chr21-46430193-G-A
Variant summary
Our verdict is Benign. Variant got -20 ACMG points: 0P and 20B. BP4_StrongBP6_Very_StrongBA1
The ENST00000359568.10(PCNT):c.7874G>A(p.Arg2625Gln) variant causes a missense change involving the alteration of a non-conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.0119 in 1,613,800 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, including 1,773 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 (★★). Another variant affecting the same amino acid position, but resulting in a different missense (i.e. R2625W) has been classified as Uncertain significance.
Frequency
Consequence
ENST00000359568.10 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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PCNT | NM_006031.6 | c.7874G>A | p.Arg2625Gln | missense_variant | 36/47 | ENST00000359568.10 | NP_006022.3 | |
PCNT | NM_001315529.2 | c.7520G>A | p.Arg2507Gln | missense_variant | 36/47 | NP_001302458.1 |
Ensembl
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | TSL | MANE | Protein | Appris | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PCNT | ENST00000359568.10 | c.7874G>A | p.Arg2625Gln | missense_variant | 36/47 | 1 | NM_006031.6 | ENSP00000352572 | P2 |
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes AF: 0.0605 AC: 9201AN: 152144Hom.: 901 Cov.: 33
GnomAD3 exomes AF: 0.0159 AC: 3983AN: 251160Hom.: 356 AF XY: 0.0116 AC XY: 1578AN XY: 135816
GnomAD4 exome AF: 0.00684 AC: 10003AN: 1461538Hom.: 872 Cov.: 32 AF XY: 0.00592 AC XY: 4307AN XY: 727082
GnomAD4 genome AF: 0.0605 AC: 9213AN: 152262Hom.: 901 Cov.: 33 AF XY: 0.0586 AC XY: 4362AN XY: 74440
ClinVar
Submissions by phenotype
not specified Benign:4
Benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Laboratory of Diagnostic Genome Analysis, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC) | - | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Genetic Services Laboratory, University of Chicago | Feb 08, 2013 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | GeneDx | Jun 02, 2014 | 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, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Clinical Genetics DNA and cytogenetics Diagnostics Lab, Erasmus MC, Erasmus Medical Center | - | - - |
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 | Jan 31, 2024 | - - |
Microcephalic osteodysplastic primordial dwarfism type II Benign:1
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina | Jan 13, 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. - |
Computational scores
Source:
Splicing
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at