3-52814021-C-T
Variant summary
Our verdict is Benign. Variant got -20 ACMG points: 0P and 20B. BP4_StrongBP6_Very_StrongBS1BS2
The NM_002218.5(ITIH4):c.2677G>A(p.Gly893Ser) variant causes a missense change involving the alteration of a non-conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.00574 in 1,613,802 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, including 62 homozygotes. In-silico tool predicts a benign outcome for this variant. 14/20 in silico tools predict a benign outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Benign (★★).
Frequency
Consequence
NM_002218.5 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 | Protein | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ITIH4 | NM_002218.5 | c.2677G>A | p.Gly893Ser | missense_variant | 23/24 | ENST00000266041.9 | NP_002209.2 | |
ITIH4 | NM_001166449.2 | c.2587G>A | p.Gly863Ser | missense_variant | 21/22 | NP_001159921.1 |
Ensembl
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | TSL | MANE | Protein | Appris | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ITIH4 | ENST00000266041.9 | c.2677G>A | p.Gly893Ser | missense_variant | 23/24 | 1 | NM_002218.5 | ENSP00000266041 | P2 |
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes AF: 0.00394 AC: 599AN: 152184Hom.: 3 Cov.: 32
GnomAD3 exomes AF: 0.00522 AC: 1306AN: 250400Hom.: 11 AF XY: 0.00601 AC XY: 814AN XY: 135450
GnomAD4 exome AF: 0.00593 AC: 8669AN: 1461500Hom.: 59 Cov.: 32 AF XY: 0.00633 AC XY: 4599AN XY: 727028
GnomAD4 genome AF: 0.00392 AC: 597AN: 152302Hom.: 3 Cov.: 32 AF XY: 0.00406 AC XY: 302AN XY: 74458
ClinVar
Submissions by phenotype
not provided Benign:2
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | not provided | Breakthrough Genomics, Breakthrough Genomics | - | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), Labcorp | Jun 06, 2018 | - - |
Computational scores
Source:
Splicing
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at