rs150687987
Variant summary
Our verdict is Benign. Variant got -13 ACMG points: 0P and 13B. BP4_StrongBP6BS1BS2
The NM_001852.4(COL9A2):c.1982C>T(p.Pro661Leu) variant causes a missense change. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.00276 in 1,614,048 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, including 6 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. P661T) has been classified as Likely benign.
Frequency
Consequence
NM_001852.4 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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COL9A2 | NM_001852.4 | c.1982C>T | p.Pro661Leu | missense_variant | 32/32 | ENST00000372748.8 | NP_001843.1 |
Ensembl
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | TSL | MANE | Protein | Appris | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COL9A2 | ENST00000372748.8 | c.1982C>T | p.Pro661Leu | missense_variant | 32/32 | 1 | NM_001852.4 | ENSP00000361834 | P1 | |
COL9A2 | ENST00000482722.5 | n.2285C>T | non_coding_transcript_exon_variant | 31/31 | 1 |
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes AF: 0.00231 AC: 352AN: 152202Hom.: 5 Cov.: 32
GnomAD3 exomes AF: 0.00206 AC: 511AN: 248346Hom.: 0 AF XY: 0.00214 AC XY: 288AN XY: 134836
GnomAD4 exome AF: 0.00281 AC: 4105AN: 1461728Hom.: 1 Cov.: 31 AF XY: 0.00282 AC XY: 2052AN XY: 727170
GnomAD4 genome AF: 0.00231 AC: 352AN: 152320Hom.: 5 Cov.: 32 AF XY: 0.00222 AC XY: 165AN XY: 74482
ClinVar
Submissions by phenotype
not provided Uncertain:1Benign:3
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | CeGaT Center for Human Genetics Tuebingen | Jul 01, 2022 | COL9A2: PP3, BS1 - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), Labcorp | Jan 29, 2024 | - - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | ARUP Laboratories, Molecular Genetics and Genomics, ARUP Laboratories | Oct 13, 2023 | - - |
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Eurofins Ntd Llc (ga) | Sep 20, 2016 | - - |
not specified Benign:2
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | PreventionGenetics, part of Exact Sciences | - | - - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | GeneDx | Dec 11, 2017 | This variant is considered likely benign or benign based on one or more of the following criteria: it is a conservative change, it occurs at a poorly conserved position in the protein, it is predicted to be benign by multiple in silico algorithms, and/or has population frequency not consistent with disease. - |
Epiphyseal dysplasia, multiple, 2 Benign:1
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina | Jan 13, 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 and internal cut-off values, a variant classified as benign is not then subjected to further curation. The score for this variant resulted in a classification of benign for this disease. - |
Connective tissue disorder Benign:1
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Genome Diagnostics Laboratory, The Hospital for Sick Children | Feb 01, 2020 | - - |
Computational scores
Source:
Splicing
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at