17-4810930-G-A
Variant summary
Our verdict is Benign. Variant got -10 ACMG points: 0P and 10B. BP4_StrongBP6_ModerateBS2
The NM_002663.5(PLD2):c.989G>A(p.Arg330Gln) variant causes a missense change. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.00349 in 1,612,050 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, including 21 homozygotes. In-silico tool predicts 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. R330W) has been classified as Uncertain significance.
Frequency
Consequence
NM_002663.5 missense
Scores
Clinical Significance
Conservation
Genome browser will be placed here
ACMG classification
Verdict is Benign. Variant got -10 ACMG points.
Transcripts
RefSeq
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | MANE | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PLD2 | NM_002663.5 | c.989G>A | p.Arg330Gln | missense_variant | 10/25 | ENST00000263088.11 |
Ensembl
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | TSL | MANE | Appris | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PLD2 | ENST00000263088.11 | c.989G>A | p.Arg330Gln | missense_variant | 10/25 | 1 | NM_002663.5 | P1 | |
PLD2 | ENST00000572940.5 | c.989G>A | p.Arg330Gln | missense_variant | 10/25 | 1 | |||
PLD2 | ENST00000575813.5 | c.125G>A | p.Arg42Gln | missense_variant, NMD_transcript_variant | 1/4 | 4 | |||
PLD2 | ENST00000575246.6 | c.*637G>A | 3_prime_UTR_variant, NMD_transcript_variant | 10/18 | 2 |
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes ? AF: 0.00314 AC: 478AN: 152084Hom.: 2 Cov.: 31
GnomAD3 exomes AF: 0.00313 AC: 777AN: 248444Hom.: 5 AF XY: 0.00314 AC XY: 422AN XY: 134338
GnomAD4 exome AF: 0.00353 AC: 5146AN: 1459848Hom.: 19 Cov.: 31 AF XY: 0.00347 AC XY: 2520AN XY: 726222
GnomAD4 genome ? AF: 0.00314 AC: 478AN: 152202Hom.: 2 Cov.: 31 AF XY: 0.00370 AC XY: 275AN XY: 74404
ClinVar
Submissions by phenotype
not provided Benign:1
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Invitae | Dec 31, 2019 | - - |
Computational scores
Source:
Splicing
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at