NM_002529.4:c.612G>A

Variant names:

Variant summary

Our verdict is Benign. The variant received -17 ACMG points: 0P and 17B. BP4_StrongBP6_Very_StrongBP7BS2

The NM_002529.4(NTRK1):c.612G>A(p.Ser204Ser) variant causes a synonymous change involving the alteration of a non-conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.000527 in 1,558,648 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, including 4 homozygotes. In-silico tool predicts a benign outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Likely benign (★★). Synonymous variant affecting the same amino acid position (i.e. S204S) has been classified as Likely benign.

Frequency

Genomes: 𝑓 0.0023 ( 4 hom., cov: 33)

Exomes 𝑓: 0.00033 ( 0 hom. )

Consequence

NTRK1
NM_002529.4 synonymous

Scores

Clinical Significance

Benign/Likely benign criteria provided, multiple submitters, no conflicts B:10

Conservation

PhyloP100: -5.73

Publications

1 publications found

Variant links:

COSMIC-nc: COSV104662700

Genes affected

NTRK1 (HGNC:8031): (neurotrophic receptor tyrosine kinase 1) This gene encodes a member of the neurotrophic tyrosine kinase receptor (NTKR) family. This kinase is a membrane-bound receptor that, upon neurotrophin binding, phosphorylates itself and members of the MAPK pathway. The presence of this kinase leads to cell differentiation and may play a role in specifying sensory neuron subtypes. Mutations in this gene have been associated with congenital insensitivity to pain, anhidrosis, self-mutilating behavior, cognitive disability and cancer. Alternate transcriptional splice variants of this gene have been found, but only three have been characterized to date. [provided by RefSeq, Jul 2008]

NTRK1 Gene-Disease associations (from GenCC):

hereditary sensory and autonomic neuropathy type 4
Inheritance: AR Classification: DEFINITIVE, STRONG, SUPPORTIVE Submitted by: Orphanet, G2P, ClinGen, Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae)
familial medullary thyroid carcinoma
Inheritance: AD Classification: SUPPORTIVE Submitted by: Orphanet

NTRK1 links:

Genome browser will be placed here

ACMG classification

Classification was made for transcript

Our verdict: Benign. The variant received -17 ACMG points.

BP4

Computational evidence support a benign effect (BayesDel_noAF=-0.82).

BP6

Variant 1-156868542-G-A is Benign according to our data. Variant chr1-156868542-G-A is described in ClinVar as Benign/Likely_benign. ClinVar VariationId is 385060.Status of the report is criteria_provided_multiple_submitters_no_conflicts, 2 stars.

BP7

Synonymous conserved (PhyloP=-5.73 with no splicing effect.

BS2

High Homozygotes in GnomAd4 at 4 AD,AR gene

Transcripts

RefSeq

Gene	Transcript	HGVSc	HGVSp	Effect	Exon rank	MANE	Protein	UniProt
NTRK1	NM_002529.4 link	c.612G>A	p.Ser204Ser	synonymous_variant	Exon 6 of 17	ENST00000524377.7	NP_002520.2	P04629-1
NTRK1	NM_001012331.2 link	c.612G>A	p.Ser204Ser	synonymous_variant	Exon 6 of 16		NP_001012331.1	P04629-2X5DR71
NTRK1	NM_001007792.1 link	c.522G>A	p.Ser174Ser	synonymous_variant	Exon 7 of 17		NP_001007793.1	P04629-3

Ensembl

Gene	Transcript	HGVSc	HGVSp	Effect	Exon rank	TSL	MANE	Protein	Appris	UniProt
NTRK1	ENST00000524377.7 link	c.612G>A	p.Ser204Ser	synonymous_variant	Exon 6 of 17	1	NM_002529.4	ENSP00000431418.1		P04629-1

Frequencies

GnomAD3 genomes

AF:

0.00227

AC:

345

AN:

152208

Hom.:

Cov.:

show subpopulations

Gnomad AFR

AF:

0.00757

Gnomad AMI

AF:

0.00

Gnomad AMR

AF:

0.000589

Gnomad ASJ

AF:

0.00

Gnomad EAS

AF:

0.000385

Gnomad SAS

AF:

0.000207

Gnomad FIN

AF:

0.000470

Gnomad MID

AF:

0.00

Gnomad NFE

AF:

0.000162

Gnomad OTH

AF:

0.00143

GnomAD2 exomes

AF:

0.000610

AC:

101

AN:

165548

AF XY:

0.000377

show subpopulations

Gnomad AFR exome

AF:

0.00706

Gnomad AMR exome

AF:

0.000349

Gnomad ASJ exome

AF:

0.00

Gnomad EAS exome

AF:

0.000820

Gnomad FIN exome

AF:

0.000319

Gnomad NFE exome

AF:

0.000106

Gnomad OTH exome

AF:

0.00

GnomAD4 exome

AF:

0.000332

AC:

467

AN:

1406322

Hom.:

Cov.:

AF XY:

0.000304

AC XY:

211

AN XY:

694350

show subpopulations

African (AFR)

AF:

0.00734

AC:

235

AN:

31996

American (AMR)

AF:

0.000326

AC:

AN:

36842

Ashkenazi Jewish (ASJ)

AF:

0.00

AC:

AN:

25226

East Asian (EAS)

AF:

0.000688

AC:

AN:

36356

South Asian (SAS)

AF:

0.0000878

AC:

AN:

79712

European-Finnish (FIN)

AF:

0.000443

AC:

AN:

49692

Middle Eastern (MID)

AF:

0.00112

AC:

AN:

5380

European-Non Finnish (NFE)

AF:

0.000115

AC:

125

AN:

1082868

Other (OTH)

AF:

0.000601

AC:

AN:

58250

Allele Balance Distribution

Red line indicates average allele balance

Average allele balance: 0.483

Heterozygous variant carriers

101

135

169

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

0.95

Allele balance

Age Distribution

Exome Het

Variant carriers

100

<30

30-35

35-40

40-45

45-50

50-55

55-60

60-65

65-70

70-75

75-80

>80

Age

GnomAD4 genome

AF:

0.00233

AC:

355

AN:

152326

Hom.:

Cov.:

AF XY:

0.00234

AC XY:

174

AN XY:

74480

show subpopulations

African (AFR)

AF:

0.00782

AC:

325

AN:

41578

American (AMR)

AF:

0.000523

AC:

AN:

15306

Ashkenazi Jewish (ASJ)

AF:

0.00

AC:

AN:

3472

East Asian (EAS)

AF:

0.000386

AC:

AN:

5184

South Asian (SAS)

AF:

0.000208

AC:

AN:

4818

European-Finnish (FIN)

AF:

0.000470

AC:

AN:

10628

Middle Eastern (MID)

AF:

0.00

AC:

AN:

294

European-Non Finnish (NFE)

AF:

0.000162

AC:

AN:

68020

Other (OTH)

AF:

0.00142

AC:

AN:

2114

Allele Balance Distribution

Red line indicates average allele balance

Average allele balance: 0.506

Heterozygous variant carriers

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

0.95

Allele balance

Age Distribution

Genome Het

Variant carriers

<30

30-35

35-40

40-45

45-50

50-55

55-60

60-65

65-70

70-75

75-80

>80

Age

Alfa

AF:

0.000940

Hom.:

Bravo

AF:

0.00240

Asia WGS

AF:

0.000577

AC:

AN:

3478

ClinVar

Significance: Benign/Likely benign

Submissions summary: Benign:10

Revision: criteria provided, multiple submitters, no conflicts

LINK: link

Submissions by phenotype

Hereditary insensitivity to pain with anhidrosis

Benign:5

Jul 07, 2023

KCCC/NGS Laboratory, Kuwait Cancer Control Center

Significance:Likely benign

Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter

Collection Method:clinical testing

- -

Dec 06, 2019

Natera, Inc.

Significance:Likely benign

Review Status:no assertion criteria provided

Collection Method:clinical testing

- -

Apr 11, 2023

Genome-Nilou Lab

Significance:Likely benign

Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter

Collection Method:clinical testing

- -

Jan 12, 2018

Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina

Significance:Likely benign

Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter

Collection Method:clinical testing

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 likely benign is not then subjected to further curation. The score for this variant resulted in a classification of likely benign for this disease. -

Jan 24, 2025

Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), Labcorp

Significance:Benign

Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter

Collection Method:clinical testing

- -

not specified

Benign:2

Jul 07, 2025

Women's Health and Genetics/Laboratory Corporation of America, LabCorp

Significance:Likely benign

Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter

Collection Method:clinical testing

- -

Feb 13, 2018

GeneDx

Significance:Likely benign

Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter

Collection Method:clinical testing

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. -

Inborn genetic diseases

Benign:1

Jul 11, 2019

Ambry Genetics

Significance:Likely benign

Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter

Collection Method:clinical testing

This alteration is classified as likely benign based on a combination of the following: seen in unaffected individuals, population frequency, intact protein function, lack of segregation with disease, co-occurrence, RNA analysis, in silico models, amino acid conservation, lack of disease association in case-control studies, and/or the mechanism of disease or impacted region is inconsistent with a known cause of pathogenicity. -

NTRK1-related disorder

Benign:1

Aug 29, 2022

PreventionGenetics, part of Exact Sciences

Significance:Benign

Review Status:no assertion criteria provided

Collection Method:clinical testing

This variant is classified as benign based on ACMG/AMP sequence variant interpretation guidelines (Richards et al. 2015 PMID: 25741868, with internal and published modifications). -

not provided

Benign:1

Oct 01, 2023

CeGaT Center for Human Genetics Tuebingen

Significance:Likely benign

Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter

Collection Method:clinical testing

NTRK1: BP4, BP7 -

Computational scores

Source: dbNSFP v4.3

Name

Calibrated prediction

Score

Prediction

BayesDel_noAF

Benign

-0.82

CADD

Benign

0.68

(source)

DANN

Benign

0.72

PhyloP100

-5.7

RBP_binding_hub_radar

0.0

RBP_regulation_power_radar

1.6

Mutation Taster

=100/0

polymorphism

(source)

Splicing

Name

Calibrated prediction

Score

Prediction

SpliceAI score (max)

0.070

Details are displayed if max score is > 0.2

Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at spliceailookup.broadinstitute.org

Publications

You must be logged in to view publications. This limit was set because tens of millions (!) of queries from AI bots are generated daily.

Variant summary

Frequency

Consequence

Scores

Clinical Significance

Conservation

Publications

ACMG classification

Transcripts

RefSeq

Ensembl

Frequencies

Age Distribution

Age Distribution

ClinVar

Submissions by phenotype

Computational scores

Splicing

Publications

Other links and lift over