rs1801250
Positions:
Variant summary
Our verdict is Benign. Variant got -19 ACMG points: 0P and 19B. BP4_ModerateBP6_Very_StrongBP7BS1BS2
The NM_005359.6(SMAD4):āc.1086T>Cā(p.Phe362=) variant causes a synonymous change involving the alteration of a non-conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.00144 in 1,614,186 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, including 13 homozygotes. In-silico tool predicts a benign outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Likely benign (ā ā ).
Frequency
Genomes: š 0.0022 ( 1 hom., cov: 32)
Exomes š: 0.0014 ( 12 hom. )
Consequence
SMAD4
NM_005359.6 synonymous
NM_005359.6 synonymous
Scores
2
Clinical Significance
Conservation
PhyloP100: 2.42
Genes affected
SMAD4 (HGNC:6770): (SMAD family member 4) This gene encodes a member of the Smad family of signal transduction proteins. Smad proteins are phosphorylated and activated by transmembrane serine-threonine receptor kinases in response to transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta signaling. The product of this gene forms homomeric complexes and heteromeric complexes with other activated Smad proteins, which then accumulate in the nucleus and regulate the transcription of target genes. This protein binds to DNA and recognizes an 8-bp palindromic sequence (GTCTAGAC) called the Smad-binding element (SBE). The protein acts as a tumor suppressor and inhibits epithelial cell proliferation. It may also have an inhibitory effect on tumors by reducing angiogenesis and increasing blood vessel hyperpermeability. The encoded protein is a crucial component of the bone morphogenetic protein signaling pathway. The Smad proteins are subject to complex regulation by post-translational modifications. Mutations or deletions in this gene have been shown to result in pancreatic cancer, juvenile polyposis syndrome, and hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome. [provided by RefSeq, May 2022]
Genome browser will be placed here
ACMG classification
Classification made for transcript
Verdict is Benign. Variant got -19 ACMG points.
BP4
Computational evidence support a benign effect (BayesDel_noAF=-0.46).
BP6
Variant 18-51065553-T-C is Benign according to our data. Variant chr18-51065553-T-C is described in ClinVar as [Likely_benign]. Clinvar id is 132693.Status of the report is criteria_provided_multiple_submitters_no_conflicts, 2 stars. Variant chr18-51065553-T-C is described in Lovd as [Benign]. Variant chr18-51065553-T-C is described in Lovd as [Likely_benign].
BP7
Synonymous conserved (PhyloP=2.41 with no splicing effect.
BS1
Variant frequency is greater than expected in population afr. gnomad4 allele frequency = 0.00223 (340/152328) while in subpopulation AFR AF= 0.00397 (165/41562). AF 95% confidence interval is 0.00347. There are 1 homozygotes in gnomad4. There are 167 alleles in male gnomad4 subpopulation. Median coverage is 32. This position pass quality control queck.
BS2
High AC in GnomAd4 at 340 AD gene.
Transcripts
RefSeq
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | MANE | Protein | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SMAD4 | NM_005359.6 | c.1086T>C | p.Phe362= | synonymous_variant | 9/12 | ENST00000342988.8 | NP_005350.1 |
Ensembl
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | TSL | MANE | Protein | Appris | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SMAD4 | ENST00000342988.8 | c.1086T>C | p.Phe362= | synonymous_variant | 9/12 | 5 | NM_005359.6 | ENSP00000341551 | P1 |
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes AF: 0.00222 AC: 338AN: 152210Hom.: 1 Cov.: 32
GnomAD3 genomes
AF:
AC:
338
AN:
152210
Hom.:
Cov.:
32
Gnomad AFR
AF:
Gnomad AMI
AF:
Gnomad AMR
AF:
Gnomad ASJ
AF:
Gnomad EAS
AF:
Gnomad SAS
AF:
Gnomad FIN
AF:
Gnomad MID
AF:
Gnomad NFE
AF:
Gnomad OTH
AF:
GnomAD3 exomes AF: 0.00182 AC: 457AN: 251414Hom.: 3 AF XY: 0.00182 AC XY: 247AN XY: 135886
GnomAD3 exomes
AF:
AC:
457
AN:
251414
Hom.:
AF XY:
AC XY:
247
AN XY:
135886
Gnomad AFR exome
AF:
Gnomad AMR exome
AF:
Gnomad ASJ exome
AF:
Gnomad EAS exome
AF:
Gnomad SAS exome
AF:
Gnomad FIN exome
AF:
Gnomad NFE exome
AF:
Gnomad OTH exome
AF:
GnomAD4 exome AF: 0.00135 AC: 1980AN: 1461858Hom.: 12 Cov.: 31 AF XY: 0.00134 AC XY: 976AN XY: 727228
GnomAD4 exome
AF:
AC:
1980
AN:
1461858
Hom.:
Cov.:
31
AF XY:
AC XY:
976
AN XY:
727228
Gnomad4 AFR exome
AF:
Gnomad4 AMR exome
AF:
Gnomad4 ASJ exome
AF:
Gnomad4 EAS exome
AF:
Gnomad4 SAS exome
AF:
Gnomad4 FIN exome
AF:
Gnomad4 NFE exome
AF:
Gnomad4 OTH exome
AF:
GnomAD4 genome AF: 0.00223 AC: 340AN: 152328Hom.: 1 Cov.: 32 AF XY: 0.00224 AC XY: 167AN XY: 74488
GnomAD4 genome
AF:
AC:
340
AN:
152328
Hom.:
Cov.:
32
AF XY:
AC XY:
167
AN XY:
74488
Gnomad4 AFR
AF:
Gnomad4 AMR
AF:
Gnomad4 ASJ
AF:
Gnomad4 EAS
AF:
Gnomad4 SAS
AF:
Gnomad4 FIN
AF:
Gnomad4 NFE
AF:
Gnomad4 OTH
AF:
Alfa
AF:
Hom.:
Bravo
AF:
Asia WGS
AF:
AC:
9
AN:
3478
EpiCase
AF:
EpiControl
AF:
ClinVar
Significance: Benign/Likely benign
Submissions summary: Benign:25
Revision: criteria provided, multiple submitters, no conflicts
LINK: link
Submissions by phenotype
not specified Benign:8
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Genetic Services Laboratory, University of Chicago | Apr 25, 2019 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | PreventionGenetics, part of Exact Sciences | Dec 14, 2016 | - - |
Likely benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Mayo Clinic Laboratories, Mayo Clinic | - | - - |
Benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Clinical Genetics, Academic Medical Center | - | - - |
Benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Genome Diagnostics Laboratory, Amsterdam University Medical Center | - | - - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Center for Genomic Medicine, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital | Aug 15, 2023 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | GeneDx | Dec 26, 2013 | 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. - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Eurofins Ntd Llc (ga) | Mar 27, 2018 | - - |
not provided Benign:7
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Women's Health and Genetics/Laboratory Corporation of America, LabCorp | Feb 23, 2016 | Variant summary: The c.1086T>C in SMAD4 gene is a synonymous change that involves a conserved nucleotide. 5/5 programs in Alamut predict that this variant does not affect normal splicing, however no functional studies supporting this notion were published at the time of evaluation. The variant was found in multiple affected individuals presented with personal and/or family history of cancer. It is present in the control population dataset of ExAC at frequency of 0.17%, including 2 homozygous occurrences. The observed frequency exceeds the maximum expected allele frequency for a pathogenic SMAD4 variant, suggesting that it is a common polymorphism. However, some of these occurrences may potentially be due to a presence of a processed pseudogene, and, therefore, should be taken with cautions. Lastly, the variant has been reported as Likely Benign/Benign by reputable databases/clinical laboratories. Taken together, this variant has been classified as Benign. - |
Likely benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Joint Genome Diagnostic Labs from Nijmegen and Maastricht, Radboudumc and MUMC+ | - | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Quest Diagnostics Nichols Institute San Juan Capistrano | Aug 24, 2022 | - - |
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | CeGaT Center for Human Genetics Tuebingen | Nov 01, 2024 | SMAD4: BP4, BS1 - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | ARUP Laboratories, Molecular Genetics and Genomics, ARUP Laboratories | Sep 22, 2023 | - - |
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 | not provided | Breakthrough Genomics, Breakthrough Genomics | - | - - |
Hereditary cancer-predisposing syndrome Benign:2
Likely benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | True Health Diagnostics | Oct 10, 2017 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Color Diagnostics, LLC DBA Color Health | Mar 17, 2016 | - - |
Generalized juvenile polyposis/juvenile polyposis coli Benign:2
Likely benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Sinai Health System | - | The SMAD4 p.Phe362= variant was identified in 2 of 1004 proband chromosomes (frequency: 0.002) from individuals or families with gastric or breast cancer and was present in 1 of 1420 control chromosomes (frequency: 0.001) from healthy individuals (Oliveira 2003, Tram 2011). The variant was also identified in dbSNP (ID: rs1801250) as "With other allele", ClinVar (classified as benign by Invitae, GeneDx, Color and ARUP; and as likely benign by Ambry Genetics and two other submitters), and in LOVD 3.0 (3x as benign or likely benign). The variant was identified in control databases in 502 of 277188 chromosomes (3 homozygous) at a frequency of 0.002, increasing the likelihood this could be a low frequency benign variant (Genome Aggregation Database Feb 27, 2017). The variant was observed in the following populations: African in 84 of 24028 chromosomes (freq: 0.003), Other in 28 of 6466 chromosomes (freq: 0.004), Latino in 103 of 34412 chromosomes (freq: 0.003), European in 133 of 126694 chromosomes (freq: 0.001), Ashkenazi Jewish in 149 of 10150 chromosomes (freq: 0.02), and South Asian in 5 of 30782 chromosomes (freq: 0.0002), while the variant was not observed in the East Asian or Finnish populations. The p.Phe362= variant is not expected to have clinical significance because it does not result in a change of amino acid and is not located in a known consensus splice site. In addition, in silico or computational prediction software programs (SpliceSiteFinder, MaxEntScan, NNSPLICE, GeneSplicer) do not predict a 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. - |
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. - |
Juvenile polyposis syndrome Benign:2
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), Labcorp | Feb 01, 2024 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | KCCC/NGS Laboratory, Kuwait Cancer Control Center | Jul 07, 2023 | - - |
Myhre syndrome 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. - |
Familial thoracic aortic aneurysm and aortic dissection Benign:1
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | CHEO Genetics Diagnostic Laboratory, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario | Aug 16, 2017 | - - |
Hereditary cancer-predisposing syndrome;C4707243:Familial thoracic aortic aneurysm and aortic dissection Benign:1
Likely benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Ambry Genetics | Sep 25, 2014 | 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. - |
Juvenile polyposis/hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome Benign:1
Likely 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 likely benign is not then subjected to further curation. The score for this variant resulted in a classification of likely benign for this disease. - |
Computational scores
Source:
Name
Calibrated prediction
Score
Prediction
BayesDel_noAF
Benign
CADD
Benign
DANN
Benign
RBP_binding_hub_radar
RBP_regulation_power_radar
Splicing
Name
Calibrated prediction
Score
Prediction
SpliceAI score (max)
Details are displayed if max score is > 0.2
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at