rs373850451
Variant summary
Our verdict is Uncertain significance. Variant got 2 ACMG points: 2P and 0B. PM2
The NM_001164507.2(NEB):c.17024G>T(p.Arg5675Leu) variant causes a missense change involving the alteration of a non-conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.0000132 in 152,012 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, with no homozygous occurrence. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Uncertain significance (★). Another variant affecting the same amino acid position, but resulting in a different missense (i.e. R5675H) has been classified as Likely benign.
Frequency
Consequence
NM_001164507.2 missense
Scores
Clinical Significance
Conservation
Genome browser will be placed here
ACMG classification
Verdict is Uncertain_significance. Variant got 2 ACMG points.
Transcripts
RefSeq
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | MANE | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NEB | NM_001164507.2 | c.17024G>T | p.Arg5675Leu | missense_variant | 108/182 | ENST00000427231.7 | |
NEB | NM_001164508.2 | c.17024G>T | p.Arg5675Leu | missense_variant | 108/182 | ENST00000397345.8 |
Ensembl
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | TSL | MANE | Appris | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NEB | ENST00000397345.8 | c.17024G>T | p.Arg5675Leu | missense_variant | 108/182 | 5 | NM_001164508.2 | P5 | |
NEB | ENST00000427231.7 | c.17024G>T | p.Arg5675Leu | missense_variant | 108/182 | 5 | NM_001164507.2 | A2 | |
NEB | ENST00000409198.5 | c.11921G>T | p.Arg3974Leu | missense_variant | 81/150 | 5 | |||
NEB | ENST00000413693.5 | c.1214G>T | p.Arg405Leu | missense_variant | 8/74 | 5 |
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes ? AF: 0.0000132 AC: 2AN: 152012Hom.: 0 Cov.: 32
GnomAD4 exome Cov.: 33
GnomAD4 genome ? AF: 0.0000132 AC: 2AN: 152012Hom.: 0 Cov.: 32 AF XY: 0.00 AC XY: 0AN XY: 74226
ClinVar
Submissions by phenotype
not provided Uncertain:1
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Genetic Services Laboratory, University of Chicago | Mar 31, 2014 | - - |
Computational scores
Source:
Splicing
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at