15-90761095-A-G
Variant names:
Variant summary
Our verdict is Benign. Variant got -21 ACMG points: 0P and 21B. BP4_StrongBP6_Very_StrongBP7BS1BS2
The NM_000057.4(BLM):āc.1722A>Gā(p.Leu574Leu) variant causes a synonymous change involving the alteration of a non-conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.00609 in 1,550,562 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, including 78 homozygotes. In-silico tool predicts a benign outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Likely benign (ā ā ).
Frequency
Genomes: š 0.0045 ( 5 hom., cov: 32)
Exomes š: 0.0063 ( 73 hom. )
Consequence
BLM
NM_000057.4 synonymous
NM_000057.4 synonymous
Scores
2
Clinical Significance
Conservation
PhyloP100: 0.378
Genes affected
BLM (HGNC:1058): (BLM RecQ like helicase) The Bloom syndrome is an autosomal recessive disorder characterized by growth deficiency, microcephaly and immunodeficiency among others. It is caused by homozygous or compound heterozygous mutation in the gene encoding DNA helicase RecQ protein on chromosome 15q26. This Bloom-associated helicase unwinds a variety of DNA substrates including Holliday junction, and is involved in several pathways contributing to the maintenance of genome stability. Identification of pathogenic Bloom variants is required for heterozygote testing in at-risk families. [provided by RefSeq, May 2020]
Genome browser will be placed here
ACMG classification
Classification made for transcript
Verdict is Benign. Variant got -21 ACMG points.
BP4
Computational evidence support a benign effect (BayesDel_noAF=-0.82).
BP6
Variant 15-90761095-A-G is Benign according to our data. Variant chr15-90761095-A-G is described in ClinVar as [Likely_benign]. Clinvar id is 136511.Status of the report is criteria_provided_multiple_submitters_no_conflicts, 2 stars. Variant chr15-90761095-A-G is described in Lovd as [Benign]. Variant chr15-90761095-A-G is described in Lovd as [Likely_benign].
BP7
Synonymous conserved (PhyloP=0.378 with no splicing effect.
BS1
Variant frequency is greater than expected in population sas. gnomad4 allele frequency = 0.00447 (681/152288) while in subpopulation SAS AF= 0.0245 (118/4818). AF 95% confidence interval is 0.0209. There are 5 homozygotes in gnomad4. There are 345 alleles in male gnomad4 subpopulation. Median coverage is 32. This position pass quality control queck.
BS2
High Homozygotes in GnomAd4 at 5 AR gene
Transcripts
RefSeq
Ensembl
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes AF: 0.00447 AC: 680AN: 152170Hom.: 5 Cov.: 32
GnomAD3 genomes
AF:
AC:
680
AN:
152170
Hom.:
Cov.:
32
Gnomad AFR
AF:
Gnomad AMI
AF:
Gnomad AMR
AF:
Gnomad ASJ
AF:
Gnomad EAS
AF:
Gnomad SAS
AF:
Gnomad FIN
AF:
Gnomad MID
AF:
Gnomad NFE
AF:
Gnomad OTH
AF:
GnomAD3 exomes AF: 0.00631 AC: 1244AN: 196992Hom.: 16 AF XY: 0.00716 AC XY: 752AN XY: 105042
GnomAD3 exomes
AF:
AC:
1244
AN:
196992
Hom.:
AF XY:
AC XY:
752
AN XY:
105042
Gnomad AFR exome
AF:
Gnomad AMR exome
AF:
Gnomad ASJ exome
AF:
Gnomad EAS exome
AF:
Gnomad SAS exome
AF:
Gnomad FIN exome
AF:
Gnomad NFE exome
AF:
Gnomad OTH exome
AF:
GnomAD4 exome AF: 0.00627 AC: 8769AN: 1398274Hom.: 73 Cov.: 31 AF XY: 0.00679 AC XY: 4687AN XY: 690048
GnomAD4 exome
AF:
AC:
8769
AN:
1398274
Hom.:
Cov.:
31
AF XY:
AC XY:
4687
AN XY:
690048
Gnomad4 AFR exome
AF:
Gnomad4 AMR exome
AF:
Gnomad4 ASJ exome
AF:
Gnomad4 EAS exome
AF:
Gnomad4 SAS exome
AF:
Gnomad4 FIN exome
AF:
Gnomad4 NFE exome
AF:
Gnomad4 OTH exome
AF:
GnomAD4 genome AF: 0.00447 AC: 681AN: 152288Hom.: 5 Cov.: 32 AF XY: 0.00463 AC XY: 345AN XY: 74470
GnomAD4 genome
AF:
AC:
681
AN:
152288
Hom.:
Cov.:
32
AF XY:
AC XY:
345
AN XY:
74470
Gnomad4 AFR
AF:
Gnomad4 AMR
AF:
Gnomad4 ASJ
AF:
Gnomad4 EAS
AF:
Gnomad4 SAS
AF:
Gnomad4 FIN
AF:
Gnomad4 NFE
AF:
Gnomad4 OTH
AF:
Alfa
AF:
Hom.:
Bravo
AF:
Asia WGS
AF:
AC:
31
AN:
3478
ClinVar
Significance: Benign/Likely benign
Submissions summary: Benign:15
Revision: criteria provided, multiple submitters, no conflicts
LINK: link
Submissions by phenotype
Bloom syndrome Benign:6
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), Labcorp | Feb 03, 2025 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | KCCC/NGS Laboratory, Kuwait Cancer Control Center | Jul 07, 2023 | - - |
Benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Natera, Inc. | Jun 13, 2017 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina | Jan 13, 2018 | This variant was observed in the ICSL laboratory as part of a predisposition screen in an ostensibly healthy population. It had not been previously curated by ICSL or reported in the Human Gene Mutation Database (HGMD: prior to June 1st, 2018), and was therefore a candidate for classification through an automated scoring system. Utilizing variant allele frequency, disease prevalence and penetrance estimates, and inheritance mode, an automated score was calculated to assess if this variant is too frequent to cause the disease. Based on the score and internal cut-off values, a variant classified as benign is not then subjected to further curation. The score for this variant resulted in a classification of benign for this disease. - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Genome-Nilou Lab | Jul 01, 2021 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | ARUP Laboratories, Molecular Genetics and Genomics, ARUP Laboratories | Jun 14, 2023 | - - |
not specified Benign:5
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Quest Diagnostics Nichols Institute San Juan Capistrano | May 06, 2021 | - - |
Benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Genome Diagnostics Laboratory, Amsterdam University Medical Center | - | - - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Eurofins Ntd Llc (ga) | Aug 12, 2014 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | GeneDx | Oct 04, 2013 | This variant is considered likely benign or benign based on one or more of the following criteria: it is a conservative change, it occurs at a poorly conserved position in the protein, it is predicted to be benign by multiple in silico algorithms, and/or has population frequency not consistent with disease. - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Women's Health and Genetics/Laboratory Corporation of America, LabCorp | Dec 25, 2017 | Variant summary: The c.1722A>G (p.Leu574=) in BLM gene is a synonymous change that involves a non-conserved nucleotide. 3/5 programs in Alamut predict that this variant does not affect splicing, however no functional studies supporting this notion were published at the time of evaluation. The variant is present in control dataset of gnomAD at a frequency of 0.0062 (1384/223222 chrs tested, including 16 homozygotes), predominantly in individuals of South Asian descent (0.026; 475/18298 chrs). These frequencies exceed the estimated maximum allele frequency for a pathogenic allele in this gene (0.0035). The variant of interest has been reported as a polymorphism via published reports (German_2007), and is cited as Benign by a reputable databases/clinical laboratories. Taking together, the variant was classified as Benign. - |
not provided Benign:2
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | not provided | Breakthrough Genomics, Breakthrough Genomics | - | - - |
Likely benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Clinical Genetics DNA and cytogenetics Diagnostics Lab, Erasmus MC, Erasmus Medical Center | - | - - |
BLM-related disorder Benign:1
Benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | PreventionGenetics, part of Exact Sciences | Aug 27, 2019 | This variant is classified as benign based on ACMG/AMP sequence variant interpretation guidelines (Richards et al. 2015 PMID: 25741868, with internal and published modifications). - |
Hereditary cancer-predisposing syndrome Benign:1
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Ambry Genetics | Sep 29, 2016 | This alteration is classified as likely 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. - |
Computational scores
Source:
Name
Calibrated prediction
Score
Prediction
BayesDel_noAF
Benign
CADD
Benign
DANN
Benign
Splicing
Name
Calibrated prediction
Score
Prediction
SpliceAI score (max)
Details are displayed if max score is > 0.2
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at