chr2-219004321-G-C
Variant summary
Our verdict is Benign. Variant got -8 ACMG points: 2P and 10B. PM2BP4_StrongBP6_ModerateBS1
The NM_194302.4(CFAP65):āc.5186C>Gā(p.Pro1729Arg) variant causes a missense change involving the alteration of a non-conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.000131 in 1,614,126 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, with no homozygous occurrence. In-silico tool predicts a benign outcome for this variant. 12/20 in silico tools predict a benign outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Likely benign (ā ).
Frequency
Consequence
NM_194302.4 missense
Scores
Clinical Significance
Conservation
Genome browser will be placed here
ACMG classification
Verdict is Benign. Variant got -8 ACMG points.
Transcripts
RefSeq
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | MANE | Protein | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CFAP65 | NM_194302.4 | c.5186C>G | p.Pro1729Arg | missense_variant | 33/35 | ENST00000341552.10 | NP_919278.2 |
Ensembl
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | TSL | MANE | Protein | Appris | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CFAP65 | ENST00000341552.10 | c.5186C>G | p.Pro1729Arg | missense_variant | 33/35 | 5 | NM_194302.4 | ENSP00000340776.5 | ||
CFAP65 | ENST00000453220.5 | c.5186C>G | p.Pro1729Arg | missense_variant | 31/33 | 5 | ENSP00000409117.1 | |||
ENSG00000224090 | ENST00000441450.1 | n.86+2021G>C | intron_variant | 2 |
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes AF: 0.000670 AC: 102AN: 152174Hom.: 0 Cov.: 32
GnomAD3 exomes AF: 0.000187 AC: 47AN: 251484Hom.: 0 AF XY: 0.000162 AC XY: 22AN XY: 135918
GnomAD4 exome AF: 0.0000746 AC: 109AN: 1461834Hom.: 0 Cov.: 33 AF XY: 0.0000619 AC XY: 45AN XY: 727212
GnomAD4 genome AF: 0.000670 AC: 102AN: 152292Hom.: 0 Cov.: 32 AF XY: 0.000510 AC XY: 38AN XY: 74484
ClinVar
Submissions by phenotype
not provided Benign:1
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), Labcorp | Apr 16, 2018 | - - |
Computational scores
Source:
Splicing
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at