chr12-88089351-C-T

Variant names:

• chr12-88089351-C-T
• rs7307793
• NM_025114.4:c.3710G>A

Variant summary

Our verdict is Benign. Variant got -20 ACMG points: 0P and 20B. BP4_Strong BP6_Very_Strong BA1

The NM_025114.4(CEP290):​c.3710G>A​(p.Arg1237His) variant causes a missense change. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.00905 in 1,613,838 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, including 1,198 homozygotes. In-silico tool predicts a benign outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Benign (★★).

• Frequency:
  • Genomes: 𝑓 0.050 (637 hom., cov: 32)
  • Exomes 𝑓: 0.0048 (561 hom.)
• Consequence: CEP290 NM_025114.4 missense
• Clinical Significance: Benign criteria provided, multiple submitters, no conflicts B:13
• Conservation: PhyloP100: 5.92

Genes affected

CEP290 (HGNC:29021): (centrosomal protein 290) This gene encodes a protein with 13 putative coiled-coil domains, a region with homology to SMC chromosome segregation ATPases, six KID motifs, three tropomyosin homology domains and an ATP/GTP binding site motif A. The protein is localized to the centrosome and cilia and has sites for N-glycosylation, tyrosine sulfation, phosphorylation, N-myristoylation, and amidation. Mutations in this gene have been associated with Joubert syndrome and nephronophthisis and the presence of antibodies against this protein is associated with several forms of cancer. [provided by RefSeq, Jul 2008]

ACMG classification

Verdict is Benign. Variant got -20 ACMG points.

• BP4: Computational evidence support a benign effect (MetaRNN=0.0016953051).
• BP6: Variant 12-88089351-C-T is Benign according to our data. Variant chr12-88089351-C-T is described in ClinVar as [Benign]. Clinvar id is 126257.Status of the report is criteria_provided_multiple_submitters_no_conflicts, 2 stars. Variant chr12-88089351-C-T is described in Lovd as [Benign].
• BA1: GnomAd4 highest subpopulation (AFR) allele frequency at 95% confidence interval = 0.169 is higher than 0.05.

Transcripts

RefSeq

Gene	Transcript	HGVSc	HGVSp	Effect	Exon rank	MANE	Protein	UniProt
CEP290	NM_025114.4	c.3710G>A	p.Arg1237His	missense_variant	Exon 31 of 54	ENST00000552810.6	NP_079390.3

Ensembl

Gene	Transcript	HGVSc	HGVSp	Effect	Exon rank	TSL	MANE	Protein	Appris	UniProt
CEP290	ENST00000552810.6	c.3710G>A	p.Arg1237His	missense_variant	Exon 31 of 54	1	NM_025114.4	ENSP00000448012.1

Frequencies

GnomAD3 genomes AF: 0.0495 AC: 7531 AN: 152036 Hom.: 636 Cov.: 32

Gnomad AFR AF: 0.172

Gnomad AMI AF: 0.00

Gnomad AMR AF: 0.0206

Gnomad ASJ AF: 0.00

Gnomad EAS AF: 0.00

Gnomad SAS AF: 0.000622

Gnomad FIN AF: 0.00

Gnomad MID AF: 0.00

Gnomad NFE AF: 0.000338

Gnomad OTH AF: 0.0292

GnomAD3 exomes AF: 0.0120 AC: 2978 AN: 249060 Hom.: 238 AF XY: 0.00889 AC XY: 1201 AN XY: 135110

Gnomad AFR exome AF: 0.173

Gnomad AMR exome AF: 0.00669

Gnomad ASJ exome AF: 0.00

Gnomad EAS exome AF: 0.00

Gnomad SAS exome AF: 0.000327

Gnomad FIN exome AF: 0.00

Gnomad NFE exome AF: 0.000195

Gnomad OTH exome AF: 0.00529

GnomAD4 exome AF: 0.00483 AC: 7060 AN: 1461684 Hom.: 561 Cov.: 33 AF XY: 0.00413 AC XY: 3001 AN XY: 727124

Gnomad4 AFR exome AF: 0.176

Gnomad4 AMR exome AF: 0.00832

Gnomad4 ASJ exome AF: 0.00

Gnomad4 EAS exome AF: 0.0000252

Gnomad4 SAS exome AF: 0.000417

Gnomad4 FIN exome AF: 0.00

Gnomad4 NFE exome AF: 0.000102

Gnomad4 OTH exome AF: 0.0103

GnomAD4 genome AF: 0.0496 AC: 7543 AN: 152154 Hom.: 637 Cov.: 32 AF XY: 0.0477 AC XY: 3550 AN XY: 74398

Gnomad4 AFR AF: 0.172

Gnomad4 AMR AF: 0.0205

Gnomad4 ASJ AF: 0.00

Gnomad4 EAS AF: 0.00

Gnomad4 SAS AF: 0.000623

Gnomad4 FIN AF: 0.00

Gnomad4 NFE AF: 0.000338

Gnomad4 OTH AF: 0.0289

Alfa AF: 0.00751 Hom.: 151

Bravo AF: 0.0560

ESP6500AA AF: 0.168 AC: 632

ESP6500EA AF: 0.000121 AC: 1

ExAC AF: 0.0146 AC: 1766

Asia WGS AF: 0.00779 AC: 27 AN: 3478

EpiCase AF: 0.000218

EpiControl AF: 0.000178

ClinVar

Significance: Benign

Submissions summary: Benign:13

Revision: criteria provided, multiple submitters, no conflicts

Submissions by phenotype

not specified Benign:5

-

Genetic Services Laboratory, University of Chicago

Significance: Likely benign

Review Status: no assertion criteria provided

Collection Method: clinical testing

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. -

Jan 30, 2014

GeneDx

Significance: 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. -

-

PreventionGenetics, part of Exact Sciences

Significance: Benign

Review Status: criteria provided, single submitter

Collection Method: clinical testing

- -

-

Laboratory of Diagnostic Genome Analysis, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC)

Significance: Benign

Review Status: no assertion criteria provided

Collection Method: clinical testing

- -

-

Joint Genome Diagnostic Labs from Nijmegen and Maastricht, Radboudumc and MUMC+

Significance: Benign

Review Status: no assertion criteria provided

Collection Method: clinical testing

- -

Senior-Loken syndrome 6 Benign:1

Jan 12, 2018

Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina

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

Leber congenital amaurosis 10 Benign:1

Jan 12, 2018

Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina

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

Leber congenital amaurosis Benign:1

Sep 16, 2020

Natera, Inc.

Significance: Benign

Review Status: no assertion criteria provided

Collection Method: clinical testing

- -

not provided Benign:1

-

Breakthrough Genomics, Breakthrough Genomics

Significance: Benign

Review Status: criteria provided, single submitter

Collection Method: not provided

- -

Bardet-Biedl syndrome 14 Benign:1

Jan 12, 2018

Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina

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

Meckel-Gruber syndrome;C0431399:Familial aplasia of the vermis;C0687120:Nephronophthisis Benign:1

Feb 03, 2025

Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), Labcorp

Significance: Benign

Review Status: criteria provided, single submitter

Collection Method: clinical testing

- -

Meckel syndrome, type 4 Benign:1

Jan 12, 2018

Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina

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

Joubert syndrome 5 Benign:1

Jan 12, 2018

Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina

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

Computational scores

Source: dbNSFP v4.3

Name	Calibrated prediction	Score	Prediction
AlphaMissense	Benign	0.097
BayesDel_addAF	Benign	-0.30	T
BayesDel_noAF	Uncertain	-0.060
CADD	Uncertain	25
DANN	Uncertain	1.0
DEOGEN2	Benign	0.35	.;.;T
Eigen	Uncertain	0.33
Eigen_PC	Uncertain	0.45
FATHMM_MKL	Pathogenic	0.97	D
LIST_S2	Uncertain	0.93	D;D;D
MetaRNN	Benign	0.0017	T;T;T
MetaSVM	Benign	-1.1	T
MutationAssessor	Benign	1.7	.;.;L
PrimateAI	Benign	0.38	T
PROVEAN	Benign	-2.3	N;N;N
REVEL	Benign	0.22
Sift	Benign	0.074	T;T;T
Sift4G	Benign	0.069	T;T;T
Polyphen		0.76	.;.;P
Vest4		0.11
MPC		0.38
ClinPred		0.034	T
GERP RS		5.6
Varity_R		0.15
gMVP		0.32

Splicing

Name	Calibrated prediction	Score	Prediction
SpliceAI score (max)		0.0		Details are displayed if max score is > 0.2

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

Publications

LitVar

Other links and lift over

dbSNP: rs7307793; hg19: chr12-88483128;