rs143523271
Variant summary
Our verdict is Benign. Variant got -8 ACMG points: 1P and 9B. PP2BP6BS1BS2
The ENST00000302850.10(INSR):c.2243C>T(p.Ser748Leu) variant causes a missense change involving the alteration of a non-conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.00183 in 1,614,056 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, including 8 homozygotes. In-silico tool predicts a benign outcome for this variant. 14/23 in silico tools predict a benign outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Conflicting classifications of pathogenicity (no stars).
Frequency
Consequence
ENST00000302850.10 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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
INSR | NM_000208.4 | c.2243C>T | p.Ser748Leu | missense_variant | 11/22 | ENST00000302850.10 | NP_000199.2 | |
INSR | XM_011527988.3 | c.2243C>T | p.Ser748Leu | missense_variant | 11/22 | XP_011526290.2 | ||
INSR | NM_001079817.3 | c.2231+2205C>T | intron_variant | NP_001073285.1 | ||||
INSR | XM_011527989.4 | c.2231+2205C>T | intron_variant | XP_011526291.2 |
Ensembl
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | TSL | MANE | Protein | Appris | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
INSR | ENST00000302850.10 | c.2243C>T | p.Ser748Leu | missense_variant | 11/22 | 1 | NM_000208.4 | ENSP00000303830 | A2 | |
INSR | ENST00000341500.9 | c.2231+2205C>T | intron_variant | 1 | ENSP00000342838 | P3 |
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes AF: 0.00111 AC: 169AN: 152250Hom.: 0 Cov.: 32
GnomAD3 exomes AF: 0.000796 AC: 200AN: 251258Hom.: 0 AF XY: 0.000751 AC XY: 102AN XY: 135810
GnomAD4 exome AF: 0.00190 AC: 2784AN: 1461806Hom.: 8 Cov.: 31 AF XY: 0.00181 AC XY: 1319AN XY: 727210
GnomAD4 genome AF: 0.00111 AC: 169AN: 152250Hom.: 0 Cov.: 32 AF XY: 0.00116 AC XY: 86AN XY: 74384
ClinVar
Submissions by phenotype
not provided Uncertain:2Benign:4
Likely benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Laboratory of Diagnostic Genome Analysis, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC) | - | - - |
Likely benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Clinical Genetics DNA and cytogenetics Diagnostics Lab, Erasmus MC, Erasmus Medical Center | - | - - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), Labcorp | Jul 10, 2023 | - - |
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Eurofins Ntd Llc (ga) | Jul 18, 2017 | - - |
Likely benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Genome Diagnostics Laboratory, University Medical Center Utrecht | - | - - |
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | GeneDx | May 18, 2020 | Reported previously in the heterozygous state with a second INSR variant in a female with type A insulin resistance in childhood who had normal weight and body mass indices (Wei et al., 2017); In silico analysis supports that this missense variant does not alter protein structure/function; This variant is associated with the following publications: (PMID: 28093873, 22939401) - |
Insulin-resistant diabetes mellitus AND acanthosis nigricans Uncertain:1Benign:1
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Mendelics | May 28, 2019 | - - |
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina | Jan 12, 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, this variant could not be ruled out of causing disease and therefore its association with disease required further investigation. A literature search was performed for the gene, cDNA change, and amino acid change (if applicable). No publications were found based on this search. This variant was therefore classified as a variant of unknown significance for this disease. - |
not specified Uncertain:1
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Genetic Services Laboratory, University of Chicago | Jun 12, 2015 | - - |
Rabson-Mendenhall syndrome Uncertain:1
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina | Jan 12, 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, this variant could not be ruled out of causing disease and therefore its association with disease required further investigation. A literature search was performed for the gene, cDNA change, and amino acid change (if applicable). No publications were found based on this search. This variant was therefore classified as a variant of unknown significance for this disease. - |
Leprechaunism syndrome Uncertain:1
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina | Jan 12, 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, this variant could not be ruled out of causing disease and therefore its association with disease required further investigation. A literature search was performed for the gene, cDNA change, and amino acid change (if applicable). No publications were found based on this search. This variant was therefore classified as a variant of unknown significance for this disease. - |
Inborn genetic diseases Benign:1
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Ambry Genetics | Oct 09, 2021 | This alteration is classified as likely 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. - |
Monogenic diabetes Benign:1
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | research | Personalized Diabetes Medicine Program, University of Maryland School of Medicine | Mar 24, 2017 | ACMG Criteria:BS2 (6 controls in T2DM), PP3 (2 predictors), BP4 (6 predictors) - |
INSR-related disorder Benign:1
Likely benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | PreventionGenetics, part of Exact Sciences | Feb 07, 2022 | 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