16-23630293-G-T
Variant summary
Our verdict is Likely benign. Variant got -5 ACMG points: 0P and 5B. BP4_StrongBP6
The NM_024675.4(PALB2):c.1861C>A(p.Pro621Thr) variant causes a missense change involving the alteration of a non-conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.0000103 in 1,461,884 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, with no homozygous occurrence. In-silico tool predicts a benign outcome for this variant. 15/21 in silico tools predict a benign outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Conflicting classifications of pathogenicity (no stars). Another variant affecting the same amino acid position, but resulting in a different missense (i.e. P621L) has been classified as Uncertain significance.
Frequency
Consequence
NM_024675.4 missense
Scores
Clinical Significance
Conservation
Genome browser will be placed here
ACMG classification
Verdict is Likely_benign. Variant got -5 ACMG points.
Transcripts
RefSeq
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | MANE | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PALB2 | NM_024675.4 | c.1861C>A | p.Pro621Thr | missense_variant | 5/13 | ENST00000261584.9 |
Ensembl
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | TSL | MANE | Appris | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PALB2 | ENST00000261584.9 | c.1861C>A | p.Pro621Thr | missense_variant | 5/13 | 1 | NM_024675.4 | P1 |
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes ? Cov.: 32
GnomAD3 exomes AF: 0.0000398 AC: 10AN: 251338Hom.: 0 AF XY: 0.0000442 AC XY: 6AN XY: 135892
GnomAD4 exome AF: 0.0000103 AC: 15AN: 1461884Hom.: 0 Cov.: 32 AF XY: 0.0000110 AC XY: 8AN XY: 727240
GnomAD4 genome ? Cov.: 32
ClinVar
Submissions by phenotype
Hereditary cancer-predisposing syndrome Uncertain:2Benign:1
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Color Diagnostics, LLC DBA Color Health | Jan 24, 2023 | This missense variant replaces proline with threonine at codon 621 of the PALB2 protein. Computational prediction suggests that this variant may not impact protein structure and function (internally defined REVEL score threshold <= 0.5, PMID: 27666373). To our knowledge, functional studies have not been reported for this variant. This variant has been reported in one individual affected with breast cancer in the literature (PMID: 25636233) and it also has been detected in two breast cancer case-control studies where it was found in an unaffected individual and absent in breast cancer cases, including in a large breast cancer case-control meta-analysis in 0/60466 cases and 1/53461 unaffected individuals (PMID: 31206626, 33471991; Leiden Open Variation Database DB-ID PALB2_010968). This variant has been identified in 10/251338 chromosomes in the general population by the Genome Aggregation Database (gnomAD). The available evidence is insufficient to determine the role of this variant in disease conclusively. Therefore, this variant is classified as a Variant of Uncertain Significance. - |
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | curation | Sema4, Sema4 | Oct 01, 2021 | - - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Ambry Genetics | Sep 24, 2022 | 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. - |
not specified Uncertain:2
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Women's Health and Genetics/Laboratory Corporation of America, LabCorp | Nov 10, 2022 | Variant summary: PALB2 c.1861C>A (p.Pro621Thr) results in a non-conservative amino acid change in the encoded protein sequence. Four of five in-silico tools predict a benign effect of the variant on protein function. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 4e-05 in 251338 control chromosomes (gnomAD). This frequency is not higher than expected for a pathogenic variant in PALB2 causing Breast Cancer (4e-05 vs 0.00016), allowing no conclusion about variant significance. c.1861C>A has been reported in the literature in at-least one individual affected with Breast Cancer (Leyton_2015), but it has also been reported in healthy controls (Weitzel_2019; PMID: 33471991, LOVD). These reports do not provide unequivocal conclusions about association of the variant with Breast Cancer. A co-occurrence with a pathogenic variant has been reported via internal testing (ATM c.4236+1G>T). Experimental evidence demonstrated the variant increased the binding affinity of the protein to MRG15 (Morf-related gene on chromosome 15), which is part of many transcription complexes (Redington_2021). Seven ClinVar submitters (evaluation after 2014) cite the variant as uncertain significance and one ClinVar submitter (evaluation after 2014) cites it as likely benign. Based on the evidence outlined above, the variant was classified as uncertain significance. - |
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Center for Genomic Medicine, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital | Aug 15, 2023 | - - |
not provided Uncertain:2
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Quest Diagnostics Nichols Institute San Juan Capistrano | Sep 15, 2017 | - - |
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | GeneDx | Oct 10, 2023 | In silico analysis supports that this missense variant does not alter protein structure/function; This variant is associated with the following publications: (PMID: 27842325, 25636233, 22941656, 34946951, 31658756) - |
Familial cancer of breast Uncertain:1Benign:1
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Invitae | Jan 18, 2024 | - - |
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Mendelics | May 28, 2019 | - - |
Computational scores
Source:
Splicing
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at