3-43561311-C-T
Variant summary
Our verdict is Benign. Variant got -20 ACMG points: 0P and 20B. BP4_StrongBP6_Very_StrongBA1
The NM_018075.5(ANO10):c.1385G>A(p.Arg462Gln) variant causes a missense change involving the alteration of a non-conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.625 in 1,613,842 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, including 319,572 homozygotes. In-silico tool predicts a benign outcome for this variant. 15/20 in silico tools predict a benign outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Benign (★★).
Frequency
Consequence
NM_018075.5 missense
Scores
Clinical Significance
Conservation
Genome browser will be placed here
ACMG classification
Verdict is Benign. Variant got -20 ACMG points.
Transcripts
RefSeq
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | MANE | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ANO10 | NM_018075.5 | c.1385G>A | p.Arg462Gln | missense_variant | 9/13 | ENST00000292246.8 |
Ensembl
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | TSL | MANE | Appris | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ANO10 | ENST00000292246.8 | c.1385G>A | p.Arg462Gln | missense_variant | 9/13 | 1 | NM_018075.5 | P1 |
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes AF: 0.598 AC: 90911AN: 151942Hom.: 27926 Cov.: 32
GnomAD3 exomes AF: 0.658 AC: 165338AN: 251442Hom.: 55873 AF XY: 0.655 AC XY: 89039AN XY: 135900
GnomAD4 exome AF: 0.628 AC: 918204AN: 1461782Hom.: 291626 Cov.: 54 AF XY: 0.629 AC XY: 457574AN XY: 727194
GnomAD4 genome AF: 0.598 AC: 90984AN: 152060Hom.: 27946 Cov.: 32 AF XY: 0.606 AC XY: 45085AN XY: 74360
ClinVar
Submissions by phenotype
Autosomal recessive spinocerebellar ataxia 10 Benign:4
Benign, 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 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, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Diagnostic Laboratory, Department of Genetics, University Medical Center Groningen | - | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Clinical Genetics DNA and cytogenetics Diagnostics Lab, Erasmus MC, Erasmus Medical Center | Sep 21, 2015 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Genome-Nilou Lab | Jul 14, 2021 | - - |
not provided Benign:4
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), Labcorp | Feb 01, 2024 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | not provided | Breakthrough Genomics, Breakthrough Genomics | - | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Athena Diagnostics | Jul 18, 2019 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | GeneDx | Sep 25, 2019 | - - |
not specified Benign:3
Likely benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Genetic Services Laboratory, University of Chicago | - | Likely benign based on allele frequency in 1000 Genomes Project or ESP global frequency and its presence in a patient with a rare or unrelated disease phenotype. NOT Sanger confirmed. - |
Benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Joint Genome Diagnostic Labs from Nijmegen and Maastricht, Radboudumc and MUMC+ | - | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | PreventionGenetics, part of Exact Sciences | - | - - |
Computational scores
Source:
Splicing
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at