PRR25

Chr 16

proline rich 25

Also known as: gs64

0
Active trials
47
Pathogenic / LP
181
ClinVar variants
0
Pubs (1 yr)
-1.1
Missense Z
1.93
LOEUF
Clinical SummaryPRR25
Population Constraint (gnomAD)
Low constraint (pLI 0.00) — loss-of-function variants are relatively tolerated in the population.
📋
ClinVar Variants
47 Pathogenic / Likely Pathogenic· 113 VUS of 181 total submissions
Some data sources returned errors (1)

ensembl: Error: Ensembl fetch failed: 400 for https://rest.ensembl.org/lookup/symbol/homo_sapiens/PRR25?content-type=application/json&expand=1

Population Genetics & Constraint

gnomAD v4 — loss-of-function & missense intolerance

Tolerant — LoF & missense variants common in population
LoF Constraint?LOEUF (Loss-of-function Observed/Expected Upper bound Fraction) is the upper bound of the 90% CI for LoF OE — the preferred gnomAD v4 metric. Lower = more intolerant to LoF. LOEUF < 0.35 = highly constrained.
1.93LOEUF
pLI 0.000
Z-score -1.26
OE 1.48 (0.921.93)
Tolerant

Highly tolerant — LoF variants common in population

Missense Constraint?Missense Z-score: standard deviations fewer missense variants observed vs. expected. Z > 3.09 (p < 0.001) = gene does not tolerate missense variation. OE missense < 0.6 is also considered constrained.
-1.05Z-score
OE missense 1.20 (1.081.33)
265 obs / 221.1 exp
Tolerant

Tolerant to missense variation

Observed / Expected Ratios?Shaded band = 90% confidence interval. Vertical tick = point estimate. Grey threshold line = gnomAD constraint cutoff for that variant class.
LoF OE?Ratio of observed to expected LoF variants. Upper CI bound (LOEUF) ≤ 0.35 = strong LoF constraint signal.1.48 (0.921.93)
00.351.4
Missense OE?Ratio of observed to expected missense variants. OE ≤ 0.6 = fewer missense variants than expected by chance.1.20 (1.081.33)
00.61.4
Synonymous OE?Control metric — synonymous variants are largely neutral and expected near OE = 1.0. Significant deviation may indicate annotation issues.1.36
01.21.6
LoF obs/exp: 12 / 8.1Missense obs/exp: 265 / 221.1Syn Z: -2.78
DN
0.6454th %ile
GOF
0.6834th %ile
LOF
0.52top 25%

This gene has evidence for multiple mechanisms of pathogenicity (gain-of-function and dominant-negative). Both the Badonyi & Marsh prediction and the broader genomic evidence point to gain-of-function as the predominant mechanism. Different variants in this gene may act through different mechanisms — interpret in context of the specific variant.

GOFprediction above median
DNprediction above median

Note: In-silico variant effect predictors (SIFT, PolyPhen, REVEL, CADD) may underestimate pathogenicity of missense variants in genes with GOF or DN mechanisms. Consider functional evidence and clinical context.

Predictions from Badonyi M, Marsh JA. PLoS ONE. 2024;19(8):e0307312.

ClinVar Variant Classifications

181 submitted variants in ClinVar

Classification Summary

Pathogenic47
VUS113
Likely Benign18
Benign3
47
Pathogenic
113
VUS
18
Likely Benign
3
Benign

Curated Variants Distribution

Classified variants from ClinVar · 5 ACMG categories· variant type breakdown unavailable

ClassificationLoFMissense + InframeNon-codingSynonymousTotal
Pathogenic
47
Likely Pathogenic
0
VUS
113
Likely Benign
18
Benign
3
Total181

Counts from ClinVar esearch · Updated hourly

View in ClinVar →

Protein Context — Lollipop Plot

PRR25 · protein map & ClinVar variants

Showing all ClinVar variants across the protein. Search a specific variant to highlight its position.

Clinical Trials

Active and recruiting trials from ClinicalTrials.gov

No active trials found for this gene.

Search ClinicalTrials.gov →
Clinical Literature
Landmark / reviewRecent case evidence
Key Publications
Landmark & review papers · by relevance
PubMed
Top 1 results · since 2015Search PubMed ↗
Recent Gene-Specific Literature
Gene in title · MEDLINE · newest first
Europe PMC

No open access results found