chr7-105567208-C-T
Variant summary
Our verdict is Benign. The variant received -20 ACMG points: 0P and 20B. BP4_StrongBP6_Very_StrongBS1BS2
The NM_021930.6(RINT1):c.2276C>T(p.Pro759Leu) variant causes a missense change involving the alteration of a non-conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.00748 in 1,613,198 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, including 59 homozygotes. In-silico tool predicts a benign outcome for this variant. 15/22 in silico tools predict a benign outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Likely benign (★★). Another variant affecting the same amino acid position, but resulting in a different missense (i.e. P759S) has been classified as Uncertain significance.
Frequency
Consequence
NM_021930.6 missense
Scores
Clinical Significance
Conservation
Publications
Genome browser will be placed here
ACMG classification
Our verdict: Benign. The variant received -20 ACMG points.
Transcripts
RefSeq
Ensembl
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | Exon rank | TSL | MANE | Protein | Appris | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RINT1 | ENST00000257700.7 | c.2276C>T | p.Pro759Leu | missense_variant | Exon 15 of 15 | 1 | NM_021930.6 | ENSP00000257700.2 | ||
EFCAB10 | ENST00000480514.6 | c.383+259G>A | intron_variant | Intron 4 of 4 | 1 | NM_001355526.2 | ENSP00000418678.1 |
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes AF: 0.00525 AC: 799AN: 152212Hom.: 3 Cov.: 32 show subpopulations
GnomAD2 exomes AF: 0.00545 AC: 1366AN: 250478 AF XY: 0.00539 show subpopulations
GnomAD4 exome AF: 0.00772 AC: 11276AN: 1460868Hom.: 56 Cov.: 30 AF XY: 0.00762 AC XY: 5540AN XY: 726698 show subpopulations
Age Distribution
GnomAD4 genome AF: 0.00524 AC: 798AN: 152330Hom.: 3 Cov.: 32 AF XY: 0.00472 AC XY: 352AN XY: 74500 show subpopulations
Age Distribution
ClinVar
Submissions by phenotype
not specified Benign:2
This alteration is classified as 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. -
The RINT1 p.Pro418Leu variant was not identified in the literature nor was it identified in Cosmic. The variant was identified in dbSNP (ID: rs34310648), ClinVar (classified as benign by Invitae), and LOVD 3.0. The variant was identified in control databases in 1493 of 267350 chromosomes (4 homozygous) at a frequency of 0.005584 increasing the likelihood this could be a low frequency benign variant (Genome Aggregation Database March 6, 2019, v2.1.1, non-cancer). The variant was observed in the following populations: Ashkenazi Jewish in 149 of 9852 chromosomes (freq: 0.01512), European (non-Finnish) in 995 of 117934 chromosomes (freq: 0.008437), Other in 50 of 6678 chromosomes (freq: 0.007487), South Asian in 133 of 30174 chromosomes (freq: 0.004408), European (Finnish) in 64 of 25096 chromosomes (freq: 0.00255), Latino in 69 of 34774 chromosomes (freq: 0.001984) and African in 33 of 23618 chromosomes (freq: 0.001397), but was not observed in the East Asian population. The p.Pro418 residue is not conserved in mammals and computational analyses (PolyPhen-2, SIFT, AlignGVGD, BLOSUM, MutationTaster) provide inconsistent predictions regarding the impact to the protein. The variant occurs outside of the splicing consensus sequence and in silico or computational prediction software programs (SpliceSiteFinder, MaxEntScan, NNSPLICE, GeneSplicer) do not predict a difference in splicing. In summary, based on the above information this variant meets our laboratory's criteria to be classified as benign. -
not provided Benign:2
- -
EFCAB10: BS2; RINT1: BP4, BS2 -
RINT1-related disorder Benign:1
This variant is classified as likely benign based on ACMG/AMP sequence variant interpretation guidelines (Richards et al. 2015 PMID: 25741868, with internal and published modifications). -
Computational scores
Source:
Splicing
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at