rs148337159

Variant names:

Your query was ambiguous. Multiple possible variants found:

Variant summary

Our verdict is Benign. The variant received -9 ACMG points: 0P and 9B. BP4_StrongBP6BS1

The NM_030928.4(CDT1):c.758G>A(p.Arg253His) variant causes a missense change involving the alteration of a non-conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.000196 in 1,613,146 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). Another variant affecting the same amino acid position, but resulting in a different missense (i.e. R253C) has been classified as Uncertain significance.

Frequency

Genomes: 𝑓 0.00077 ( 0 hom., cov: 35)

Exomes 𝑓: 0.00014 ( 0 hom. )

Consequence

CDT1
NM_030928.4 missense

Scores

Clinical Significance

Conflicting classifications of pathogenicity criteria provided, conflicting classifications U:1B:2

Conservation

PhyloP100: 2.74

Publications

1 publications found

Variant links:

Genes affected

CDT1 (HGNC:24576): (chromatin licensing and DNA replication factor 1) The protein encoded by this gene is involved in the formation of the pre-replication complex that is necessary for DNA replication. The encoded protein can bind geminin, which prevents replication and may function to prevent this protein from initiating replication at inappropriate origins. Phosphorylation of this protein by cyclin A-dependent kinases results in degradation of the protein. [provided by RefSeq, Mar 2011]

CDT1 Gene-Disease associations (from GenCC):

Meier-Gorlin syndrome 4
Inheritance: AR Classification: DEFINITIVE, STRONG Submitted by: ClinGen, Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), G2P
Meier-Gorlin syndrome
Inheritance: AD Classification: SUPPORTIVE Submitted by: Orphanet

CDT1 links:

Genome browser will be placed here

ACMG classification

Classification was made for transcript

Our verdict: Benign. The variant received -9 ACMG points.

BP4

Computational evidence support a benign effect (MetaRNN=0.013385385).

BP6

Variant 16-88805795-G-A is Benign according to our data. Variant chr16-88805795-G-A is described in ClinVar as Conflicting_classifications_of_pathogenicity. ClinVar VariationId is 434675.

BS1

Variant frequency is greater than expected in population afr. GnomAd4 allele frequency = 0.000768 (117/152326) while in subpopulation AFR AF = 0.00224 (93/41566). AF 95% confidence interval is 0.00187. There are 0 homozygotes in GnomAd4. There are 55 alleles in the male GnomAd4 subpopulation. Median coverage is 35. This position passed quality control check.

Variant Effect in Transcripts

ACMG analysis was done for transcript: NM_030928.4. You can select a different transcript below to see updated ACMG assignments.

RefSeq Transcripts

Selected	Gene	Transcript	Tags	HGVSc	HGVSp	Effect	Exon Rank	Protein	UniProt
	CDT1	NM_030928.4	MANE Select	c.758G>A	p.Arg253His	missense	Exon 5 of 10	NP_112190.2

Ensembl Transcripts

Gene	Transcript	Tags	HGVSc	HGVSp	Effect	Exon Rank	Protein
CDT1	ENST00000301019.9	TSL:1 MANE Select	c.758G>A	p.Arg253His	missense	Exon 5 of 10	ENSP00000301019.4
CDT1	ENST00000569140.1	TSL:3	c.26G>A	p.Arg9His	missense	Exon 1 of 5	ENSP00000456926.1
CDT1	ENST00000562747.1	TSL:2	n.464G>A		non_coding_transcript_exon	Exon 4 of 5

Frequencies

GnomAD3 genomes

AF:

0.000769

AC:

117

AN:

152208

Hom.:

Cov.:

show subpopulations

Gnomad AFR

AF:

0.00224

Gnomad AMI

AF:

0.00

Gnomad AMR

AF:

0.000196

Gnomad ASJ

AF:

0.00

Gnomad EAS

AF:

0.00

Gnomad SAS

AF:

0.00

Gnomad FIN

AF:

0.00169

Gnomad MID

AF:

0.00

Gnomad NFE

AF:

0.0000294

Gnomad OTH

AF:

0.000478

GnomAD2 exomes

AF:

0.000372

AC:

AN:

249804

AF XY:

0.000317

show subpopulations

Gnomad AFR exome

AF:

0.00261

Gnomad AMR exome

AF:

0.000116

Gnomad ASJ exome

AF:

0.00

Gnomad EAS exome

AF:

0.0000545

Gnomad FIN exome

AF:

0.00158

Gnomad NFE exome

AF:

0.0000266

Gnomad OTH exome

AF:

0.000164

GnomAD4 exome

AF:

0.000136

AC:

199

AN:

1460820

Hom.:

Cov.:

AF XY:

0.000139

AC XY:

101

AN XY:

726692

show subpopulations

African (AFR)

AF:

0.00254

AC:

AN:

33476

American (AMR)

AF:

0.0000894

AC:

AN:

44718

Ashkenazi Jewish (ASJ)

AF:

0.00

AC:

AN:

26132

East Asian (EAS)

AF:

0.000151

AC:

AN:

39698

South Asian (SAS)

AF:

0.000186

AC:

AN:

86250

European-Finnish (FIN)

AF:

0.00124

AC:

AN:

52466

Middle Eastern (MID)

AF:

0.00

AC:

AN:

5762

European-Non Finnish (NFE)

AF:

0.00000809

AC:

AN:

1111940

Other (OTH)

AF:

0.000232

AC:

AN:

60378

Allele Balance Distribution

Red line indicates average allele balance

Average allele balance: 0.491

Heterozygous variant carriers

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

0.95

Allele balance

Age Distribution

Exome Het

Variant carriers

<30

30-35

35-40

40-45

45-50

50-55

55-60

60-65

65-70

70-75

75-80

>80

Age

GnomAD4 genome

AF:

0.000768

AC:

117

AN:

152326

Hom.:

Cov.:

AF XY:

0.000738

AC XY:

AN XY:

74490

show subpopulations

African (AFR)

AF:

0.00224

AC:

AN:

41566

American (AMR)

AF:

0.000196

AC:

AN:

15308

Ashkenazi Jewish (ASJ)

AF:

0.00

AC:

AN:

3472

East Asian (EAS)

AF:

0.00

AC:

AN:

5182

South Asian (SAS)

AF:

0.00

AC:

AN:

4824

European-Finnish (FIN)

AF:

0.00169

AC:

AN:

10624

Middle Eastern (MID)

AF:

0.00

AC:

AN:

294

European-Non Finnish (NFE)

AF:

0.0000294

AC:

AN:

68028

Other (OTH)

AF:

0.000473

AC:

AN:

2116

Allele Balance Distribution

Red line indicates average allele balance

Average allele balance: 0.493

Heterozygous variant carriers

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

0.95

Allele balance

Age Distribution

Genome Het

Variant carriers

<30

30-35

35-40

40-45

45-50

50-55

55-60

60-65

65-70

70-75

75-80

>80

Age

Alfa

AF:

0.000267

Hom.:

Bravo

AF:

0.000839

ESP6500AA

AF:

0.00250

AC:

ESP6500EA

AF:

0.000116

AC:

ExAC

AF:

0.000297

AC:

ClinVar

Significance: Conflicting classifications of pathogenicity

Submissions summary: Uncertain:1Benign:2

Revision: criteria provided, conflicting classifications

LINK: link

Submissions by phenotype

not specified

Uncertain:1

May 24, 2017

Genetic Services Laboratory, University of Chicago

Significance:Uncertain significance

Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter

Collection Method:clinical testing

CDT1-related disorder

Benign:1

May 09, 2022

PreventionGenetics, part of Exact Sciences

Significance:Likely benign

Review Status:no assertion criteria provided

Collection Method:clinical testing

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).

not provided

Benign:1

Jul 24, 2024

Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), Labcorp

Significance:Likely benign

Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter

Collection Method:clinical testing

Computational scores

Source: dbNSFP v4.9

Name

Calibrated prediction

Score

Prediction

AlphaMissense

Benign

0.085

BayesDel_addAF

Benign

-0.43

BayesDel_noAF

Benign

-0.40

CADD

Uncertain

(source)

DANN

Pathogenic

1.0

DEOGEN2

Benign

0.18

Eigen

Uncertain

0.22

Eigen_PC

Benign

0.10

FATHMM_MKL

Uncertain

0.83

LIST_S2

Uncertain

0.87

M_CAP

Benign

0.022

MetaRNN

Benign

0.013

MetaSVM

Benign

-0.94

MutationAssessor

Uncertain

2.6

PhyloP100

2.7

PrimateAI

Benign

0.26

PROVEAN

Uncertain

-3.3

REVEL

Benign

0.15

Sift

Uncertain

0.027

Sift4G

Uncertain

0.019

Polyphen

1.0

Vest4

0.17

MVP

0.66

MPC

0.016

ClinPred

0.062

GERP RS

2.8

PromoterAI

-0.011

Neutral

(source)

RBP_binding_hub_radar

0.0

RBP_regulation_power_radar

1.1

Varity_R

0.11

gMVP

0.41

Mutation Taster

=86/14

polymorphism

(source)

Splicing

Name

Calibrated prediction

Score

Prediction

SpliceAI score (max)

0.0

Details are displayed if max score is > 0.2

Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at spliceailookup.broadinstitute.org

Publications

You must be logged in to view publications. This limit was set because tens of millions (!) of queries from AI bots are generated daily.

Variant summary

Frequency

Consequence

Scores

Clinical Significance

Conservation

Publications

ACMG classification

Variant Effect in Transcripts

RefSeq Transcripts

Ensembl Transcripts

Frequencies

Age Distribution

Age Distribution

ClinVar

Submissions by phenotype

Computational scores

Splicing

Publications

Other links and lift over