Search Results

Ask a specific question about this device

The cobas® liat Bordetella panel nucleic acid test (cobas® liat Bordetella panel) is an automated real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test intended for the simultaneous qualitative detection and differentiation of Bordetella pertussis (Bp), Bordetella parapertussis (Bpp), and Bordetella holmesii (Bh) nucleic acid in human nasopharyngeal swabs taken from patients with suspected pertussis respiratory infection.

The test is meant to be used in conjunction with other clinical and epidemiological information and laboratory findings. When clinical factors suggest that B. pertussis, B. parapertussis or B. holmesii may not be the cause of respiratory infection, other clinically appropriate investigation(s) should be carried out in accordance with published guidelines.

Negative results do not preclude Bp, Bpp, or Bh infection and should not be used as the sole basis for treatment or other patient management decisions. Conversely, positive results do not rule out co-infection with other bacteria or viruses. The agent detected may not be the definite cause of disease.

The cobas® liat Bordetella panel nucleic acid test (cobas® liat Bordetella panel) is an automated multiplex real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay for the rapid in vitro qualitative detection and differentiation of B. pertussis (Bp), B. parapertussis (Bpp), and B. holmesii (Bh) DNA in human nasopharyngeal swabs taken from patients with suspected pertussis respiratory infection.

The different fluorescent dye designs enable the specific detection and differentiation of the three microorganisms (Bp, Bpp, and Bh) independently in a multiplex system. The system automates all nucleic acid amplification test sample processing steps, including inhibitor removal, nucleic acid extraction, purification, amplification, real-time detection, and result interpretation in a rapid manner. The test is designed for use in near-patient settings to deliver results in approximately 15 minutes.

The cobas® liat system is comprised of the cobas® liat analyzer (analyzer) hardware with integrated cobas® liat system software (analyzer software + liat assay specific package (script)) for running tests and analyzing the results, and a single-use disposable cobas® liat assay tube (assay tube).

• cobas® liat analyzer is a system component that consists of one software subsystem and three hardware units:

  • Infrastructure unit, which consists of the hardware and embedded software (firmware).
  • Thermal, loading and motion unit: the processing module that interacts physically with the assay tube during the assay execution.
  • Detection unit consisting of the photodetectors that is used for the fluorescence detection during the PCR reaction

• The assay script provides a set of instructions to the analyzer hardware and software for assay tube processing, PCR, result calculation and interpretation and result reporting. The assay script can be installed on the analyzer independently of the analyzer software.

The cobas® liat Bordetella panel nucleic acid test is supported with a Liat Assay Specific Package (Assay Script): cobas® liat Bordetella panel LASP (BPTA).

• The assay tube holds all reagents needed for sample preparation and PCR processes. The assay specific reagents are packaged into a single assay tube in separate segments that are separated by frangible seals. An internal control (IC) is also included. The IC is present to control for adequate processing of the target bacteria through all steps of the assay process and to monitor the presence of inhibitors in the PCR reaction.

N/A

Ask a specific question about this device

cobas® CMV is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for the quantitation of cytomegalovirus (CMV) DNA in human EDTA plasma.

cobas® CMV is intended for use as an aid in the management of CMV in solid organ transplant patients and in hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients. In patients receiving anti-CMV therapy, serial DNA measurements can be used to assess viral response to treatment.

The results from cobas® CMV must be interpreted within the context of all relevant clinical and laboratory findings.

cobas® CMV is not intended for use as a screening test for blood or blood products.

cobas® CMV is based on fully automated sample preparation (nucleic acid extraction and purification) followed by PCR amplification and detection. The cobas® 5800 system is designed as one integrated instrument. The cobas® 6800/8800 systems consist of the sample supply module, the transfer module, the processing module, and the analytic module. Automated data management is performed by the cobas® 5800 or cobas® 6800/8800 system software which assigns test results for all tests as either target not detected, CMV DNA detected < LLoQ (lower limit of quantitation), CMV DNA detected > ULoQ (upper limit of quantitation), or a value in the linear range LLoQ < x < ULoQ. Results can be reviewed directly on the system screen, exported, or printed as a report.

Nucleic acid from patient samples and added lambda DNA-QS molecules is simultaneously extracted. In summary, viral nucleic acid is released by addition of proteinase and lysis reagent to the sample. The released nucleic acid binds to the silica surface of the added magnetic glass particles. Unbound substances and impurities, such as denatured protein, cellular debris and potential PCR inhibitors are removed with subsequent wash reagent steps and purified nucleic acid is eluted from the glass particles with elution buffer at elevated temperature.

Selective amplification of target nucleic acid from the sample is achieved by the use of target virus-specific forward and reverse primers which are selected from highly-conserved regions of the CMV DNA polymerase (UL54) gene. Selective amplification of DNA-QS is achieved by the use of sequence-specific forward and reverse primers which are selected to have no homology with the CMV genome. A thermostable DNA polymerase enzyme is used for amplification. The target and DNA-QS sequences are amplified simultaneously utilizing a universal PCR amplification profile with predefined temperature steps and number of cycles. The master mix includes deoxyuridine triphosphate (dUTP), instead of deoxythimidine triphosphate (dTTP), which is incorporated into the newly synthesized DNA (amplicon). Any contaminating amplicon from previous PCR runs is eliminated by the AmpErase enzyme, which is included in the PCR mix, when heated in the first thermal cycling step. However, newly formed amplicon are not eliminated since the AmpErase enzyme is inactivated once exposed to temperatures above 55°C.

The cobas® CMV master mix contains one detection probe specific for CMV target sequences and one for the DNA-QS. The probes are labeled with target-specific fluorescent reporter dyes allowing simultaneous detection of CMV target and DNA-QS in two different target channels. The fluorescent signal of the intact probes is suppressed by the quencher dye. During the PCR amplification step, hybridization of the probe to the specific single-stranded DNA templates results in cleavage by the 5'-to-3' nuclease activity of the DNA polymerase resulting in separation of the reporter and quencher dyes and the generation of a fluorescent signal. With each PCR cycle, increasing amounts of cleaved probes are generated and the cumulative signal of the reporter dye is concomitantly increased. Real-time detection and discrimination of PCR products is accomplished by measuring the fluorescence of the released reporter dyes for the viral targets and DNA-QS.

N/A

Ask a specific question about this device

cobas® HCV is an in vitro nucleic acid amplification test for both the detection and quantitation of hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA, in human EDTA plasma or serum, of HCV antibody positive or HCV-infected individuals. Specimens containing HCV genotypes 1 to 6 are validated for detection and quantitation in the assay.

cobas® HCV is intended for use as an aid in the diagnosis of HCV infection in the following populations: individuals with antibody evidence of HCV with evidence of liver disease, individuals suspected to be actively infected with HCV antibody evidence, and individuals at risk for HCV infection with antibodies to HCV. Detection of HCV RNA indicates that the virus is replicating and therefore is evidence of active infection.

cobas® HCV is intended for use as an aid in the management of HCV-infected patients undergoing anti-viral therapy. The assay can be used to measure HCV RNA levels at baseline, during treatment, at the end of treatment, and at the end of follow up of treatment to determine sustained or non-sustained viral response. The results must be interpreted within the context of all relevant clinical and laboratory findings.

cobas® HCV has not been approved for use as a screening test for the presence of HCV in blood or blood products.

Assay performance characteristics have been established for individuals treated with certain direct-acting antiviral agents (DAA) regimens. No information is available on the assay's predictive value when other DAA combination therapies are used.

cobas® HCV is a quantitative test performed on the cobas® 5800 system, cobas® 6800 system and cobas® 8800 system. cobas® HCV enables the detection and quantitation of HCV RNA in EDTA plasma or serum of infected patients. Dual probes are used to detect and quantify, but not discriminate genotypes 1–6. The viral load is quantified against a non-HCV armored RNA quantitation standard (RNA-QS), which is introduced into each specimen during sample preparation. The RNA-QS also functions as an internal control to assess substantial failures during the sample preparation and PCR amplification processes. In addition, the test utilizes three external controls: a high titer positive, a low titer positive, and a negative control.

N/A

Ask a specific question about this device

The CoaguChek XS Plus System is intended for use by professional healthcare providers for quantitative prothrombin time testing for the monitoring of warfarin therapy. The system uses fresh capillary or non-anticoagulated venous whole blood.

The CoaguChek XS Plus system is a portable coagulation monitoring system to monitor prothrombin time (PT) in patients receiving oral anticoagulant therapy. The system uses the amperometric detection of thrombin in the blood sample. A test strip is used to determine a PT value from 8 µL of whole blood. Onboard quality control is available on every test strip and the system also features an optional external quality control material (CoaguChek XS PT Control).

N/A

Ask a specific question about this device

Elecsys Phospho-Tau (181P) Plasma is an in vitro electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA) intended for the measurement of the phosphorylated Tau 181 protein in human plasma on cobas e immunoassay analyzers.

The Elecsys Phospho-Tau (181P) Plasma assay result is intended to be used as an aid in the initial assessment for Alzheimer's disease and other causes of cognitive decline in adult patients aged 55 years and older, presenting with signs, symptoms, or complaints of cognitive decline. The result should be interpreted in conjunction with other clinical information.

A negative test result is consistent with a negative amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) scan result and reduced likelihood that a patient's cognitive impairment is due to amyloid pathology. These patients should be investigated for other causes of cognitive decline.

A positive test result may not be consistent with a positive amyloid PET scan result. Patients with an initial positive result should be further investigated to determine whether the amyloid pathology can be a cause of cognitive impairment.

In vitro electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA) intended for the measurement of the phosphorylated Tau 181 protein (pTau181p) in human plasma.

Elecsys Phospho-Tau (181P) Plasma utilizes a sandwich test principle and has a total duration time of 18 minutes.

• 1st incubation: 30 µL of sample, biotinylated monoclonal antibody specific for phosphorylation at threonine 181, and a monoclonal tau-specific antibody labeled with a ruthenium complex^a) react to form a sandwich complex.
• 2nd incubation: After addition of streptavidin-coated microparticles, the complex becomes bound to the solid phase via interaction of biotin and streptavidin.
• The reaction mixture is aspirated into the measuring cell where the microparticles are magnetically captured onto the surface of the electrode. Unbound substances are then removed with ProCell II M. Application of a voltage to the electrode then induces chemiluminescent emission which is measured by a photomultiplier.
• Results are determined via a calibration curve which is instrument-specifically generated by 2-point calibration and a master curve provided via the cobas link.

N/A

Ask a specific question about this device

The cobas® Respiratory 4-flex for use on the cobas® 5800/6800/8800 Systems is an automated, multiplex, nucleic acid test that utilizes real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technology intended for simultaneous in vitro qualitative detection and differentiation of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), influenza A virus, influenza B virus, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in nasopharyngeal swab specimens obtained from individuals with signs and symptoms of respiratory tract infection. Clinical signs and symptoms of respiratory viral infection due to SARS-CoV-2, influenza A, influenza B and RSV can be similar. This test is intended to aid in the differential diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A, influenza B, and RSV infections in humans and is not intended to detect influenza C virus infections.

Nucleic acids from the viral organisms identified by this test are generally detectable in nasopharyngeal swab specimens during the acute phase of infection. The detection and identification of specific viral nucleic acids from individuals exhibiting signs and symptoms of respiratory tract infection are indicative of the presence of the identified virus, and aid in diagnosis if used in conjunction with other clinical and epidemiological information, and laboratory findings.

The results of this test should not be used as the sole basis for diagnosis, treatment, or other patient management decisions. Negative results do not preclude SARS-CoV-2, influenza A virus, influenza B virus, or RSV infections. Conversely, positive results do not rule out coinfection with other organisms, and the agent(s) detected by the cobas® Respiratory 4-flex for use on the cobas® 5800/6800/8800 Systems may not be the definite cause of disease.

cobas® Respiratory 4-flex for use on the cobas® 5800/6800/8800 Systems (cobas® Respiratory 4-flex) is based on fully automated sample preparation (nucleic acid extraction and purification) followed by PCR amplification and detection. The cobas® 5800 System is designed as one integrated instrument. The cobas® 6800/8800 Systems consist of the sample supply module, the transfer module, the processing module, and the analytic module. Automated data management is performed by the cobas® 5800 System or cobas® 6800/8800 Systems software(s), which assigns results for all tests. Results can be reviewed directly on the system screen and printed as a report.

Nucleic acid from patient samples and added Internal Control RNA (RNA IC) molecules are simultaneously extracted. Nucleic acid is released by addition of proteinase and lysis reagent to the sample. The released nucleic acid binds to the silica surface of the added magnetic glass particles. Unbound substances and impurities, such as denatured protein, cellular debris and potential PCR inhibitors, are removed with subsequent wash steps and purified nucleic acid is eluted from the magnetic glass particles with elution buffer at elevated temperature. External controls (positive and negative) are processed in the same way.

Selective amplification of target nucleic acid from the sample is achieved by the use of target-specific forward and reverse primers detecting conserved viral genome regions as shown in Table 1.

Selective amplification of RNA IC is achieved by the use of non-competitive, sequence specific forward and reverse primers, which have no homology with the viral-target specific genomes. Amplified target is detected by the cleavage of fluorescently labeled oligonucleotide probes. Roche's temperature assisted generation of signal (TAGS) technology, short TAGS technology, is introduced to differentiate up to three targets per fluorescence channel, enabling the detection of up to14 targets, and the Internal Control, per well. A thermostable DNA polymerase enzyme is used for amplification.

Multiplicity of target detection is enabled with temperature-dependent quenching of cleaved fluorescent target-specific probes. This is achieved by separating signals from probes into introduced thermal channels, where fluorescence is acquired at two additional fixed temperatures for each amplification cycle.

During the PCR amplification step, hybridization of the probes to the specific single-stranded DNA template results in cleavage of the probe by the 5' to 3' exonuclease activity of the DNA polymerase, resulting in separation of the reporter and quencher dyes, and the generation of a fluorescent signal. Conventional probes release fluorescence signal immediately upon separation of reporter from quencher. TAGS probes rely on temperature dependent fluorescence activation, requiring both nuclease cleavage during the extension phase, as well as an increase in reaction temperature, to activate the otherwise dormant fluorophore. For this reason, during each PCR cycle the TAGS technology captures fluorescence in five available fluorescence channels in combination with three thermal channels (detection of fluorescence at three defined temperatures T1, T2 and T3).

The cobas® Respiratory 4-flex master mix contains detection probes which are specific for influenza A virus, influenza B virus, RSV, SARS-CoV-2 and the RNA Internal Control (RNA IC) nucleic acid, which enables simultaneous detection and differentiation of influenza A virus, influenza B virus, RSV, and SARS-CoV-2 viral targets and the RNA IC.

The master mix includes deoxyuridine triphosphate (dUTP), instead of deoxythymidine triphosphate (dTTP), which is incorporated into the newly synthesized DNA (amplicon). Any contaminating amplicons from previous PCR runs are destroyed by the AmpErase enzyme [uracil-N-glycosylase], which is included in the PCR mix, when heated in the first thermal cycling step. However, newly formed amplicons are not destroyed since the AmpErase enzyme is inactivated once exposed to temperatures above 55°C.

The RESP-4FLEX ASAP enables the system to differentiate and report the qualitative results of the four targets influenza A virus, influenza B virus, RSV and SARS-CoV-2. For each specimen the customer can test for any combination of the four enabled virus targets. Also, additional target calculation (digital reflex) can be ordered for the four enabled virus targets (influenza A virus, influenza B virus, RSV and SARS-CoV-2) on the cobas® 5800 System.

Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and study detailed in the provided FDA clearance letter for the cobas Respiratory 4-flex, structured according to your request:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The FDA clearance letter does not explicitly state pre-defined acceptance criteria for the clinical performance. Instead, it reports the observed performance metrics (PPA and NPA) from the clinical studies. For the purpose of this table, I will present the reported clinical performance as the "met acceptance criteria," assuming these values were deemed acceptable by the FDA for clearance.

Study Proving Device Meets Criteria: The detailed clinical performance evaluation described in "5. CLINICAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION" (pages 23-26) demonstrates that the cobas Respiratory 4-flex achieves the reported Positive Percent Agreement (PPA) and Negative Percent Agreement (NPA) values against a U.S. FDA-cleared molecular comparator assay. These reported percentage agreements, along with their 95% confidence intervals, serve as the evidence that the device meets the performance expectations for clinical use.

2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance

• Prospective Clinical Study:

  • Total NPS specimens enrolled: 4,475
  • Total NPS specimens tested: 4,378 (1,832 fresh, 2,546 frozen)
  • Total NPS specimens evaluable: 4,341 (1,827 fresh, 2,514 frozen)
  • Data Provenance: Fresh prospective specimens collected at eleven collection sites during the 2023-2024 respiratory viral season. Frozen prospective specimens collected during parts of the 2022-2023 respiratory viral season at seven sites and the 2023-2024 respiratory viral season from 14 collection sites. The specific country of origin is not explicitly stated but implies U.S. based on the "U.S. testing sites" mention for retrospective samples, and the FDA clearance context. The data is prospective.

• Retrospective Clinical Study:

  • Total NPS specimens enrolled: 770
  • Total NPS specimens evaluable:
    • Influenza A: 657
    • Influenza B: 647
    • RSV: 659
  • Data Provenance: Archived NPS specimens collected between 2014 and 2022 from individuals with signs and symptoms of respiratory viral infection. Tested at three (3) U.S. testing sites. The data is retrospective.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and Their Qualifications

The document does not mention the use of human experts to establish ground truth for the test set. The ground truth was established by a "U.S. FDA-cleared molecular assay" as the comparator method.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

The document does not describe an adjudication method involving experts for discrepant results. Instead, it states that an "FDA 510(k) cleared comparator" method was used to establish the "ground truth." For the influenza A target in the prospective study, "three (3) additional specimens (two (2) fresh and one (1) frozen) were excluded from analysis due to inconclusive results obtained from the comparator test," implying a reliance on the comparator's definitive result rather than external adjudication. The same pattern is noted for retrospective samples, with exclusions for failed or invalid comparator test results.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done, and the Effect Size of Human Readers' Improvement with AI vs. Without AI Assistance

This section is Not Applicable to the provided document. The cobas Respiratory 4-flex is an automated, multiplex nucleic acid detection test, not an AI-powered diagnostic tool requiring human reader interpretation or assistance. Therefore, an MRMC study or analysis of human reader improvement with AI is not relevant.

6. If a Standalone (i.e., Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Was Done

Yes, this was a standalone performance evaluation. The device is an automated in vitro diagnostic (IVD) test. The clinical performance evaluation directly compares the cobas Respiratory 4-flex's results (algorithm only, as it's an automated system) against a predicate FDA-cleared molecular assay. There is no human interpretation or intervention in the generation of the primary test result from the cobas system itself.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used (Expert Consensus, Pathology, Outcomes Data, etc.)

The ground truth for the clinical performance evaluation was established by a "U.S. FDA-cleared molecular assay." This means another legally marketed and validated molecular diagnostic test was used as the reference standard.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not specify a separate training set or its sample size. This is typical for in vitro diagnostic (IVD) devices that use established laboratory techniques (like PCR) rather than machine learning algorithms which require explicit training data. The development of such assays involves extensive analytical validation (LoD, precision, specificity, inclusivity, etc.) and then clinical validation with independent samples.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established

Since no explicit training set for a machine learning algorithm is mentioned, the concept of "ground truth for the training set" is not applicable in the context of this device's validation as described. The analytical studies (LoD, inclusivity, specificity, etc.) characterize the inherent performance of the assay's chemical and hardware components.

Ask a specific question about this device

Immunoassay for the in vitro quantitative determination of cortisol in human urine. The determination of cortisol is used for the recognition and treatment of functional disorders of the adrenal gland.

The electrochemiluminescence immunoassay "ECLIA" is intended for use on cobas e immunoassay analyzers.

The Elecsys Cortisol III immunoassay employs a competitive test principle using a cortisol-specific biotinylated monoclonal antibody and a cortisol-derivative labeled with a ruthenium complex. The Elecsys Cortisol III immunoassay is intended for the in vitro quantitative determination of cortisol in human urine. The determination of cortisol is used for the recognition and treatment of functional disorders of the adrenal gland on the cobas e immunoassay analyzers.

Results are determined via a calibration curve which is instrument-specifically generated by a two-point calibration and a master curve provided via the cobas link.

The Elecsys Cortisol III immunoassay reagent Rack Pack comprises the following:

M Streptavidin-coated microparticles (transparent cap), 1 bottle, 12.4 mL:
Streptavidin-coated microparticles 0.72 mg/mL; preservative.

R1 Anti-cortisol-Ab~biotin (gray cap), 1 bottle, 21.0 mL:
Biotinylated monoclonal anti-cortisol antibody (mouse) 18 ng/mL; danazol 20 μg/mL; MES buffer 100 mmol/L, pH 6.0; preservative.

R2 Cortisol-peptide~Ru(bpy) (black cap), 1 bottle, 21.0 mL:
Cortisol derivative (synthetic), labeled with ruthenium complex, 5 ng/mL; danazol 20 μg/mL; MES buffer 100 mmol/L, pH 6.0; preservative.

MES = 2-morpholino-ethane sulfonic acid

The provided 510(k) summary for the Elecsys Cortisol III device focuses primarily on non-clinical performance evaluations to demonstrate substantial equivalence to a predicate device. It does not describe a study to prove performance against specific acceptance criteria for diagnostic accuracy (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, or agreement with ground truth in a clinical context) with a test set of patient samples.

Here's an analysis of the available information:

1. Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not explicitly state "acceptance criteria" in the traditional sense for diagnostic performance metrics like sensitivity, specificity, or agreement against a clinical ground truth. Instead, it details performance specifications for various analytical aspects and states that these "met the predefined acceptance criteria." These are primarily related to the analytical performance of the assay itself.

2. Sample Size and Data Provenance for Test Set

• Precision (Repeatability & Intermediate Precision): Human urine samples (24-hour urine) and controls. Two replicates per run, two runs per day for 21 days for each of 4 human urine samples and 2 controls. (Total of $4 \text{ samples} \times 2 \text{ replicates/run} \times 2 \text{ runs/day} \times 21 \text{ days} = 336$ measurements for human urine, plus $2 \text{ controls} \times 2 \text{ replicates/run} \times 2 \text{ runs/day} \times 21 \text{ days} = 168$ measurements for controls. Or potentially 42 total runs for each sample/control).
• Analytical Sensitivity (LoB, LoD, LoQ): Not specified beyond "reagents and calibrators" likely being used.
• Linearity/Assay Reportable Range: Dilution series contained a minimum of 9 concentrations. Number of samples not explicitly stated but implies a set of samples specifically created to span the measuring range.
• HAMA: Not specified.
• Endogenous Interferences: Human urine samples (24-hour urine) were used. The number of samples is not explicitly stated.
• Analytical Specificity/Cross-Reactivity: Human urine (24-hour urine) samples. Specific numbers not provided beyond "samples were measured in the presence and absence of the potential cross-reactants."
• Exogenous Interferences – Drugs: In vitro tests performed on 12 commonly used pharmaceuticals and additional special drugs. This implies spiked samples rather than a "test set" of patient samples.
• Method Comparison: "Native 24 h urine samples" for comparison with the predicate device. The number of samples is not specified.
• Reference Range Study: Samples collected from an "apparently healthy population in the United States" across three study sites. The exact number of samples is not provided, but it's sufficient for establishing 2.5th and 97.5th percentiles (typically requires 120+ samples according to CLSI EP28-A3c).

Data Provenance: The document explicitly states "human urine samples (24-hour urine)" for most studies and for the reference range, "collected across three study sites... in the United States." This indicates prospective collection for the reference range study specifically for generating normal values applicable to the US population. For other analytical performance claims, the sample type (human urine) is generally mentioned, suggesting a similar provenance, likely for prospective testing within the manufacturer's lab or clinical sites.

3. Number of Experts and Qualifications for Ground Truth

Not applicable for the Elecsys Cortisol III. This is an in vitro diagnostic device (IVD) that quantitatively measures a biomarker (cortisol). The "ground truth" for such devices is typically established through recognized analytical standards, reference methods, and comparison to a legally marketed predicate device, rather than expert consensus on diagnostic images or clinical assessments. The closest to "ground truth" in this context would be the accuracy against a gold standard analytical method or purified cortisol standards. These details are not provided but are implicit in the validation that relies on CLSI guidelines.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Not applicable. As this is a quantitative IVD for a biomarker, diagnostic classification and adjudication by experts are not relevant to the described analytical studies. The performance is assessed by comparison to expected analytical results or a predicate device.

5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study

Not applicable. MRMC studies are typically for imaging devices or software that assist human readers in making a diagnosis. The Elecsys Cortisol III is an automated in vitro diagnostic immunoassay for quantitative measurement of cortisol in urine. It does not involve human readers interpreting cases with or without AI assistance.

6. Standalone Performance Study

Yes, the entire submission describes standalone performance. The Elecsys Cortisol III is an immunoassay designed to operate on cobas e immunoassay analyzers. All the performance data (precision, sensitivity, linearity, interference, cross-reactivity, method comparison) are generated directly from the device's measurement of cortisol in urine samples. The device itself performs the quantitative determination without human-in-the-loop interpretation impacting the measurement results. The method comparison study directly compares its quantitative output to the predicate device's quantitative output.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

For an IVD like Elecsys Cortisol III, the "ground truth" for the test set is established by:

• Reference standards/Calibrators: For analytical sensitivity (LoB, LoD, LoQ) and linearity studies, known concentrations of cortisol (or materials traceable to them) are used.
• Predicate device comparison: For method comparison, the results from the Elecsys Cortisol III are compared to those obtained from the legally marketed ARCHITECT Cortisol (K062204), which serves as the established "truth" or benchmark for demonstrating substantial equivalence.
• Spiked samples/characterized samples: For interference and cross-reactivity studies, samples with known concentrations of interferents or cross-reactants are used to determine the device's accuracy in their presence.
• Clinically characterized healthy population samples: For the reference range study, samples from healthy individuals are used to establish normal ranges, though this isn't a "ground truth" for diagnostic accuracy.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not mention "training set" in the context of an AI/ML algorithm. This device is an immunoassay, which relies on chemical reactions and optical detection, not an AI/ML model that requires a training set. The term "training set" is therefore not applicable here.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established

Not applicable. As noted above, there is no AI/ML training set for this immunoassay device.

Ask a specific question about this device

Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 is an immunoassay intended for the in vitro qualitative detection of total antibodies to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in human serum and Li-heparin, K2-EDTA and K3-EDTA plasma collected on or after 15 days post-symptom onset. The test is intended as an aid in identifying individuals with an adaptive immune response to SARS-CoV-2, indicating recent or prior infection.

The electrochemiluminescence immunoassay "ECLIA" is intended for use on cobas e 601 immunoassay analyzer.

Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 is a qualitative, serological, double-antigen sandwich principle immunoassay to be used on the cobas e 601 analyzer with an 18-minute test time. Results are determined automatically by the software by comparing the electrochemiluminescence signal obtained from the reaction product of the sample with the signal of the cutoff value previously obtained by calibration. The Elecsys Anti‑SARS‑CoV-2 assay uses a recombinant protein representing the nucleocapsid (N) antigen for the determination of antibodies against SARS‑CoV‑2.

The reagent working solutions include: rackpack (kit placed on the analyzer)

• M Streptavidin-coated microparticles (transparent cap), 1 bottle, 12 mL: Streptavidin-coated microparticles 0.72 mg/mL; preservative.
• R1 SARS-CoV-2-Ag~biotin, (gray cap), 1 bottle, 16 mL: Biotinylated SARS‑CoV‑2‑specific recombinant antigen (E. coli) < 0.5 mg/L; HEPES^a) buffer 50 mmol/L, pH 7.7; preservative.
• R2 SARS-CoV-2 Ag~Ru(bpy) (black cap), 1 bottle, 16 mL: SARS‑CoV‑2‑specific recombinant antigen labeled with ruthenium complex < 0.5 mg/L; HEPES^(b) buffer 50 mmol/L, pH 7.7; preservative.

^(a) HEPES = [4-(2-hydroxyethyl)-piperazine]-ethane sulfonic acid

The Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 assay includes two liquid calibrators, which are packed with the test kit:

• ACOV2 Cal1 Negative calibrator 1 (white cap), 2 bottles of 0.67 mL: Human serum, non-reactive for anti‑SARS‑CoV‑2 antibodies; buffer; preservative.
• ACOV2 Cal2 Positive calibrator 2 (black cap), 2 bottles of 0.67 mL: Human serum, reactive for anti‑SARS‑CoV‑2 antibodies; buffer; preservative.

The provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter and summary describe the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device, Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2, meets those criteria.

Here's the breakdown of the requested information:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document doesn't explicitly state "acceptance criteria" as clear numerical targets for PPA and NPA prior to presenting the results. However, implied acceptance criteria for qualitative serology tests typically involve a high percentage of agreement. Based on the reported performance, we can infer the acceptance criteria were met by these results.

Additional Non-Clinical Acceptance Criteria (Met for all):

• Precision: Standard Deviation (SD) and Coefficient of Variance (CV) values within predetermined limits for repeatability, between-run, between-day, between-lot, and between-site precision.
• Hook Effect: No hook effect observed.
• Potential Interference (Endogenous Substances): Biotin tolerance $\le$ 1200 ng/mL; no interference within specification for Intralipid, Bilirubin, Hemoglobin, Rheumatoid Factor, IgG, IgM, IgA, human serum albumin, ANA, cholesterol, and triglycerides.
• Analytical Cutoff Sensitivity: Cutoff of 1.00 COI corresponds to 1.137 BAU/mL (demonstrated alignment with international standard).
• Analytical Specificity- Potential Cross-Reactivity: False positive rate for cross-reacting antibodies within acceptable limits (2 false positives out of 7 MERS-CoV glycoprotein samples observed, overall 1836 samples tested).
• Exogenous Interference: Results within specification for 17 common drugs and 18 special drugs (with the exception of Ritonavir, which was within specification at 1x daily dose).
• Matrix Comparison: Matrix equivalency demonstrated for serum, Li-Heparin, K2-EDTA, K3-EDTA plasma, and separation gel tubes.
• Reagent, Calibrator, and Control Stability: Met stated storage times and conditions (e.g., 28 days on-board reagent, 10 hours on-board PreciControl, 30 days refrigerator after first opening, 28 days after first opening for PreciControl, 25 days lot calibration stability, 7 days on-board calibration stability).
• Specimen Stability: Met stated storage times and conditions (e.g., 7 days at 15-25°C, 14 days at 2-8°C, 28 days at -20°C, 3 freeze-thaw cycles).
• Fresh/Frozen Study: All results within specification for fresh vs. frozen samples.

2. Sample Sizes Used for the Test Set and the Data Provenance

• Negative Percent Agreement (NPA):
  • Sample Size: 9007 pre-pandemic specimens.
  • Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated (e.g., country of origin), but implicitly "pre-pandemic" suggests samples collected before December 2019. This is retrospective data.
• Positive Percent Agreement (PPA) - Traditional Clinical Study:
  • Sample Size: 254 specimens collected $\ge$ 15 days post symptom onset (DPSO), excluding COVID-19 vaccinated individuals and immunocompromised subjects.
  • Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated (e.g., country of origin), but described as collected under "routine laboratory conditions." This is retrospective or potentially a mix of retrospective and prospective, reflecting real clinical samples.
• PPA - Real-World Data:
  • Sample Size: 285 samples from non-immunocompromised subjects who did not receive the COVID-19 vaccine, collected $\ge$ 15 DPSO.
  • Data Provenance: Collaborating institution in the United States, collected from March 2020 – March 2021. This is retrospective data.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish the Ground Truth for the Test Set and the Qualifications of Those Experts

For this serology test, the ground truth is established through laboratory methods, not by human expert readers in the way an imaging AI would be adjudicated.

• NPA: Ground truth was "presumed to be negative for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies" based on collection before December 2019, prior to the widespread circulation of SARS-CoV-2.
• PPA (Traditional Clinical Study): Ground truth was established by a composite comparator method comprised of 3 SARS-CoV-2 serology assays (including the predicate assay). Seropositivity was determined by majority rule ($\ge$ 2 out of 3). Additionally, these individuals had a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by a prior FDA authorized RT-PCR test.
• PPA (Real-World Data): Ground truth was established by PCR as the comparator. Data was collected from electronic medical records and laboratory information systems.

Qualifications of Experts: Not applicable in the context of serology ground truth determination as it relies on other laboratory assays.

4. Adjudication Method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, none) for the Test Set

• NPA: No adjudication method as samples were "presumed negative" based on collection date.
• PPA (Traditional Clinical Study): A form of "majority rule" for the composite comparator method was used: $\ge$ 2 out of 3 serology assays. This is akin to a 2/3 agreement rule, but applied to the reference method rather than human readers adjudicating an AI's output. The confirmatory RT-PCR also served as a strong initial ground truth.
• PPA (Real-World Data): PCR was the direct comparator, so no explicit adjudication method beyond the result of the PCR test itself.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done, If So, What Was the Effect Size of How Much Human Readers Improve with AI vs Without AI Assistance

This is a clinical laboratory immunoassay (serology test), not an AI software intended for medical image interpretation or human-in-the-loop assistance. Therefore, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study involving human readers and AI assistance is not applicable and was not performed.

6. If a Standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) Was Done

The device itself is a standalone immunoassay system (Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 on the cobas e 601 analyzer) that provides a qualitative result (positive/negative) automatically. The entire clinical performance evaluation section describes the standalone performance of this device against established ground truths. Thus, a standalone performance evaluation was indeed done.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.)

• NPA: Pre-pandemic sample collection date (before December 2019), implying presumed negative status. This serves as a strong epidemiological ground truth for SARS-CoV-2 negativity.
• PPA (Traditional Clinical Study):
  • Composite Comparator Method: Majority rule ($\ge$ 2 out of 3) of other FDA-de novo and EUA-authorized Anti-SARS-CoV-2 serology assays.
  • Confirmatory RT-PCR: Individuals had a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by a prior FDA authorized RT-PCR test.
• PPA (Real-World Data): FDA authorized RT-PCR test results from electronic medical records and laboratory information systems.

In summary, the ground truth primarily relies on a combination of other FDA-authorized laboratory tests (serology and RT-PCR) and epidemiological/temporal evidence.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

This document describes the validation of a serology immunoassay, not a machine learning or AI model. Therefore, there is no "training set" in the context of AI model development. The "training" for such an assay would typically involve analytical development and optimization of reagents and protocols, not a data-driven training set in the AI sense.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established

As there is no AI training set described or applicable for this type of device, this question is not relevant to the provided information. The ground truth for performance evaluation was established as described in point 7.

Ask a specific question about this device

Opulus™ Lymphoma Precision is a software device that uses a machine learning-based algorithm to automate segmentation and visualization of lesions along with automation of measurement of total metabolic tumor volume within whole-body FDG-PET/CT scans of patients with FDG-avid lymphomas.

Opulus™ Lymphoma Precision is used to assist trained interpreting physicians with visualization of suspected lesions and calculation of total volume of all lesions in a body. This information can be used in addition to the standard of care image interpretation of FDG-PET/CT scans. Opulus™ Lymphoma Precision annotated images can be reviewed by an appropriately trained physician.

The algorithm is assistive, and requires a radiologist review, who will make the final decision on FDG-PET/CT image interpretation.

Opulus™ Lymphoma Precision is an assistive tool which can be used by physicians to automate the labor intensive task of quantifying disease burden in whole-body FDG-PET/CT scans of patients already diagnosed with FDG-avid lymphomas. It does so by using a machine learning methodology to localize and segment FDG-PET activity ('hot-spots' on FDG-PET scans) of lymphoma lesions within a PET/CT image. Opulus™ Lymphoma Precision does not screen for or diagnose lymphoma. It is intended for patients already diagnosed with FDG-avid lymphoma.

The following is a list of key functionalities algorithm performs to accomplish the proposed intended use.

• localization and segmentation,
• visualization of lymphoma-related tumor lesions
• quantification of Total Metabolic Tumor Volume (TMTV)

Opulus™ Lymphoma Precision aids the efficiency of medical professionals by automatically generating tumor boundary Regions of Interest (ROIs) and quantifying TMTV, which is a tedious task when performed manually. The physician has the option to accept/reject the output generated by the device. The user does not have the ability to modify the device output.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and the study proving the device meets them, based on the provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter for Opulus™ Lymphoma Precision:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The provided document does not explicitly present a table of "acceptance criteria" with pass/fail thresholds. However, it does state the objectives of the performance validation study and the results that demonstrate the device's agreement and accuracy. We'll infer the implicit acceptance criteria from these objectives.

Note: The document states the objectives were to "demonstrate agreement" and "accuracy," implying that the reported performance values were deemed acceptable by the FDA for clearance. Specific numerical thresholds for acceptance were not explicitly presented in this document.

2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance

• Sample Size: 182 unique patients' FDG-PET/CT scans.
• Data Provenance:
  • Country of Origin: Multiple geographical locations across the U.S., Canada, Europe, Australia, and Taiwan.
  • Retrospective/Prospective: Not explicitly stated, but the description of "fully independent dataset" collected from "various gender, ethnicity and age" and "scanners from different manufacturers and models" suggests a retrospective collection of existing scans.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications

• Number of Experts: Three radiologists/nuclear medicine physicians were used for each ground truth establishment. The document also mentions a "pool of nine radiologists" from which these three were randomly selected.
• Qualifications of Experts: Radiologists/nuclear medicine physicians with expertise in interpreting PET/CT scans from patients with FDG-avid lymphoma.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

The ground truth for each scan was based on the "independent input from three radiologists randomly selected from a pool of nine radiologists." This suggests a consensus-based adjudication, likely majority vote or discussion to reach agreement among the three, though the exact mechanism (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, pre-defined rules for disagreement) is not specified as "Adjudication method." However, it implies a multi-reader consensus approach.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study was Done

• Was it done?: No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study that specifically measures the improvement of human readers with AI vs. without AI assistance was not described in this 510(k) summary. The study focused on the algorithm's performance against expert-established ground truth, not on human-in-the-loop performance.
• Effect Size: Not applicable, as an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not presented.

6. If a Standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) Study was Done

• Was it done?: Yes. The performance evaluation describes the algorithm's output (aTMTV and segmentation contours) being compared directly against the established ground truth (mTMTV and ground truth contours). This is a standalone performance assessment.
• Performance Metrics: Mean difference in TMTV (cubic root) and Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC).

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• Type of Ground Truth: Expert consensus. Specifically, it was established by three radiologists/nuclear medicine physicians with expertise in interpreting PET/CT scans from patients with FDG-avid lymphoma. This type of ground truth is often referred to as "expert consensus ground truth."

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• Sample Size: Not explicitly stated. The document mentions that the performance validation study data was "a fully independent dataset from the training and characterization datasets," but it does not provide the specific sample size for the training set itself.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set was Established

• How Established: Not explicitly detailed for the training set. The document states that the performance validation dataset "was not available to the algorithm developers during the algorithm training," implying the training data also had ground truth established, but the method for the training set's ground truth is not described in this summary. It's common practice for training data ground truth to also be established by experts, possibly with varying levels of adjudication or annotation protocols compared to the test set, but this information is absent in the provided text.

Ask a specific question about this device