rs624851
Variant summary
Our verdict is Benign. Variant got -20 ACMG points: 0P and 20B. BP4_StrongBP6_Very_StrongBA1
The NM_001142800.2(EYS):c.4256T>C(p.Leu1419Ser) variant causes a missense change involving the alteration of a non-conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.718 in 1,550,802 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, including 402,452 homozygotes. In-silico tool predicts a benign outcome for this variant. 14/19 in silico tools predict a benign outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Benign (★★). Another nucleotide change resulting in same amino acid change has been previously reported as Likely benignin ClinVar.
Frequency
Consequence
NM_001142800.2 missense
Scores
Clinical Significance
Conservation
Genome browser will be placed here
ACMG classification
Verdict is Benign. Variant got -20 ACMG points.
Transcripts
RefSeq
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | MANE | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EYS | NM_001142800.2 | c.4256T>C | p.Leu1419Ser | missense_variant | 26/43 | ENST00000503581.6 | |
EYS | NM_001292009.2 | c.4256T>C | p.Leu1419Ser | missense_variant | 26/44 |
Ensembl
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | TSL | MANE | Appris | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EYS | ENST00000503581.6 | c.4256T>C | p.Leu1419Ser | missense_variant | 26/43 | 5 | NM_001142800.2 | A2 | |
EYS | ENST00000370621.7 | c.4256T>C | p.Leu1419Ser | missense_variant | 26/44 | 1 | P2 |
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes ? AF: 0.767 AC: 116364AN: 151782Hom.: 45533 Cov.: 30
GnomAD3 exomes AF: 0.729 AC: 111796AN: 153440Hom.: 41130 AF XY: 0.728 AC XY: 59254AN XY: 81400
GnomAD4 exome AF: 0.713 AC: 996812AN: 1398902Hom.: 356855 Cov.: 56 AF XY: 0.713 AC XY: 492035AN XY: 689970
GnomAD4 genome ? AF: 0.767 AC: 116486AN: 151900Hom.: 45597 Cov.: 30 AF XY: 0.766 AC XY: 56826AN XY: 74212
ClinVar
Submissions by phenotype
not specified Benign:4
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | GeneDx | Jul 05, 2011 | 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. - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Eurofins Ntd Llc (ga) | Aug 09, 2013 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Women's Health and Genetics/Laboratory Corporation of America, LabCorp | Apr 17, 2023 | - - |
Benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Joint Genome Diagnostic Labs from Nijmegen and Maastricht, Radboudumc and MUMC+ | - | - - |
Retinitis pigmentosa 25 Benign:4
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Genome-Nilou Lab | Jul 01, 2021 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Clinical Genetics DNA and cytogenetics Diagnostics Lab, Erasmus MC, Erasmus Medical Center | Mar 04, 2015 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | ARUP Laboratories, Molecular Genetics and Genomics, ARUP Laboratories | Nov 29, 2023 | - - |
Benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Diagnostic Laboratory, Department of Genetics, University Medical Center Groningen | - | - - |
Retinitis pigmentosa Benign:2
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina | Jan 12, 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. - |
Benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Natera, Inc. | Sep 16, 2020 | - - |
not provided Benign:1
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Invitae | Feb 01, 2024 | - - |
Retinal dystrophy Benign:1
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | research | Dept Of Ophthalmology, Nagoya University | Oct 01, 2023 | - - |
Computational scores
Source:
Splicing
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at