Jiang, F., Ren, J., Chen, F., Zhou, Y., Xie, J., Dan, S., Su, Y., Xie, J., Yin, B., Su, W., Zhang, H., Wang, W., Chai, X., Lin, L., Guo, H., Li, Q., Li, P., Yuan, Y., Pan, X., Li, Y., Liu, L., Chen, H., Xuan, Z., Chen, S., Zhang, C., Zhang, H., Tian, Z., Zhang, Z., Jiang, H., Zhao, L., Zheng, W., Li, S., Li, Y., Wang, J., Wang, J. and Zhang, X. (2012) Noninvasive Fetal Trisomy (NIFTY) Test: An Advanced Noninvasive Prenatal Diagnosis Methodology for Fetal Autosomal and Sex Chromosomal Aneuploidies. BMC Medical Genomics, 5, 57.
https://doi.org/10.1186/1755-8794-5-57

has been cited by the following article:

• TITLE: Multiple z-Score Based Method for Noninvasive Prenatal Test Using Cell-Free DNA in Maternal Plasma

  AUTHORS: Hyuk Jung Kwon, Amit Goyal, Heesu Im, Kichan Lee, Seon Young Yun, Yoon Hee Kim, Sungjong Lee, Mi-Gyeong Lee, Hyuna Lee, Reena Garg, Boram Park, Soyoung Choi, Joungsu Joo, Jin-Sik Bae, Min-Jeong Kim, Min Seob Lee, Sunghoon Lee

  KEYWORDS: Cell-Free DNA, z-Score, Multiple Thresholds, Coefficient of Variance, Noninvasive Prenatal Testing, NIPT

  JOURNAL NAME: Open Journal of Genetics, Vol.7 No.1, February 7, 2017

  ABSTRACT: Objective: To improve the detecting accuracy of chromosomal aneuploidy of fetus by non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) using next generation sequencing data of pregnant women’s cell-free DNA. Methods: We proposed the multi-Z method which uses 21 z-scores for each autosomal chromosome to detect aneuploidy of the chromosome, while the conventional NIPT method uses only one z-score. To do this, mapped read numbers of a certain chromosome were normalized by those of the other 21 chromosomes. Average and standard deviation (SD), which are used for calculating z-score of each sample, were obtained with normalized values between all autosomal chromosomes of control samples. In this way, multiple z-scores can be calculated for 21 autosomal chromosomes except oneself. Results: Multi-Z method showed 100% sensitivity and specificity for 187 samples sequenced to 3 M reads while the conventional NIPT method showed 95.1% specificity. Similarly, for 216 samples sequenced to 1 M reads, Multi-Z method showed 100% sensitivity and 95.6% specificity and the conventional NIPT method showed a result of 75.1% specificity. Conclusion: Multi-Z method showed higher accuracy and robust results than the conventional method even at low coverage reads.