17-14076868-C-T
Variant summary
Our verdict is Likely benign. Variant got -3 ACMG points: 2P and 5B. PM2BP4_StrongBS1_Supporting
The NM_001303.4(COX10):c.311C>T(p.Pro104Leu) variant causes a missense change involving the alteration of a non-conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.000181 in 1,614,098 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, with no homozygous occurrence. In-silico tool predicts a benign outcome for this variant. 14/21 in silico tools predict a benign outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Conflicting classifications of pathogenicity (no stars).
Frequency
Consequence
NM_001303.4 missense
Scores
Clinical Significance
Conservation
Genome browser will be placed here
ACMG classification
Verdict is Likely_benign. Variant got -3 ACMG points.
Transcripts
RefSeq
Ensembl
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes AF: 0.000164 AC: 25AN: 152100Hom.: 0 Cov.: 32
GnomAD3 exomes AF: 0.000203 AC: 51AN: 251418Hom.: 0 AF XY: 0.000206 AC XY: 28AN XY: 135876
GnomAD4 exome AF: 0.000183 AC: 267AN: 1461880Hom.: 0 Cov.: 31 AF XY: 0.000198 AC XY: 144AN XY: 727240
GnomAD4 genome AF: 0.000164 AC: 25AN: 152218Hom.: 0 Cov.: 32 AF XY: 0.000148 AC XY: 11AN XY: 74416
ClinVar
Submissions by phenotype
not provided Uncertain:2Benign:1Other:1
not provided, no classification provided | in vitro | Johnston Lab, North Central College | - | - - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | CeGaT Center for Human Genetics Tuebingen | Sep 01, 2023 | COX10: BP4 - |
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | GeneDx | Aug 21, 2017 | The P104L variant in the COX10 gene has not been reported previously as a pathogenic variant, nor as a benign variant, to our knowledge. The P104L variant is observed in 9/8650 (0.104%) alleles from individuals of East Asian background in the ExAC dataset and no individuals were reported to be homozygous (Lek et al., 2016). The P104L variant is a semi-conservative amino acid substitution, which may impact secondary protein structure as these residues differ in some properties. This substitution occurs at a position that is not conserved. In silico analysis is inconsistent in its predictions as to whether or not the variant is damaging to the protein structure/function. We interpret P104L as a variant of uncertain significance. - |
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), Labcorp | Jul 06, 2022 | This sequence change replaces proline, which is neutral and non-polar, with leucine, which is neutral and non-polar, at codon 104 of the COX10 protein (p.Pro104Leu). This variant is present in population databases (rs202207627, gnomAD 0.1%). This variant has not been reported in the literature in individuals affected with COX10-related conditions. ClinVar contains an entry for this variant (Variation ID: 449007). Algorithms developed to predict the effect of missense changes on protein structure and function output the following: SIFT: "Tolerated"; PolyPhen-2: "Benign"; Align-GVGD: "Class C0". The leucine amino acid residue is found in multiple mammalian species, which suggests that this missense change does not adversely affect protein function. In summary, the available evidence is currently insufficient to determine the role of this variant in disease. Therefore, it has been classified as a Variant of Uncertain Significance. - |
Leigh syndrome Uncertain:2
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina | Jan 12, 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, this variant could not be ruled out of causing disease and therefore its association with disease required further investigation. A literature search was performed for the gene, cDNA change, and amino acid change (if applicable). No publications were found based on this search. This variant was therefore classified as a variant of unknown significance for this disease. - |
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Baylor Genetics | May 15, 2018 | This variant was determined to be of uncertain significance according to ACMG Guidelines, 2015 [PMID:25741868]. - |
Mitochondrial complex IV deficiency, nuclear type 1 Uncertain:1
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina | Jan 12, 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, this variant could not be ruled out of causing disease and therefore its association with disease required further investigation. A literature search was performed for the gene, cDNA change, and amino acid change (if applicable). No publications were found based on this search. This variant was therefore classified as a variant of unknown significance for this disease. - |
Mitochondrial complex 4 deficiency, nuclear type 3 Uncertain:1
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Fulgent Genetics, Fulgent Genetics | Dec 25, 2021 | - - |
Computational scores
Source:
Splicing
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at