TET2 c.3863G>T, p.Gly1288Val

NM_001127208.2:c.3863G>T
COSMIC ID: COSM1716167
Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS)
TET2 c.3863G>T (p.G1288V) is a missense variant absent from population databases (PM2) with computational predictions favoring benign effect (BP4), and insufficient supportive or contradictory evidence for other criteria, resulting in a classification of Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS).
ACMG/AMP Criteria Applied
PM2 BP4

Genetic Information

Gene & Transcript Details
Gene
TET2
Transcript
NM_001127208.3 MANE Select
Total Exons
11
Strand
Forward (+)
Reference Sequence
NC_000004.11
Alternative Transcripts
IDStatusDetails
NM_001127208.1 Alternative 11 exons | Forward
NM_001127208.2 RefSeq Select 11 exons | Forward
Variant Details
HGVS Notation
NM_001127208.2:c.3863G>T
Protein Change
G1288V
Location
Exon 7 (Exon 7 of 11)
7
5'Exon Structure (11 total)3'
Functional Consequence
Loss of Function
Related Variants
No evidence of other pathogenic variants at position 1288 in gene TET2
Alternate Identifiers
COSM1716167
Variant interpretation based on transcript NM_001127208.3

Genome Browser

UCSC Genome Browser hg19/GRCh37
Loading genome browser...
HGVS InputNM_001127208:c.3863G>T
Active Tracks
ConservationRefSeqClinVargnomAD
Open in UCSC
Navigation tips: Use mouse to drag and zoom. Click on features for details.

Clinical Data

Population Frequency
Global Frequency
0.0 in 100,000
Extremely Rare
Global: 0.0%
0%
0.05%
0.1%
1%
5%
10%+
ACMG Criteria Applied
PM2
This variant is not present in gnomAD (PM2 criteria applies).
ClinVar 2025-08-25T15:29:00.297196
Classification
Unknown
Publications (0)
No publication details.
Clinical Statement
COSMIC
COSMIC ID
COSM1716167
Recurrence
4 occurrences
PM1 Criteria
Not Applied
COSMIC Database Preview
COSMIC Preview
Expand
Accessing full COSMIC database details requires institutional login or subscription. External links may prompt for authentication.

Functional Impact

Functional Domain
Hotspot Status
Not a hotspot
Domain Summary

This variant is not located in a mutational hotspot or critical domain (0 mutations).

Related Variants in This Domain
No evidence of other pathogenic variants at position 1288 in gene TET2
Functional Studies & Therapeutic Relevance
Functional Summary
The TET2 G1288V variant has not been functionally characterized.
Database Previews
OncoKB
OncoKB Preview
Expand
JAX-CKB
JAX-CKB Preview
Expand
Click on previews to view full database entries. External databases may require institutional access.

Computational Analysis

Pathogenicity Predictions
REVEL Score
0.608
0.608
Likely Benign0.0
Uncertain (Low)0.2
Uncertain (Med)0.5
Likely Pathogenic0.75
REVEL scores ≥ 0.75 are strong evidence (PP3)
Predictor Consensus
Mixed/VUS
PP3 Applied
No
Additional Predictors
Benign:
CADD: 5.56
SpliceAI Scores Window: ±500bp
Effect TypeScorePosition
-Acceptor Loss
0.0
134 bp
-Donor Loss
0.08
29 bp
+Acceptor Gain
0.0
-87 bp
+Donor Gain
0.0
91 bp
High impact (≥0.5)
Medium impact (0.2-0.49)
Low impact (<0.2)

VCEP Guidelines

Applied ACMG/AMP Criteria (VCEP Specific)
PVS1
PVS1 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for PVS1 is: "Null variant in a gene where loss of function (LoF) is a known mechanism of disease". The evidence for this variant shows: it is a missense change (G1288V) and not predicted to result in loss of function. Therefore, this criterion is not applied because the variant is not a null (LoF) variant.
PS1
PS1 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for PS1 is: "Same amino acid change as a known pathogenic variant but different nucleotide change". The evidence for this variant shows: there is no previously established pathogenic variant at amino acid G1288. Therefore, this criterion is not applied because no matching pathogenic amino acid change is reported.
PS2
PS2 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for PS2 is: "De novo (both maternity and paternity confirmed) in a patient with the disease and no family history". The evidence for this variant shows: there are no de novo data reported. Therefore, this criterion is not applied due to lack of de novo confirmation.
PS3
PS3 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for PS3 is: "Well-established functional studies supportive of a damaging effect on the gene or gene product". The evidence for this variant shows: no functional studies have been performed on TET2 G1288V. Therefore, this criterion is not applied because functional data are lacking.
PS4
PS4 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for PS4 is: "Prevalence in affected individuals significantly increased compared with controls". The evidence for this variant shows: no case-control or cohort data exist. Therefore, this criterion is not applied due to absence of prevalence data.
PM1
PM1 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for PM1 is: "Located in a mutational hot spot or well-established functional domain without benign variation". The evidence for this variant shows: G1288 is not reported as a mutational hotspot or critical functional domain. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.
PM2
PM2 (Moderate)
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for PM2 is: "Absent from controls (or at extremely low frequency if recessive) (Table 6) in Exome Sequencing Project, 1000 Genomes Project, or Exome Aggregation Consortium". The evidence for this variant shows: it is absent from population databases including gnomAD (MAF = 0%). Therefore, this criterion is applied at Moderate strength because the variant is not observed in controls.
PM3
PM3 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for PM3 is: "Detected in trans with a pathogenic variant (for recessive disorders)". The evidence for this variant shows: no recessive inheritance or trans data are available. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.
PM4
PM4 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for PM4 is: "Protein length changes due to in-frame deletions/insertions or stop-loss variants". The evidence for this variant shows: it is a single amino acid substitution without affecting protein length. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.
PM5
PM5 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for PM5 is: "Novel missense change at an amino acid residue where a different pathogenic missense change has been seen". The evidence for this variant shows: no other pathogenic missense changes at residue G1288 have been reported. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.
PM6
PM6 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for PM6 is: "Assumed de novo, but without confirmation of paternity and maternity". The evidence for this variant shows: no de novo data provided. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.
PP1
PP1 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for PP1 is: "Co-segregation with disease in multiple affected family members". The evidence for this variant shows: no segregation data available. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.
PP2
PP2 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for PP2 is: "Missense variant in a gene with a low rate of benign missense variation and where missense variants are a common mechanism of disease". The evidence for this variant shows: TET2 disease mechanism is primarily loss of function, and missense variants are not established as a common mechanism. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.
PP3
PP3 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for PP3 is: "Multiple lines of computational evidence support a deleterious effect on the gene/gene product". The evidence for this variant shows: in silico predictions are mixed (REVEL 0.61 vs CADD 5.56 vs SpliceAI 0.08). Therefore, this criterion is not applied due to inconsistent computational evidence.
PP4
PP4 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for PP4 is: "Patient's phenotype or family history highly specific for a disease with a single genetic etiology". The evidence for this variant shows: no phenotype or family history data provided. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.
PP5
PP5 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for PP5 is: "Reputable source reports variant as pathogenic, but without accessible evidence". The evidence for this variant shows: not reported in ClinVar or other databases. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.
BA1
BA1 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for BA1 is: "Allele frequency is too high for the disorder". The evidence for this variant shows: allele frequency is 0%, not above benign threshold. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.
BS1
BS1 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for BS1 is: "Allele frequency is greater than expected for the disorder". The evidence for this variant shows: allele frequency is 0%, below any threshold. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.
BS2
BS2 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for BS2 is: "Observed in a healthy adult individual for a dominant disorder with full penetrance expected at an early age". The evidence for this variant shows: no healthy individual observations reported. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.
BS3
BS3 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for BS3 is: "Well-established functional studies show no damaging effect on protein function or splicing". The evidence for this variant shows: no functional studies performed. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.
BS4
BS4 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for BS4 is: "Lack of segregation in affected family members". The evidence for this variant shows: no segregation data. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.
BP1
BP1 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for BP1 is: "Missense variant in a gene where only loss of function causes disease". The evidence for this variant shows: although TET2 disease mechanism is LoF, no specific guidance exists for BP1 in TET2 germline context. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.
BP2
BP2 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for BP2 is: "Observed in trans with a pathogenic variant for a dominant disorder or in cis with a pathogenic variant". The evidence for this variant shows: no phasing data. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.
BP3
BP3 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for BP3 is: "In-frame deletions/insertions in a repetitive region without known function". The evidence for this variant shows: it is a single amino acid substitution, not an indel. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.
BP4
BP4 (Supporting)
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for BP4 is: "Multiple lines of computational evidence suggest no impact on gene or gene product". The evidence for this variant shows: mixed in silico predictions (low CADD score, SpliceAI predicts no splicing impact) overall leaning benign. Therefore, this criterion is applied at Supporting strength because computational data do not support a damaging effect.
BP5
BP5 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for BP5 is: "Variant found in a case with an alternate molecular basis for disease". The evidence for this variant shows: no such case data. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.
BP6
BP6 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for BP6 is: "Reputable source reports variant as benign, but without accessible evidence". The evidence for this variant shows: no benign reports exist. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.
BP7
BP7 (Not Applied) Strength Modified
According to standard ACMG guidelines, the rule for BP7 is: "Synonymous variant with no predicted impact on splicing". The evidence for this variant shows: it is nonsynonymous. Therefore, this criterion is not applied.