13-32336771-G-C
Variant summary
Our verdict is Benign. Variant got -9 ACMG points: 0P and 9B. BP4BP6_Very_Strong
The NM_000059.4(BRCA2):c.2416G>C(p.Asp806His) variant causes a missense change involving the alteration of a non-conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.000049 in 1,610,824 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, with no homozygous occurrence. In-silico tool predicts a benign outcome for this variant. 13/19 in silico tools predict a benign outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Benign (★★★). Another variant affecting the same amino acid position, but resulting in a different missense (i.e. D806E) has been classified as Likely benign.
Frequency
Consequence
NM_000059.4 missense
Scores
Clinical Significance
Conservation
Genome browser will be placed here
ACMG classification
Verdict is Benign. Variant got -9 ACMG points.
Transcripts
RefSeq
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | MANE | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BRCA2 | NM_000059.4 | c.2416G>C | p.Asp806His | missense_variant | 11/27 | ENST00000380152.8 |
Ensembl
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | TSL | MANE | Appris | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BRCA2 | ENST00000380152.8 | c.2416G>C | p.Asp806His | missense_variant | 11/27 | 5 | NM_000059.4 | A2 |
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes AF: 0.00000657 AC: 1AN: 152164Hom.: 0 Cov.: 32
GnomAD3 exomes AF: 0.0000242 AC: 6AN: 247692Hom.: 0 AF XY: 0.0000298 AC XY: 4AN XY: 134160
GnomAD4 exome AF: 0.0000535 AC: 78AN: 1458660Hom.: 0 Cov.: 33 AF XY: 0.0000482 AC XY: 35AN XY: 725418
GnomAD4 genome AF: 0.00000657 AC: 1AN: 152164Hom.: 0 Cov.: 32 AF XY: 0.00 AC XY: 0AN XY: 74338
ClinVar
Submissions by phenotype
not specified Benign:6
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Center for Genomic Medicine, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital | Aug 15, 2023 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Women's Health and Genetics/Laboratory Corporation of America, LabCorp | Dec 10, 2019 | Variant summary: BRCA2 c.2416G>C (p.Asp806His) results in a non-conservative amino acid change in the encoded protein sequence. Three of five in-silico tools predict a benign effect of the variant on protein function. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 2.4e-05 in 247692 control chromosomes (gnomAD). The available data on variant occurrences in the general population are insufficient to allow any conclusion about variant significance. c.2416G>C has been reported in the literature in individuals affected with Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer without strong evidence for causality (e.g. Easton_2007, DeLeener_2008, Mattocks_2010, Kraus_2016, Davis_2018). These reports do not provide unequivocal conclusions about association of the variant with Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer. Co-occurrences with other pathogenic variants have been reported [BRCA1 c.5080G>T, p.Glu1694X (UMD); BRCA1 c.2457_2457delC, p.Ser819=fs (BIC); BRCA2 c.517-2A>G (internal sample)] providing supporting evidence for a benign role. To our knowledge, no experimental evidence demonstrating an impact on protein function has been reported. Six other ClinVar submitters have cited the variant as benign/likely benign, including one expert panel classifed this variant as benign. Based on the evidence outlined above, the variant was classified as benign. - |
Benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Joint Genome Diagnostic Labs from Nijmegen and Maastricht, Radboudumc and MUMC+ | - | - - |
Benign, no assertion criteria provided | research | Research Molecular Genetics Laboratory, Women's College Hospital, University of Toronto | Jan 31, 2014 | - - |
Benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Clinical Genetics Laboratory, Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute | - | - - |
Benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Clinical Genetics DNA and cytogenetics Diagnostics Lab, Erasmus MC, Erasmus Medical Center | - | - - |
Breast-ovarian cancer, familial, susceptibility to, 2 Uncertain:2Benign:3
Benign, reviewed by expert panel | curation | Evidence-based Network for the Interpretation of Germline Mutant Alleles (ENIGMA) | Aug 10, 2015 | IARC class based on posterior probability from multifactorial likelihood analysis, thresholds for class as per Plon et al. 2008 (PMID: 18951446). Class 1 based on posterior probability = 0.00008 - |
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina | May 23, 2017 | This variant was observed as part of a predisposition screen in an ostensibly healthy population. A literature search was performed for the gene, cDNA change, and amino acid change (where applicable). Publications were found based on this search. However, the evidence from the literature, in combination with allele frequency data from public databases where available, was not sufficient to rule this variant in or out of causing disease. Therefore, this variant is classified as a variant of unknown significance. - |
Benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Sharing Clinical Reports Project (SCRP) | Nov 29, 2011 | - - |
Uncertain significance, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Breast Cancer Information Core (BIC) (BRCA2) | May 29, 2002 | - - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | literature only | Counsyl | Jul 30, 2014 | - - |
not provided Benign:3
Likely benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Diagnostic Laboratory, Department of Genetics, University Medical Center Groningen | - | - - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Quest Diagnostics Nichols Institute San Juan Capistrano | Feb 04, 2023 | - - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | GeneDx | Dec 22, 2021 | This variant is associated with the following publications: (PMID: 27633797, 24323938, 15001988, 27616075, 17924331, 21990134) - |
Hereditary cancer-predisposing syndrome Benign:3
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Color Diagnostics, LLC DBA Color Health | Feb 03, 2017 | - - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | curation | Sema4, Sema4 | Jun 03, 2021 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Ambry Genetics | Nov 19, 2014 | This alteration is classified as benign based on a combination of the following: seen in unaffected individuals, population frequency, intact protein function, lack of segregation with disease, co-occurrence, RNA analysis, in silico models, amino acid conservation, lack of disease association in case-control studies, and/or the mechanism of disease or impacted region is inconsistent with a known cause of pathogenicity. - |
Hereditary breast ovarian cancer syndrome Benign:2
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Institute for Biomarker Research, Medical Diagnostic Laboratories, L.L.C. | Jun 17, 2024 | - - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), Labcorp | Feb 01, 2024 | - - |
Fanconi anemia complementation group D1 Uncertain:1
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina | Apr 28, 2017 | This variant was observed as part of a predisposition screen in an ostensibly healthy population. A literature search was performed for the gene, cDNA change, and amino acid change (where applicable). No publications were found based on this search. Allele frequency data from public databases did not allow this variant to be ruled in or out of causing disease. Therefore, this variant is classified as a variant of unknown significance. - |
Breast and/or ovarian cancer Benign:1
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | CHEO Genetics Diagnostic Laboratory, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario | Jul 30, 2019 | - - |
BRCA2-related disorder Benign:1
Likely benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | PreventionGenetics, part of Exact Sciences | Nov 26, 2019 | This variant is classified as likely benign based on ACMG/AMP sequence variant interpretation guidelines (Richards et al. 2015 PMID: 25741868, with internal and published modifications). - |
Malignant tumor of breast Benign:1
Likely benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Sinai Health System | - | The BRCA2 p.Asp806His variant was identified as benign in in silico prediction models (posterior probability and likelihood ratio model) that integrate multiple forms of genetic evidence (Lindor 2012, Easton 2007 ). The variant was also identified in dbSNP (ID: rs56404215) “With other allele”, ClinVar (benign, reviewed by an expert panel (2015); submitters: benign by ENIGMA, Ambry Genetics and SCRP; LIKELY BENIGN BY Quest Diagnostics Nichols Institute San Juan Capistrano, Invitae, GeneDx, Counsyl; and uncertain significance by BIC), Clinvitae (4x), Genesight-COGR (by 3 clinical labs), LOVD 3.0 (1x), UMD-LSDB (4x as 2-likely neutral , co-occurring with pathogenic BRCA1 variant c.5080G>T/p.Glu1649X), BIC Database (7x, clinical importance unknown, classification pending) and not in Cosmic, MutDB, ARUP Laboratories, and Zhejiang Colon Cancer Database. The variant was identified in control databases in 7 of 274058 chromosomes at a frequency of 0.00003 (Genome Aggregation Database Feb 27, 2017). Breakdown of the observations by population include African in 1 of 23966 chromosomes (freq: 0.00004), European Non-Finnish in 6 of 125572 chromosomes (freq: 0.00005), while the variant was not observed in the Other, Latino, Ashkenazi Jewish, East Asian, European Finnish, and South Asian populations. The p.Asp806 residue is not conserved in mammals and computational analyses (PolyPhen-2, SIFT, AlignGVGD, BLOSUM, MutationTaster) provide inconsistent predictions regarding the impact of His to the protein; this information is not very predictive of pathogenicity. The variant occurs outside of the splicing consensus sequence and in silico or computational prediction software programs (SpliceSiteFinder, MaxEntScan, NNSPLICE, GeneSplicer, HumanSpliceFinder) do not predict a difference in splicing. In summary, based on the above information the clinical significance of this variant cannot be determined with certainty at this time although we would lean towards a more benign role for this variant. This variant is classified as likely benign. - |
Computational scores
Source:
Splicing
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at