rs965375504
Variant summary
Our verdict is Likely benign. Variant got -3 ACMG points: 2P and 5B. PM1BP4BS2
The NM_000143.4(FH):āc.190A>Gā(p.Asn64Asp) variant causes a missense change involving the alteration of a non-conserved nucleotide. The variant allele was found at a frequency of 0.00000682 in 1,614,008 control chromosomes in the GnomAD database, with no homozygous occurrence. In-silico tool predicts a benign outcome for this variant. 13/21 in silico tools predict a benign outcome for this variant. Variant has been reported in ClinVar as Uncertain significance (ā ā ). Another variant affecting the same amino acid position, but resulting in a different missense (i.e. N64H) has been classified as Uncertain significance.
Frequency
Consequence
NM_000143.4 missense
Scores
Clinical Significance
Conservation
Genome browser will be placed here
ACMG classification
Verdict is Likely_benign. Variant got -3 ACMG points.
Transcripts
RefSeq
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | MANE | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FH | NM_000143.4 | c.190A>G | p.Asn64Asp | missense_variant | 2/10 | ENST00000366560.4 |
Ensembl
Gene | Transcript | HGVSc | HGVSp | Effect | #exon/exons | TSL | MANE | Appris | UniProt |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FH | ENST00000366560.4 | c.190A>G | p.Asn64Asp | missense_variant | 2/10 | 1 | NM_000143.4 | P1 |
Frequencies
GnomAD3 genomes ? AF: 0.00000657 AC: 1AN: 152178Hom.: 0 Cov.: 32
GnomAD3 exomes AF: 0.00000398 AC: 1AN: 251446Hom.: 0 AF XY: 0.00000736 AC XY: 1AN XY: 135906
GnomAD4 exome AF: 0.00000684 AC: 10AN: 1461830Hom.: 0 Cov.: 31 AF XY: 0.0000110 AC XY: 8AN XY: 727226
GnomAD4 genome ? AF: 0.00000657 AC: 1AN: 152178Hom.: 0 Cov.: 32 AF XY: 0.00 AC XY: 0AN XY: 74344
ClinVar
Submissions by phenotype
Fumarase deficiency Uncertain:3
Uncertain significance, no assertion criteria provided | clinical testing | Natera, Inc. | Sep 23, 2020 | - - |
Uncertain significance, 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, this variant could not be ruled out of causing disease and therefore its association with disease required further investigation. A literature search was performed for the gene, cDNA change, and amino acid change (if applicable). No publications were found based on this search. This variant was therefore classified as a variant of unknown significance for this disease. - |
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Baylor Genetics | Mar 22, 2024 | - - |
Hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell cancer Uncertain:2
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Illumina Laboratory Services, Illumina | Jun 14, 2016 | - - |
Uncertain significance, 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, this variant could not be ruled out of causing disease and therefore its association with disease required further investigation. A literature search was performed for the gene, cDNA change, and amino acid change (if applicable). No publications were found based on this search. This variant was therefore classified as a variant of unknown significance for this disease. - |
not provided Uncertain:1
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Invitae | Sep 23, 2022 | This sequence change replaces asparagine, which is neutral and polar, with aspartic acid, which is acidic and polar, at codon 64 of the FH protein (p.Asn64Asp). This variant is present in population databases (no rsID available, gnomAD 0.006%). This variant has not been reported in the literature in individuals affected with FH-related conditions. ClinVar contains an entry for this variant (Variation ID: 296875). Advanced modeling of protein sequence and biophysical properties (such as structural, functional, and spatial information, amino acid conservation, physicochemical variation, residue mobility, and thermodynamic stability) performed at Invitae indicates that this missense variant is not expected to disrupt FH protein function. In summary, the available evidence is currently insufficient to determine the role of this variant in disease. Therefore, it has been classified as a Variant of Uncertain Significance. - |
Hereditary cancer-predisposing syndrome Uncertain:1
Uncertain significance, criteria provided, single submitter | clinical testing | Ambry Genetics | May 20, 2023 | The p.N64D variant (also known as c.190A>G), located in coding exon 2 of the FH gene, results from an A to G substitution at nucleotide position 190. The asparagine at codon 64 is replaced by aspartic acid, an amino acid with highly similar properties. This amino acid position is not well conserved in available vertebrate species. In addition, the in silico prediction for this alteration is inconclusive. Since supporting evidence is limited at this time, the clinical significance of this alteration remains unclear. - |
Computational scores
Source:
Splicing
Find out detailed SpliceAI scores and Pangolin per-transcript scores at