rs147241704
Variant summary
Our verdict is Benign. Variant got -13 ACMG points: 0P and 13B. BP4_StrongBP6BS1BS2
The ENST00000337432.9(RAD51C):c.790G>A(p.Gly264Ser) variant causes a missense change involving the alteration of a conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.00314 in 1,613,062 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, including 17 homozygotes. In-silico tool predicts a benign outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Conflicting classifications of pathogenicity (no stars). Another variant affecting the same amino acid position, but resulting in a different missense (i.e. G264V) has been classified as Uncertain significance.
Frequency
Consequence
ENST00000337432.9 missense
Scores
Clinical Significance
Conservation
Genome browser will be placed here
ACMG classification
Verdict is Benign. Variant got -13 ACMG points.
Transcripts
RefSeq
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | MANE | Protein | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RAD51C | NM_058216.3 | c.790G>A | p.Gly264Ser | missense_variant | 5/9 | ENST00000337432.9 | NP_478123.1 |
Ensembl
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | TSL | MANE | Protein | Appris | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RAD51C | ENST00000337432.9 | c.790G>A | p.Gly264Ser | missense_variant | 5/9 | 1 | NM_058216.3 | ENSP00000336701 | P2 |
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes AF: 0.00201 AC: 305AN: 152048Hom.: 1 Cov.: 30
GnomAD3 exomes AF: 0.00175 AC: 439AN: 251430Hom.: 2 AF XY: 0.00173 AC XY: 235AN XY: 135890
GnomAD4 exome AF: 0.00326 AC: 4758AN: 1460896Hom.: 16 Cov.: 30 AF XY: 0.00307 AC XY: 2232AN XY: 726814
GnomAD4 genome AF: 0.00200 AC: 305AN: 152166Hom.: 1 Cov.: 30 AF XY: 0.00179 AC XY: 133AN XY: 74386
ClinVar
Submissions by phenotype
not provided Benign:10Other:1
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | GeneDx | Mar 25, 2020 | This variant is associated with the following publications: (PMID: 26406419, 24800917, 27978560, 27443514, 25980754, 26740214, 20400964, 22167183, 21750962, 22538716, 22725699, 22370629, 24315737, 21616938, 24993905, 25470109, 25318351, 24504028, 21990120, 27153395, 27621404, 27878467, 26976419, 26261251, 21537932, 27622768, 28829762, 29458332, 28678401, 23117857, 30374176, 26483394, 30309722, 31159747) - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Women's Health and Genetics/Laboratory Corporation of America, LabCorp | Apr 20, 2017 | Variant summary: The c.790G>A (p.Gly264Ser) in RAD51C gene is a missense change that involves a conserved nucleotide. The variant is located within the conserved domain Rad51_DMC1_radA, but is located outside of multimer (BRC) interface. 3/4 in silico tools predict deleterious outcome and in functional studies the variant displayed hypomorphic effects with partial repair function and partially defective homologous recombination activity.(Meindl, 2010; Somyajit, 2012; Somyajit, 2015). The variant is present in the large control population dataset of ExAC and gnomAD at a similar frequencies of 0.001853 (225/121398 and 483/277178 chrs tested, respectively), predominantly in individuals of European descent (0.003410; 207/66736 and 432/126686 chrs tested), including 2 homozygotes. These frequencies exceed the maximal expected frequency of a pathogenic allele (0.0000625) in this gene. However, this variant has been cited in breast and ovarian cancer patients at greater frequency than in controls, and several publications indicate that this variant is an ovarian cancer risk allele (Song et al 2015, Loveday at al 2012, Meindl et al 2010). The odd's ratios calculated for its association with cancer across multiple independent studies have been in the range of 1.9-4, with the 95% CI including 1.0, example, OR 1.93 across all breast cancer cases with a CI of 0.5-7.46 as reported by Pelttari et al (2011). According to the ACMG guidelines if the CI includes 1.0, there is little confidence in the assertion of association. The guidelines state that studies with OR>5.0 and where the 95% CI does not include 1.0 are considered as strong evidence in favor of pathogenicity. The variant has been reported in probands from multiple HBOC families, including 3 families tested positive for disease-causing mutation in BRCA1 (p.Tyr1463Ter), BRCA2 (c.8632+1G>T) or BRCA2 (p.Lys944Ter), respectively. The variant was also identified in one internal LCA specimen in co-occurrence with a known pathogenic variant in CHEK2 (c.1100delC). Lastly, several reputable databases/clinical laboratories cite the variant with classification of Benign/Likely Benign. Taking all line of evidence into consideration, the variant was conservatively classified as Benign. - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Institute for Clinical Genetics, University Hospital TU Dresden, University Hospital TU Dresden | Nov 03, 2021 | - - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | CeGaT Center for Human Genetics Tuebingen | Oct 01, 2024 | RAD51C: BS2 - |
Likely benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Clinical Genetics Laboratory, Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute | - | - - |
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, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Genome Diagnostics Laboratory, Amsterdam University Medical Center | - | - - |
not provided, no classification provided | phenotyping only | GenomeConnect, ClinGen | - | Variant interpreted as Uncertain significance and reported on 08-11-2016 by Lab or GTR ID 26957. GenomeConnect assertions are reported exactly as they appear on the patient-provided report from the testing laboratory. GenomeConnect staff make no attempt to reinterpret the clinical significance of the variant. - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | ARUP Laboratories, Molecular Genetics and Genomics, ARUP Laboratories | Sep 12, 2023 | - - |
Likely benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Joint Genome Diagnostic Labs from Nijmegen and Maastricht, Radboudumc and MUMC+ | - | - - |
Hereditary cancer-predisposing syndrome Uncertain:2Benign:4
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Institute for Biomarker Research, Medical Diagnostic Laboratories, L.L.C. | May 23, 2018 | - - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Ambry Genetics | Feb 12, 2019 | 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. - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Color Diagnostics, LLC DBA Color Health | Nov 05, 2015 | - - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | GeneKor MSA | Aug 01, 2018 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | curation | Sema4, Sema4 | Jul 28, 2020 | - - |
Uncertain significance, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | True Health Diagnostics | Jul 21, 2017 | - - |
Breast-ovarian cancer, familial, susceptibility to, 3 Uncertain:1Benign:2
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina | Dec 18, 2017 | This variant was observed as part of a predisposition screen in an ostensibly healthy population. A literature search was performed for the gene, cDNA change, and amino acid change (where applicable). Publications were found based on this search. However, the evidence from the literature, in combination with allele frequency data from public databases where available, was not sufficient to rule this variant in or out of causing disease. Therefore, this variant is classified as a variant of unknown significance. - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Myriad Genetics, Inc. | Apr 06, 2023 | This variant is considered likely benign. This variant is strongly associated with less severe personal and family histories of cancer, typical for individuals without pathogenic variants in this gene [PMID: 25085752]. - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | research | University of Washington Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Washington | May 09, 2018 | The RAD51C variant designated as NM_058216.2: c.790G>A (p.G264S) is classified as likely benign. Cosegregation analysis of two observed families was performed using analyze.myvariant.org (Rañola et al, 2018, PMID:28965303). The results are a combined likelihood ratio of 1.553 (Thompson, et al., 2003, PMID:2900794), which provides supporting evidence that the variant is pathogenic. However, this variant has been reported to be present in approximately 1 in every 161 individuals with European ancestry and South Asian ancestry (exac.broadinstitute.org), which is more common than known ovarian cancer risk variants. This population frequency is not consistent with a high-risk cancer variant and supports a classification of likely benign. Additionally, this variant has been reported in multiple families with breast and ovarian cancer who also tested positive for known pathogenic mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Bayesian analysis integrating all of this data (Tavtigian et al, 2018, PMID:29300386) gives a less than 1% probability of pathogenicity, which is consistent with a classification of likely benign. This variant is not predicted to alter RAD51C function or modify cancer risk for breast and ovarian cancer. A modest (less than 2 fold) increase in cancer risk due to this variant cannot be entirely excluded. This variant is not predicted to alter EPCAM function or modify risk for Lynch syndrome. This analysis was performed in conjunction with the family studies project as part of the University of Washington Find My Variant Study. - |
not specified Benign:3
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Center for Genomic Medicine, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital | Aug 15, 2023 | - - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Genetic Services Laboratory, University of Chicago | Oct 08, 2021 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Quest Diagnostics Nichols Institute San Juan Capistrano | Jan 06, 2021 | - - |
Hereditary breast ovarian cancer syndrome Uncertain:1Benign:1
Uncertain significance, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Institute for Biomarker Research, Medical Diagnostic Laboratories, L.L.C. | Sep 27, 2021 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Mendelics | Aug 22, 2023 | - - |
Fanconi anemia complementation group O Uncertain:1Benign:1
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), Labcorp | Feb 01, 2024 | - - |
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina | Dec 18, 2017 | This variant was observed as part of a predisposition screen in an ostensibly healthy population. A literature search was performed for the gene, cDNA change, and amino acid change (where applicable). Publications were found based on this search. However, the evidence from the literature, in combination with allele frequency data from public databases where available, was not sufficient to rule this variant in or out of causing disease. Therefore, this variant is classified as a variant of unknown significance. - |
Familial cancer of breast Uncertain:1
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Genetics and Molecular Pathology, SA Pathology | Jun 17, 2022 | - - |
Breast and/or ovarian cancer Benign:1
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | CHEO Genetics Diagnostic Laboratory, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario | Jun 29, 2023 | - - |
Fanconi anemia complementation group O;C3150659:Breast-ovarian cancer, familial, susceptibility to, 3 Benign:1
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Counsyl | Jun 29, 2017 | - - |
RAD51C-related disorder Benign:1
Likely benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | PreventionGenetics, part of Exact Sciences | Sep 15, 2020 | 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). - |
Malignant tumor of breast Benign:1
Likely benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Sinai Health System | - | The RAD51C p.Gly264Ser variant was identified in 95 of 24,640 proband chromosomes (frequency: 0.004) from individuals or families with endometrial, pancreatic, colorectal, breast or ovarian cancer and was present in 40 of 16846 control chromosomes (frequency: 0.002) from healthy individuals (Meindl 2009, Vuorela 2011, Thompson 2012, Schekenbach 2014, Song 2015, Leeneer 2012, Loveday 2012, Coulet 2013, Cunningham 2014, Gevensleben 2014, Hu 2016, Jonson 2015 26740214, Ring 2016, Pearlman 2017). The variant was also identified in dbSNP (rs147241704) as 'Auwith other allele'Au, ClinVar (classified as uncertain significance by PreventionGenetics and 7 other submitters; as likely benign by Ambry Genetics, GeneDx, Counsyl and 4 other submitters; and as benign by Color, Invitae and Integrated Genetics) and LOVD 3.0 (observed 14x). The variant was identified in control databases in 459 of 268,284 chromosomes (2 homozygous) at a frequency of 0.002 (Genome Aggregation Database Feb 27, 2017). The variant was observed in the following populations: European in 404 of 118,138 chromosomes (freq: 0.003, increasing the likelihood that this is a low frequency benign variant), Other in 13 of 6704 chromosomes (freq: 0.002), Finnish in 19 of 25,102 chromosomes (freq: 0.0008), African in 14 of 23,600 chromosomes (freq: 0.0006), Ashkenazi Jewish in 3 of 9860 chromosomes (freq: 0.0003), South Asian in 4 of 30,522 chromosomes (freq: 0.0001), and Latino in 2 of 35,106 chromosomes (freq: 0.00006); it was not observed in the East Asian population. The Gly264Ser variant showed some evidence of association with malignancies in the subgroup of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families (odds ratio=3.44, confidence interval=1.51'Ai7.80, p=5.32*10'Ai3; Meindl 2009). In addition, expression of the variant only partially restored the MMC sensitivity of RAD51C DT40 cells compared to the wild-type cDNA, suggesting the possibility of a hypomorphic mutation with reduced protein activity (Meindl 2009, Somyajit 2012). However, this variant has been identified in multiple cases with co-occurring, pathogenic variants (BRCA1 p.Tyr1463*, BRCA2 c.8632+1G>T, and BRCA2 p.Lys944*; Integrated Genetics internal data per ClinVar submission dated 25 Jan 2018); this decreases the likelihood that this RAD51C variant has clinical significance. The p.Gly264 residue is conserved in mammals but not in more distantly related organisms however four out of five computational analyses (PolyPhen-2, SIFT, AlignGVGD, BLOSUM, MutationTaster) do not suggest a high likelihood of impact to the protein. The variant occurs outside of the splicing consensus sequence and 1 of 4 in silico or computational prediction software programs (SpliceSiteFinder, MaxEntScan, NNSPLICE, GeneSplicer) predict a greater than 10% difference in splicing. In summary, based on the above information, the clinical significance of this variant cannot be determined with certainty at this time although we would lean towards a more benign role for this variant. This variant is classified as likely benign. - |
Computational scores
Source:
Splicing
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at