4-5752852-C-T
Variant summary
Our verdict is Benign. Variant got -20 ACMG points: 0P and 20B. BP4_StrongBP6_Very_StrongBA1
The NM_153717.3(EVC):c.1115C>T(p.Thr372Met) variant causes a missense change involving the alteration of a non-conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.086 in 1,614,038 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, including 6,743 homozygotes. In-silico tool predicts a benign outcome for this variant. 13/20 in silico tools predict a benign outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Benign (★★).
Frequency
Consequence
NM_153717.3 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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EVC | NM_153717.3 | c.1115C>T | p.Thr372Met | missense_variant | 9/21 | ENST00000264956.11 | NP_714928.1 |
Ensembl
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | TSL | MANE | Protein | Appris | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EVC | ENST00000264956.11 | c.1115C>T | p.Thr372Met | missense_variant | 9/21 | 1 | NM_153717.3 | ENSP00000264956.6 | ||
EVC | ENST00000509451.1 | c.1115C>T | p.Thr372Met | missense_variant | 9/12 | 1 | ENSP00000426774.1 | |||
EVC | ENST00000514919.1 | n.178C>T | non_coding_transcript_exon_variant | 1/2 | 2 | |||||
CRMP1 | ENST00000506216.5 | n.1648-4540G>A | intron_variant | 5 |
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes AF: 0.0631 AC: 9600AN: 152190Hom.: 450 Cov.: 34
GnomAD3 exomes AF: 0.0673 AC: 16901AN: 251260Hom.: 779 AF XY: 0.0691 AC XY: 9382AN XY: 135854
GnomAD4 exome AF: 0.0884 AC: 129174AN: 1461730Hom.: 6294 Cov.: 35 AF XY: 0.0872 AC XY: 63411AN XY: 727166
GnomAD4 genome AF: 0.0630 AC: 9601AN: 152308Hom.: 449 Cov.: 34 AF XY: 0.0630 AC XY: 4688AN XY: 74464
ClinVar
Submissions by phenotype
Ellis-van Creveld syndrome Benign:3
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 | Natera, Inc. | Sep 16, 2020 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Pars Genome Lab | Jun 15, 2021 | - - |
not specified Benign:2
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | GeneDx | Apr 26, 2016 | This variant is considered likely benign or benign based on one or more of the following criteria: it is a conservative change, it occurs at a poorly conserved position in the protein, it is predicted to be benign by multiple in silico algorithms, and/or has population frequency not consistent with disease. - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | PreventionGenetics, part of Exact Sciences | - | - - |
not provided Benign:2
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | ARUP Laboratories, Molecular Genetics and Genomics, ARUP Laboratories | Nov 29, 2023 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | not provided | Breakthrough Genomics, Breakthrough Genomics | - | - - |
Ellis-van Creveld syndrome;C0457013:Curry-Hall syndrome Benign:1
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), Labcorp | Feb 01, 2024 | - - |
Computational scores
Source:
Splicing
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at