rs79705698

Variant summary

Our verdict is Benign. The variant received -20 ACMG points: 0P and 20B. BP4_StrongBP6_Very_StrongBA1

The NM_025114.4(CEP290):​c.1991A>G​(p.Asp664Gly) variant causes a missense change. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.0219 in 1,548,028 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, including 1,524 homozygotes. In-silico tool predicts a benign outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Benign (★★). Synonymous variant affecting the same amino acid position (i.e. D664D) has been classified as Likely benign.

Frequency

Genomes: 𝑓 0.023 ( 161 hom., cov: 32)
Exomes 𝑓: 0.022 ( 1363 hom. )

Consequence

CEP290
NM_025114.4 missense

Scores

1
7
10

Clinical Significance

Benign criteria provided, multiple submitters, no conflicts B:19O:1

Conservation

PhyloP100: 5.83

Publications

23 publications found
Variant links:
Genes affected
CEP290 (HGNC:29021): (centrosomal protein 290) This gene encodes a protein with 13 putative coiled-coil domains, a region with homology to SMC chromosome segregation ATPases, six KID motifs, three tropomyosin homology domains and an ATP/GTP binding site motif A. The protein is localized to the centrosome and cilia and has sites for N-glycosylation, tyrosine sulfation, phosphorylation, N-myristoylation, and amidation. Mutations in this gene have been associated with Joubert syndrome and nephronophthisis and the presence of antibodies against this protein is associated with several forms of cancer. [provided by RefSeq, Jul 2008]
CEP290 Gene-Disease associations (from GenCC):
  • CEP290-related ciliopathy
    Inheritance: AR Classification: DEFINITIVE Submitted by: ClinGen
  • Joubert syndrome 5
    Inheritance: AR Classification: DEFINITIVE, STRONG Submitted by: Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), G2P
  • Bardet-Biedl syndrome 14
    Inheritance: AR Classification: STRONG, MODERATE Submitted by: Genomics England PanelApp, Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae)
  • Leber congenital amaurosis 10
    Inheritance: AR Classification: STRONG Submitted by: Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae)
  • Leber congenital amaurosis
    Inheritance: AD Classification: SUPPORTIVE Submitted by: Orphanet
  • Bardet-Biedl syndrome
    Inheritance: AR Classification: SUPPORTIVE Submitted by: Orphanet
  • Joubert syndrome with oculorenal defect
    Inheritance: AR Classification: SUPPORTIVE Submitted by: Orphanet
  • Meckel syndrome
    Inheritance: AR Classification: SUPPORTIVE Submitted by: Orphanet
  • Senior-Loken syndrome
    Inheritance: AR Classification: SUPPORTIVE Submitted by: Orphanet

Genome browser will be placed here

ACMG classification

Classification was made for transcript

Our verdict: Benign. The variant received -20 ACMG points.

BP4
Computational evidence support a benign effect (MetaRNN=0.001729846).
BP6
Variant 12-88114481-T-C is Benign according to our data. Variant chr12-88114481-T-C is described in ClinVar as [Benign]. Clinvar id is 100592.Status of the report is criteria_provided_multiple_submitters_no_conflicts, 2 stars.
BA1
GnomAd4 highest subpopulation (EAS) allele frequency at 95% confidence interval = 0.133 is higher than 0.05.

Transcripts

RefSeq

Gene Transcript HGVSc HGVSp Effect Exon rank MANE Protein UniProt
CEP290NM_025114.4 linkc.1991A>G p.Asp664Gly missense_variant Exon 20 of 54 ENST00000552810.6 NP_079390.3 O15078Q05BJ6

Ensembl

Gene Transcript HGVSc HGVSp Effect Exon rank TSL MANE Protein Appris UniProt
CEP290ENST00000552810.6 linkc.1991A>G p.Asp664Gly missense_variant Exon 20 of 54 1 NM_025114.4 ENSP00000448012.1 O15078

Frequencies

GnomAD3 genomes
AF:
0.0228
AC:
3462
AN:
152128
Hom.:
158
Cov.:
32
show subpopulations
Gnomad AFR
AF:
0.00388
Gnomad AMI
AF:
0.00110
Gnomad AMR
AF:
0.0835
Gnomad ASJ
AF:
0.0147
Gnomad EAS
AF:
0.142
Gnomad SAS
AF:
0.0137
Gnomad FIN
AF:
0.0233
Gnomad MID
AF:
0.00316
Gnomad NFE
AF:
0.0129
Gnomad OTH
AF:
0.0239
GnomAD2 exomes
AF:
0.0335
AC:
5244
AN:
156596
AF XY:
0.0294
show subpopulations
Gnomad AFR exome
AF:
0.00302
Gnomad AMR exome
AF:
0.0919
Gnomad ASJ exome
AF:
0.0143
Gnomad EAS exome
AF:
0.124
Gnomad FIN exome
AF:
0.0272
Gnomad NFE exome
AF:
0.0128
Gnomad OTH exome
AF:
0.0295
GnomAD4 exome
AF:
0.0219
AC:
30498
AN:
1395780
Hom.:
1363
Cov.:
29
AF XY:
0.0211
AC XY:
14520
AN XY:
688316
show subpopulations
African (AFR)
AF:
0.00251
AC:
79
AN:
31496
American (AMR)
AF:
0.0968
AC:
3396
AN:
35100
Ashkenazi Jewish (ASJ)
AF:
0.0147
AC:
368
AN:
25110
East Asian (EAS)
AF:
0.223
AC:
7909
AN:
35536
South Asian (SAS)
AF:
0.00716
AC:
561
AN:
78352
European-Finnish (FIN)
AF:
0.0255
AC:
1253
AN:
49180
Middle Eastern (MID)
AF:
0.00264
AC:
15
AN:
5688
European-Non Finnish (NFE)
AF:
0.0143
AC:
15390
AN:
1077386
Other (OTH)
AF:
0.0264
AC:
1527
AN:
57932
Allele Balance Distribution
Red line indicates average allele balance
Average allele balance: 0.450
Heterozygous variant carriers
0
1323
2645
3968
5290
6613
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
0.95
Allele balance

Age Distribution

Exome Het
Exome Hom
Variant carriers
0
700
1400
2100
2800
3500
<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:
0.0228
AC:
3467
AN:
152248
Hom.:
161
Cov.:
32
AF XY:
0.0244
AC XY:
1816
AN XY:
74438
show subpopulations
African (AFR)
AF:
0.00387
AC:
161
AN:
41576
American (AMR)
AF:
0.0841
AC:
1286
AN:
15294
Ashkenazi Jewish (ASJ)
AF:
0.0147
AC:
51
AN:
3472
East Asian (EAS)
AF:
0.141
AC:
732
AN:
5174
South Asian (SAS)
AF:
0.0135
AC:
65
AN:
4828
European-Finnish (FIN)
AF:
0.0233
AC:
247
AN:
10612
Middle Eastern (MID)
AF:
0.00340
AC:
1
AN:
294
European-Non Finnish (NFE)
AF:
0.0128
AC:
873
AN:
67972
Other (OTH)
AF:
0.0237
AC:
50
AN:
2114
Allele Balance Distribution
Red line indicates average allele balance
Average allele balance: 0.501
Heterozygous variant carriers
0
161
322
483
644
805
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
0.95
Allele balance

Age Distribution

Genome Het
Genome Hom
Variant carriers
0
38
76
114
152
190
<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:
0.0195
Hom.:
380
Bravo
AF:
0.0266
TwinsUK
AF:
0.0124
AC:
46
ALSPAC
AF:
0.0119
AC:
46
ESP6500AA
AF:
0.00316
AC:
11
ESP6500EA
AF:
0.0122
AC:
94
ExAC
AF:
0.0111
AC:
748
Asia WGS
AF:
0.0800
AC:
277
AN:
3478

ClinVar

Significance: Benign
Submissions summary: Benign:19Other:1
Revision: criteria provided, multiple submitters, no conflicts
LINK: link

Submissions by phenotype

not provided Benign:4Other:1
-
NEI Ophthalmic Genomics Laboratory, National Institutes of Health
Significance:not provided
Review Status:no classification provided
Collection Method:literature only

- -

-
Clinical Genetics DNA and cytogenetics Diagnostics Lab, Erasmus MC, Erasmus Medical Center
Significance:Likely benign
Review Status:no assertion criteria provided
Collection Method:clinical testing

- -

Nov 11, 2023
ARUP Laboratories, Molecular Genetics and Genomics, ARUP Laboratories
Significance:Benign
Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter
Collection Method:clinical testing

- -

-
Laboratory of Diagnostic Genome Analysis, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC)
Significance:Likely benign
Review Status:no assertion criteria provided
Collection Method:clinical testing

- -

-
Breakthrough Genomics, Breakthrough Genomics
Significance:Benign
Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter
Collection Method:not provided

- -

not specified Benign:4
-
Joint Genome Diagnostic Labs from Nijmegen and Maastricht, Radboudumc and MUMC+
Significance:Benign
Review Status:no assertion criteria provided
Collection Method:clinical testing

- -

-
Genetic Services Laboratory, University of Chicago
Significance:Likely benign
Review Status:no assertion criteria provided
Collection Method:clinical testing

Likely benign based on allele frequency in 1000 Genomes Project or ESP global frequency and its presence in a patient with a rare or unrelated disease phenotype. NOT Sanger confirmed. -

Apr 15, 2014
GeneDx
Significance:Benign
Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter
Collection Method:clinical testing

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. -

-
PreventionGenetics, part of Exact Sciences
Significance:Benign
Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter
Collection Method:clinical testing

- -

Retinal dystrophy Benign:2
Oct 01, 2023
Dept Of Ophthalmology, Nagoya University
Significance:Benign
Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter
Collection Method:research

- -

Jan 01, 2012
Institute of Human Genetics, Univ. Regensburg, Univ. Regensburg
Significance:Benign
Review Status:no assertion criteria provided
Collection Method:clinical testing

- -

Joubert syndrome 5 Benign:2
May 31, 2018
SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics
Significance:Benign
Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter
Collection Method:curation

This variant is interpreted as a Benign - Stand Alone, for Joubert syndrome 5, in Autosomal Recessive manner. The following ACMG Tag(s) were applied: BA1 => Allele frequency is >5% in Exome Sequencing Project, 1000 Genomes Project, or Exome Aggregation Consortium. BS4 => Lack of segregation in affected members of a family (PMID:17564967). -

Jan 13, 2018
Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina
Significance:Benign
Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter
Collection Method:clinical testing

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. -

Kidney disorder Benign:1
Aug 01, 2019
Genome Diagnostics Laboratory, The Hospital for Sick Children
Significance:Benign
Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter
Collection Method:clinical testing

- -

Senior-Loken syndrome 6 Benign:1
Jan 13, 2018
Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina
Significance:Benign
Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter
Collection Method:clinical testing

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. -

Meckel-Gruber syndrome;C0431399:Joubert syndrome;C0687120:Nephronophthisis Benign:1
Feb 03, 2025
Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), Labcorp
Significance:Benign
Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter
Collection Method:clinical testing

- -

Leber congenital amaurosis 10 Benign:1
Jan 13, 2018
Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina
Significance:Benign
Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter
Collection Method:clinical testing

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. -

Leber congenital amaurosis Benign:1
Sep 16, 2020
Natera, Inc.
Significance:Benign
Review Status:no assertion criteria provided
Collection Method:clinical testing

- -

Bardet-Biedl syndrome 14 Benign:1
Jan 13, 2018
Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina
Significance:Benign
Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter
Collection Method:clinical testing

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. -

Meckel syndrome, type 4 Benign:1
Jan 13, 2018
Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina
Significance:Benign
Review Status:criteria provided, single submitter
Collection Method:clinical testing

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. -

Computational scores

Source: dbNSFP v4.3

Name
Calibrated prediction
Score
Prediction
AlphaMissense
Benign
0.10
BayesDel_addAF
Benign
-0.34
T
BayesDel_noAF
Benign
-0.11
CADD
Benign
21
DANN
Uncertain
0.99
DEOGEN2
Benign
0.21
.;T;T;.
Eigen
Uncertain
0.34
Eigen_PC
Uncertain
0.45
FATHMM_MKL
Pathogenic
0.99
D
LIST_S2
Uncertain
0.92
D;D;D;D
MetaRNN
Benign
0.0017
T;T;T;T
MetaSVM
Benign
-1.0
T
MutationAssessor
Uncertain
2.0
.;M;.;.
PhyloP100
5.8
PrimateAI
Benign
0.43
T
PROVEAN
Benign
-1.5
N;N;.;.
REVEL
Uncertain
0.37
Sift
Uncertain
0.011
D;D;.;.
Sift4G
Benign
0.085
T;T;T;T
Polyphen
0.20
.;B;.;.
Vest4
0.15
MPC
0.31
ClinPred
0.018
T
GERP RS
5.9
Varity_R
0.20
gMVP
0.21
Mutation Taster
=79/21
polymorphism (auto)

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

Other links and lift over

dbSNP: rs79705698; hg19: chr12-88508258; COSMIC: COSV58351871; API