, Andrea and Gerdes, Anne-Marie and Giraud, Sophie and Godwin, Andrew K. and Goldgar, David E. and Hake, Christopher R. and Hansen, Thomas V. O. and Healey, Sue and Hodgson, Shirley and Hogervorst, Frans B. L. and Houdayer, Claude and Hulick, Peter J. and Imyanitov, Evgeny N. and Isaacs, Claudine and Izatt, Louise and Izquierdo, Angel and Jacobs, Lauren and Jakubowska, Anna and Janavicius, Ramunas and Jaworska-Bieniek, Katarzyna and Jensen, Uffe Birk and John, Esther M. and Vijai, Joseph and Karlan, Beth Y. and Kast, Karin and Khan, Sofia and Kwong, Ava and Laitman, Yael and Lester, Jenny and Lesueur, Fabienne and Liljegren, Annelie and Lubinski, Jan and Mai, Phuong L. and Manoukian, Siranoush and Mazoyer, Sylvie and Meindl, Alfons and Mensenkamp, Arjen R. and Montagna, Marco and Nathanson, Katherine L. and Neuhausen, Susan L. and Nevanlinna, Heli and Niederacher, Dieter and Olah, Edith and Olopade, Olufunmilayo I. and Ong, Kai-ren and Osorio, Ana and Park, Sue Kyung and Paulsson-Karlsson, Ylva and Pedersen, Inge Sokilde and Peissel, Bernard and Peterlongo, Paolo and Pfeiler, Georg and Phelan, Catherine M. and Piedmonte, Marion and Poppe, Bruce and Pujana, Miquel Angel and Radice, Paolo and Rennert, Gad and Rodriguez, Gustavo C. and Rookus, Matti A. and Ross, Eric A. and Schmutzler, Rita Katharina and Simard, Jacques and Singer, Christian F. and Slavin, Thomas P. and Soucy, Penny and Southey, Melissa and Steinemann, Doris and Stoppa-Lyonnet, Dominique and Sukiennicki, Grzegorz and Sutter, Christian and Szabo, Csilla I. and Tea, Muy-Kheng and Teixeira, Manuel R. and Teo, Soo-Hwang and Terry, Mary Beth and Thomassen, Mads and Tibiletti, Maria Grazia and Tihomirova, Laima and Tognazzo, Silvia and van Rensburg, Elizabeth J. and Varesco, Liliana and Varon-Mateeva, Raymonda and Vratimos, Athanassios and Weitzel, Jeffrey N. and McGuffog, Lesley and Kirk, Judy and Toland, Amanda Ewart and Hamann, Ute and Lindor, Noralane and Ramus, Susan J. and Greene, Mark H. and Couch, Fergus J. and Offit, Kenneth and Pharoah, Paul D. P. and Chenevix-Trench, Georgia and Antoniou, Antonis C.},
  title     = {Fine-Scale Mapping at 9p22.2 Identifies Candidate Causal Variants That Modify Ovarian Cancer Risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers},
  series = {PLoS ONE},
  volume    = {11},
  journal   = {PLoS ONE},
  number    = {7},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0158801},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-166869},
  pages     = {e0158801},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Population-based genome wide association studies have identified a locus at 9p22.2 associated with ovarian cancer risk, which also modifies ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. We conducted fine-scale mapping at 9p22.2 to identify potential causal variants in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Genotype data were available for 15,252 (2,462 ovarian cancer cases) BRCA1 and 8,211 (631 ovarian cancer cases) BRCA2 mutation carriers. Following genotype imputation, ovarian cancer associations were assessed for 4,873 and 5,020 SNPs in BRCA1 and BRCA 2 mutation carriers respectively, within a retrospective cohort analytical framework. In BRCA1 mutation carriers one set of eight correlated candidate causal variants for ovarian cancer risk modification was identified (top SNP rs10124837, HR: 0.73, 95\%CI: 0.68 to 0.79, p-value 2× 10-16). These variants were located up to 20 kb upstream of BNC2. In BRCA2 mutation carriers one region, up to 45 kb upstream of BNC2, and containing 100 correlated SNPs was identified as candidate causal (top SNP rs62543585, HR: 0.69, 95\%CI: 0.59 to 0.80, p-value 1.0 × 10-6). The candidate causal in BRCA1 mutation carriers did not include the strongest associated variant at this locus in the general population. In sum, we identified a set of candidate causal variants in a region that encompasses the BNC2 transcription start site. The ovarian cancer association at 9p22.2 may be mediated by different variants in BRCA1 mutation carriers and in the general population. Thus, potentially different mechanisms may underlie ovarian cancer risk for mutation carriers and the general population.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{HoppeKhanMeybohmetal.2023,
  author    = {Hoppe, K. and Khan, E. and Meybohm, P. and Riese, T.},
  title     = {Mechanical power of ventilation and driving pressure: two undervalued parameters for pre extracorporeal membrane oxygenation ventilation and during daily management?},
  series = {Critical Care},
  volume    = {27},
  journal   = {Critical Care},
  doi       = {10.1186/s13054-023-04375-z},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-357181},
  year      = {2023},
  abstract  = {The current ARDS guidelines highly recommend lung protective ventilation which include plateau pressure (Pplat < 30 cm H\(_2\)O), positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP > 5 cm H2O) and tidal volume (Vt of 6 ml/kg) of predicted body weight. In contrast, the ELSO guidelines suggest the evaluation of an indication of veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) due to hypoxemic or hypercapnic respiratory failure or as bridge to lung transplantation. Finally, these recommendations remain a wide range of scope of interpretation. However, particularly patients with moderate-severe to severe ARDS might benefit from strict adherence to lung protective ventilation strategies. Subsequently, we discuss whether extended physiological ventilation parameter analysis might be relevant for indication of ECMO support and can be implemented during the daily routine evaluation of ARDS patients. Particularly, this viewpoint focus on driving pressure and mechanical power.},
  language  = {en}
}