Research on Optimization of NIPT Detection Timing and Fetal Anomaly Determination Based on Multi factor Dynamic Modeling

Authors

  • Yuting Wang

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54097/4syhg785

Keywords:

NIPT detection, Spearman correlation, K-means clustering, Mixed distribution model, Dynamic programming.

Abstract

This article establishes a multi-stage mathematical model for the timing selection and fetal abnormality determination in NIPT testing, and comprehensively applies statistical analysis and machine learning methods to provide personalized testing strategies for different pregnant groups. Firstly, Spearman rank correlation analysis revealed a positive correlation (ρ=0.305) between Y chromosome concentration and gestational age, and a significant negative correlation (ρ=-0.534) with BMI. The conclusion was statistically significant after permutation test, Fisher z transform confidence interval estimation, and Benjamin Hochberg multiple test correction. Further validation through the Gradient Boosting Tree (GBDT) model revealed that the effects of proportion, gestational age, and BMI on Y concentration were most significant The model was cross validated with R²=01246. Although its generalization ability was limited, it provided a theoretical basis for subsequent modeling[1]. Based on K-means clustering, BMI was divided into three groups (low: 27.2-33.5, medium: 34.6-39.9, high: 41.0-44.2), and an optimization model was established with the goal of minimizing risk. Taking into account the early, middle, and late risk weights (1.0, 2.5, 5.0) and the re examination process, the optimal detection time points for each group were determined to be 11.0 weeks, 19.6 weeks, and 12.1 weeks, respectively, with an overall risk score of 119.80. By using the probability function and Monte Carlo simulation to analyze the detection error, the error tolerance of each group was determined to be±3.37 weeks,±4.02 weeks, and±3.75 weeks, respectively[2]. A follow-up strategy was proposed to control the error within±1.5 weeks, reducing the error by 55.5% -62.7%.

References

[1]Ren L W. Analysis of the latest progress, application status and ethical challenges of prenatal genetic testing technology[C]// Chinese Association for Life Care. Proceedings of the Series Academic Symposium on Life Care and Smart Health Care -- Ice-breaking Actions in Nursing Management. Handan: Handan Feixiang District Maternity and Child Health Hospital, 2024: 96-97.

[2]Huang P H, Tang P, Zhou C Y, et al. Application of non-invasive prenatal testing in screening for fetal sex chromosome abnormalities[J]. Zhejiang Medical Journal, 2024, 46(11): 1147-1150.​

[3]Zhao Z L, Jia R. Clinical value of non-invasive DNA prenatal testing technology in screening for fetal sex chromosome aneuploidy abnormalities[J]. Journal of Shandong Medical College, 2024, 46(03): 71-73.​

[4]Zhang Y Z, Feng X L, Liu D, et al. Diagnostic value of non-invasive DNA prenatal testing for fetal chromosome aneuploidy[J]. Journal of Chinese Practical Diagnosis and Therapy, 2024, 38(04): 407-410.​

[5]Zheng H Y, Wu Y H, Zhang X, et al. Significance of NIPT prenatal screening for chromosomal abnormalities and high-risk Z-value classification[J]. Journal of Reproductive Medicine, 2023, 32(12): 1843-1848.​

[6]Duan K, Li L Y, Wan X, et al. Study on the application of NIPT-plus detection technology in prenatal diagnosis of high-risk pregnant women[J]. China Health Standard Management, 2023, 14(23): 57-60.​

[7]Zha B B, Feng Y. Analysis of the screening effect of non-invasive prenatal genetic testing on fetal sex chromosome abnormalities[J]. Systems Medicine, 2023, 8(08): 47-50.

[8]Zhai C Y. Clinical application study of non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPT) in sex chromosome abnormalities[D]. Tianjin: Tianjin Medical University, 2021.

Downloads

Published

31-12-2025

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Wang, Y. (2025). Research on Optimization of NIPT Detection Timing and Fetal Anomaly Determination Based on Multi factor Dynamic Modeling. Mathematical Modeling and Algorithm Application, 7(3), 22-28. https://doi.org/10.54097/4syhg785