rs806052
Variant summary
Our verdict is Benign. Variant got -20 ACMG points: 0P and 20B. BP4_StrongBP6_Very_StrongBA1
The NM_001042413.2(GLIS3):āc.1270T>Cā(p.Ser424Pro) variant causes a missense change involving the alteration of a non-conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 1 in 1,585,008 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, including 792,208 homozygotes. In-silico tool predicts a benign outcome for this variant. 14/20 in silico tools predict a benign outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Benign (ā ā ).
Frequency
Consequence
NM_001042413.2 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 | Protein | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLIS3 | NM_001042413.2 | c.1270T>C | p.Ser424Pro | missense_variant | 4/11 | ENST00000381971.8 | NP_001035878.1 |
Ensembl
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | TSL | MANE | Protein | Appris | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLIS3 | ENST00000381971.8 | c.1270T>C | p.Ser424Pro | missense_variant | 4/11 | 5 | NM_001042413.2 | ENSP00000371398 | P1 |
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes AF: 0.999 AC: 152053AN: 152208Hom.: 75949 Cov.: 34
GnomAD3 exomes AF: 1.00 AC: 202267AN: 202322Hom.: 101106 AF XY: 1.00 AC XY: 111479AN XY: 111502
GnomAD4 exome AF: 1.00 AC: 1432543AN: 1432684Hom.: 716201 Cov.: 71 AF XY: 1.00 AC XY: 709304AN XY: 709358
GnomAD4 genome AF: 0.999 AC: 152169AN: 152324Hom.: 76007 Cov.: 34 AF XY: 0.999 AC XY: 74404AN XY: 74476
ClinVar
Submissions by phenotype
not specified Benign:5
Benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Diagnostic Laboratory, Department of Genetics, University Medical Center Groningen | - | - - |
Likely benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Genetic Services Laboratory, University of Chicago | - | 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. - |
Benign, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Clinical Genetics, Academic Medical Center | - | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | PreventionGenetics, part of Exact Sciences | - | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Eurofins Ntd Llc (ga) | Feb 25, 2016 | - - |
not provided Benign:3
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | GeneDx | Jul 17, 2019 | This variant is associated with the following publications: (PMID: 28444304) - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Labcorp Genetics (formerly Invitae), Labcorp | Feb 01, 2024 | - - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | not provided | Breakthrough Genomics, Breakthrough Genomics | - | - - |
Neonatal diabetes mellitus with congenital hypothyroidism Benign:3
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Genome-Nilou Lab | Aug 10, 2021 | - - |
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. - |
Benign, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Mendelics | May 28, 2019 | - - |
Computational scores
Source:
Splicing
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at