rs1057524549
Variant summary
Our verdict is Uncertain significance. Variant got 1 ACMG points: 1P and 0B. PP3
The NM_006231.4(POLE):c.6408C>T(p.Gly2136=) variant causes a synonymous change involving the alteration of a non-conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.0000185 in 1,461,558 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, with no homozygous occurrence. In-silico tool predicts a benign outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Conflicting classifications of pathogenicity (no stars). Synonymous variant affecting the same amino acid position (i.e. G2136G) has been classified as Likely benign.
Frequency
Consequence
NM_006231.4 synonymous
Scores
Clinical Significance
Conservation
Genome browser will be placed here
ACMG classification
Verdict is Uncertain_significance. Variant got 1 ACMG points.
Transcripts
RefSeq
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | MANE | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
POLE | NM_006231.4 | c.6408C>T | p.Gly2136= | synonymous_variant | 46/49 | ENST00000320574.10 | |
POLE | XM_011534795.4 | c.6408C>T | p.Gly2136= | synonymous_variant | 46/48 | ||
POLE | XM_011534797.4 | c.5487C>T | p.Gly1829= | synonymous_variant | 38/40 | ||
POLE | XM_011534802.4 | c.3396C>T | p.Gly1132= | synonymous_variant | 22/24 |
Ensembl
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | TSL | MANE | Appris | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
POLE | ENST00000320574.10 | c.6408C>T | p.Gly2136= | synonymous_variant | 46/49 | 1 | NM_006231.4 | P1 |
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes Cov.: 33
GnomAD3 exomes AF: 0.00000797 AC: 2AN: 251046Hom.: 0 AF XY: 0.0000147 AC XY: 2AN XY: 135758
GnomAD4 exome AF: 0.0000185 AC: 27AN: 1461558Hom.: 0 Cov.: 32 AF XY: 0.0000179 AC XY: 13AN XY: 727080
GnomAD4 genome Cov.: 33
ClinVar
Submissions by phenotype
not provided Uncertain:2Benign:1
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | GeneDx | Aug 23, 2024 | Not observed at significant frequency in large population cohorts (gnomAD); In silico analysis supports a deleterious effect on splicing; Has not been previously published as pathogenic or benign to our knowledge - |
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | PreventionGenetics, part of Exact Sciences | Nov 30, 2017 | - - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), Labcorp | Jan 28, 2024 | - - |
Colorectal cancer, susceptibility to, 12 Uncertain:1
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | St. Jude Molecular Pathology, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital | Aug 10, 2021 | The POLE c.6408C>T (p.Gly2136=) synonymous change has a maximum subpopulation frequency of 0.0033% in gnomAD v2.1.1 (https://gnomad.broadinstitute.org/variant/12-133202826-G-A). Algorithms that predict the impact of sequence changes on splicing indicate that this change may create or activate a cryptic donor splice site, but RNA studies indicate no splicing effect (BS3_supporting; internal data). To our knowledge, this variant has not been reported in individuals with POLE-related disorders. In summary, this variant meets criteria to be classified as of uncertain significance based on the ACMG/AMP criteria: BS3_supporting. - |
Hereditary cancer-predisposing syndrome Uncertain:1
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Ambry Genetics | Aug 29, 2019 | The c.6408C>T variant (also known as p.G2136G), located in coding exon 46, results from a C to T substitution at nucleotide position 6408 of the POLE gene. This nucleotide substitution does not change the amino acid at codon 2136. This nucleotide position is poorly conserved in available vertebrate species. Using the BDGP and ESEfinder splice site prediction tools, this alteration is predicted to create a new alternate splice donor site; however, direct evidence is unavailable. Since supporting evidence is limited at this time, the clinical significance of this alteration remains unclear. - |
Computational scores
Source:
Splicing
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at