3-30672250-G-C
Variant summary
Our verdict is Pathogenic. Variant got 16 ACMG points: 16P and 0B. PM1PM2PM5PP3_ModeratePP5_Very_Strong
The NM_003242.6(TGFBR2):āc.1067G>Cā(p.Arg356Pro) variant causes a missense change involving the alteration of a conserved nucleotide. The variant was absent in control chromosomes in GnomAD project. In-silico tool predicts a pathogenic outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Likely pathogenic (ā ā ). Another variant affecting the same amino acid position, but resulting in a different missense (i.e. R356G) has been classified as Likely pathogenic.
Frequency
Consequence
NM_003242.6 missense
Scores
Clinical Significance
Conservation
Genome browser will be placed here
ACMG classification
Verdict is Pathogenic. Variant got 16 ACMG points.
Transcripts
RefSeq
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | MANE | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TGFBR2 | NM_003242.6 | c.1067G>C | p.Arg356Pro | missense_variant | 4/7 | ENST00000295754.10 |
Ensembl
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | TSL | MANE | Appris | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TGFBR2 | ENST00000295754.10 | c.1067G>C | p.Arg356Pro | missense_variant | 4/7 | 1 | NM_003242.6 | P1 | |
TGFBR2 | ENST00000359013.4 | c.1142G>C | p.Arg381Pro | missense_variant | 5/8 | 1 | |||
TGFBR2 | ENST00000672866.1 | n.2663G>C | non_coding_transcript_exon_variant | 4/7 |
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes Cov.: 33
GnomAD4 exome Data not reliable, filtered out with message: AC0 AF: 0.00 AC: 0AN: 1450824Hom.: 0 Cov.: 34 AF XY: 0.00 AC XY: 0AN XY: 720178
GnomAD4 genome Cov.: 33
ClinVar
Submissions by phenotype
Familial thoracic aortic aneurysm and aortic dissection Pathogenic:1
Pathogenic, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), Labcorp | Jul 16, 2020 | For these reasons, this variant has been classified as Pathogenic. Algorithms developed to predict the effect of missense changes on protein structure and function are either unavailable or do not agree on the potential impact of this missense change (SIFT: "Deleterious"; PolyPhen-2: "Probably Damaging"; Align-GVGD: "Class C15"). This variant has been observed in individual(s) with TGFBR2-related conditions (PMID: 16283890, 16835936, 22095581, 24220024, 27611364). In at least one individual the variant was observed to be de novo. This variant is also known as c.1142G>C (p.Arg381Pro) in the literature. ClinVar contains an entry for this variant (Variation ID: 177704). This variant is not present in population databases (ExAC no frequency). This sequence change replaces arginine with proline at codon 356 of the TGFBR2 protein (p.Arg356Pro). The arginine residue is highly conserved and there is a moderate physicochemical difference between arginine and proline. - |
Loeys-Dietz syndrome Pathogenic:1
Pathogenic, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Laboratory for Molecular Medicine, Mass General Brigham Personalized Medicine | Aug 29, 2014 | The Arg356Pro variant in TGFBR2 has been reported in 5 individuals with clinical features of Loeys-Dietz syndrome and was found to occur de novo in 3 of these i ndividuals (Ki 2005, Sakai 2006, Uike 2013, Amor 2012, LMM unpublished data). Th is variant was absent from large population studies. Computational prediction to ols and conservation analysis suggest that the Arg356Pro variant may impact the protein, though this information is not predictive enough to determine pathogeni city. In summary, this variant meets our criteria to be classified as pathogenic (http://pcpgm.partners.org/LMM) based upon segregation studies and absence from controls. - |
not provided Pathogenic:1
Likely pathogenic, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Revvity Omics, Revvity | Mar 10, 2023 | - - |
Loeys-Dietz syndrome 2 Pathogenic:1
Pathogenic, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Molecular Diagnostic Laboratory for Inherited Cardiovascular Disease, Montreal Heart Institute | Nov 30, 2015 | - - |
Computational scores
Source:
Splicing
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at