(44 days)
CALTAG CD3/CD19/CD45 is a fluorescent reagent containing a combination of CD3. CD19 and CD45 monoclonal antibodies conjugated to fluorescein. phycoerythrin and the tandem fluorochrome PE-Cy5, respectively, This reagent permits the simultaneous identification of CD3+ mature T lymphocytes, CQ19+ inature Bilymphocytes, and CD45+ leukocytes including lymphocytes, monocytes and granulocytes, by flow cytometric methods.
The CALTAG CD3/CD19/CD45 monoclonal antibody combination binds to the surfaces of viable blood cells that express the corresponding antigens. To identify cells bearing these antigenic determinants, peripheral blood leukocytes are incubated with the monoclonal antibody, and washed to remove unbound antibody. Prior to removal of unbound antibody, lysis solution is added to lyse red blood cells. An appropriate fixative solution is added to lysed and washed cells. Stained and fixed cells are subsequently analyzed by flow cytometric methods.
The document provided describes the Caltag CD3 FITC/CD19 R-PE/CD45 TRI-COLOR™ Mouse Monoclonal Antibody Combination and its substantial equivalence to predicate devices and single antibody components. It outlines non-clinical and clinical tests conducted to support this claim.
Here's a breakdown of the requested information:
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:
The document doesn't explicitly state formal "acceptance criteria" in a pass/fail format with specific thresholds. Instead, it presents data to demonstrate substantial equivalence through comparisons (expected values, specificity, and correlation) to predicate devices and single antibody components. The "performance" is the reported mean percentage of positive cells and correlation statistics.
Below is a summary of the relevant performance characteristics presented. The "Acceptance Criteria" are implied by the equivalency claims and strong correlations observed.
| Feature | Acceptance Criteria (Implied by Substantial Equivalence) | Reported Device Performance (Mean % Positive / Correlation) |
|---|---|---|
| Expected Value (CD3 FITC component) | Range of positive cells for healthy normal donors should be comparable to single CD3 FITC antibody. | Device Combination: 72.8% ± 7.7 (Range: 57-88%) for 155 normal donors. Single Antibody (Caltag CD3 FITC): 71.8% ± 6.9 (Range: 58-86%) for 130 normal donors. (These are essentially identical indicating comparable performance in expected value range). Correlation (vs. Caltag CD3 FITC single antibody): - Mean % positive (component): 69.7% - Mean % positive (single): 68.3% - r² value: 94.8% - Slope: 1.01 - Y intercept: 0.33 - Linear regression: y = 0.33 + 1.01x |
| Expected Value (CD19 R-PE component) | Range of positive cells for healthy normal donors should be comparable to single CD19 R-PE antibody (Caltag & Coulter). | Device Combination: 13.3% ± 4.5 (Range: 4-22%) for 155 normal donors. Single Antibody (Caltag CD19 R-PE): 13.0% ± 4.2 (Range: 5-21%) for 155 normal donors. Correlation (vs. Caltag CD19 R-PE single antibody): - Mean % positive (component): 16.8% - Mean % positive (single): 16.4% - r² value: 98.9% - Slope: 1.02 - Y intercept: 0.08 - Linear regression: y = 0.08 + 1.02x Correlation (vs. Coulter CD19 RD1 single antibody): - Mean % positive (component): 16.8% - Mean % positive (Coulter): 16.2% - r² value: 98.1% - Slope: 0.95 - Y intercept: 1.29 - Linear regression: y = 1.29 + 0.95x |
| Expected Value (CD45 TRI-COLOR component) | Range of positive cells for healthy normal donors should be comparable to single CD45 TRI-COLOR antibody. | Device Combination: 100.0% ± 0.1 (Range: 100-100%) for 155 normal donors. Single Antibody (Caltag CD45 TRI-COLOR): 99.0% ± 0.9 (Range: 97-100%) for 40 normal donors. (Again, indicating comparable performance). |
| Specificity (CD3 FITC) | Low non-specific binding to monocytes, granulocytes, platelets, and RBCs. | Mean non-specific binding: - Monocytes: 1.4% - Granulocytes: 0.8% - Platelets: 0.4% - RBCs: 0.3% (Very low, suggesting good specificity). |
| Specificity (CD19 R-PE) | Low non-specific binding to monocytes, granulocytes, platelets, and RBCs. | Mean non-specific binding: - Monocytes: 0.8% - Granulocytes: 0.5% - Platelets: 0.3% - RBCs: 0.3% (Very low, suggesting good specificity). |
| Specificity (CD45 TRI-COLOR) | High specific binding to lymphocytes, monocytes, and granulocytes; low non-specific binding to platelets and RBCs. | Mean specific binding: - Lymphocytes: 100.0% - Monocytes: 100.0% - Granulocytes: 100.0% Mean non-specific binding: - Platelets: 0.5% - RBCs: 0.3% (Excellent specific binding to target leukocytes and very low non-specific binding). |
| Correlation (General) | Strong correlation (high r² value, slope near 1, y-intercept near 0) between the component antibodies in the combination and their respective single antibody counterparts, indicating equivalent performance in quantifying cell populations. | r² values of 94.8% (CD3), 98.9% (CD19 vs Caltag single), and 98.1% (CD19 vs Coulter single) are all very high, demonstrating strong correlation. Slopes are close to 1 (1.01, 1.02, 0.95) and Y-intercepts are close to 0 (0.33, 0.08, 1.29), supporting substantial equivalence. |
2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance:
- Expected Value Study:
- Sample Size: 155 apparently healthy normal donors (16 to 72 years old, mean age 41).
- Data Provenance: Prospective collection from geographically diverse areas of the United States (Eastern, SouthCentral, and Western regions). The study was conducted in three independent laboratories. The population included adult Caucasians, Blacks, Orientals, and Hispanics.
- Specificity Study:
- Sample Size: Not explicitly stated as a distinct number, but "blood samples were obtained from healthy normal donors of Caucasian, Black, Hispanic and Oriental ethnic origins." At least 5 donors are represented in the tables (one for each ethnic origin listed).
- Data Provenance: Healthy normal donors of various ethnic origins.
- Correlation Study:
- Sample Size: 175 donors (including 155 normal and 20 abnormal donors). This seems to be a mixed prospective/retrospective set or a different prospective collection from the "expected value" study, as the previous one only mentioned normal donors.
- Data Provenance: Not explicitly detailed beyond "donors." Given the context of healthy normals and ethnically diverse data in the expected value study, it's likely similar.
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts:
This device is a reagent for flow cytometry, which quantifies cell populations based on antibody binding. The "ground truth" here is the physical presence of the antigens on the cells and their subsequent detection by flow cytometry. There is no mention of experts establishing a visual "ground truth" like in imaging studies. The accuracy of the flow cytometer's measurements, itself, establishes the "ground truth" for quantification based on the reagents' performance. The comparison is made against established single antibodies (predicate devices), implying that their performance is the accepted standard.
4. Adjudication method for the test set:
Not applicable. This is not a study requiring adjudication of expert interpretations, but rather a quantitative measurement of antibody binding and cell population percentages by flow cytometry.
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:
Not applicable. This document describes an in vitro diagnostic reagent, not an AI or imaging device that involves human readers or an MRMC study.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done:
The device itself is a reagent kit. Its performance is evaluated in a standalone manner as an IVD product (antibody binding to cells), without human interpretation as the primary outcome measure. The flow cytometer, an automated instrument, performs the analysis.
7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.):
The "ground truth" is implicitly established by:
- Known antigen expression: CD3 on T lymphocytes, CD19 on B lymphocytes, CD45 on all leukocytes.
- Flow cytometry measurements: The quantification of positive cell populations by the flow cytometer, using the combination reagent compared to established single reagents. The specificity data further supports this by showing where the antibodies do and do not bind.
- Predicate device performance: The performance of the predicate single antibodies serves as the accepted standard for defining the "true" percentages of cell populations.
8. The sample size for the training set:
The concept of "training set" is not applicable in the context of this traditional IVD reagent validation. This is a chemical reagent, not an algorithmic model that learns from data.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established:
Not applicable, as there is no training set for this type of device.
{0}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/0/Picture/0 description: The image shows the logo for CALTAG LABORATORIES. The word "CALTAG" is in large, bold, sans-serif font, with a thick line underneath it. Below the line, the word "LABORATORIES" is written in a smaller, sans-serif font. The text is black on a white background.
JAN 17 1997
510(K) SUMMARY SUMMARY OF SAFETY AND EFFECTIVENESS DATA
CD3 FITC/CD19 R-PE/CD45 TRI-COLOR™ Mouse Monoclonal Antibody Combination To Human Cell Surface Antigens by Flow Cytometry
NAME AND LOCATION OF MANUFACTURER:
Caltag Laboratories, Inc. 1849 Old Bayshore Highway Suite 200 Burlingame, CA 94010 (800) 874-4007
NAME OF CONTACT PERSON:
Robert C. Johnson Executive Vice President Caltag Laboratories, Inc.
DATE OF PREPARATION OF SUMMARY:
December 1, 1996
{1}------------------------------------------------
TRADE NAME OF THE DEVICE:
CD3 FITC/CD19 R-PE/CD45 TRI-COLOR™ Mouse Monoclonal Antibody Combination To Human Cell Surface Antigens by Flow Cytometry
COMMON NAME:
Caltag CD3 FITC/CD19 R-PE/CD45 TRI-COLOR™ Monoclonal Antibody Combination
CLASSIFICATION NAME:
Automated Differential Cell Coulter (21 CFR 864.5220)
LEGALLY MARKETED DEVICE (PREDICATE DEVICE) TO WHICH THE MANUFACTURER IS CLAIMING SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE:
The Caltag CD3 FITC monoclonal antibody in the CD3 FITC/CD19 R-PE/CD45 TRI-COLOR combination is substantially equivalent to the Caltag CD3 FITC single monoclonal antibody for in vitro diagnostic use.
The Caltag CD19 R-PE monoclonal antibody in the CD3 FITC/CD19 R-PE/CD45 TRI-COLOR combination is substantially equivalent to the Caltag CD19 R-PE single monoclonal antibody for in vitro diagnostic use, and is substantially equivalent to the Coulter CD19 RD1 single monoclonal antibody for in vitro diagnostic use.
DESCRIPTION OF THE DEVICE:
The CALTAG CD3/CD19/CD45 monoclonal antibody combination binds to the surfaces of viable blood cells that express the corresponding antigens. To identify cells bearing these antigenic determinants, peripheral blood leukocytes are incubated with the monoclonal antibody, and washed to remove unbound antibody. Prior to removal of unbound antibody, lysis solution is added to lyse red blood cells. An appropriate fixative solution is added to lysed and washed cells. Stained and fixed cells are subsequently analyzed by flow cytometric methods.
INTENDED USE OF THE DEVICE:
CALTAG CD3/CD19/CD45 is a fluorescent reagent containing a combination of CD3. CD19 and CD45 monoclonal antibodies conjugated to fluorescein. phycoerythrin and the tandem fluorochrome PE-Cy5, respectively, This reagent permits the simultaneous identification of CD3+ mature T lymphocytes, CQ19+ inature Bilymphocytes, and CD45+ leukocytes including lymphocytes, monocytes and granulocytes, by flow cytometric methods.
{2}------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY OF THE TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MANUFACTURER'S DEVICE COMPARED TO THE PREDICATE DEVICE:
| No. | Item | Caltag Components | Caltag AntibodiesCoulter Antibody | Comparison | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Intended Use | Flow Cytometry | Flow CytometryImmunofluorescence | Substantiallyequivalent | |
| 2. | Specificity | CD3CD19CD45 | CD3 CaltagCD19 CaltagCD19 Coulter | Substantiallyequivalent | |
| "live gating" only | |||||
| 3. | Target cellfor CD3 | MatureT Lymphocyte | MatureT Lymphocytes | Substantiallyequivalent | |
| for CD19 | B lymphocytes | B lymphocytes | Substantiallyequivalent | ||
| for CD45 | All Leukocytes | All Leukocytes | "live gating" only | ||
| 4. | Chemical form | Monoclonalantibody | Monoclonalantibody | Substantiallyequivalent | |
| 5. | Fluorochromes | FITCR-PER-PETRI-COLOR | FITCR-PE (Caltag)RD1 (Coulter)not available (Coulter) | Substantiallyequivalent | |
| 6. | Available forms | FITCPETRI-COLOR | liquid, PBSliquid, PBSliquid, PBS | lyophilizedliquid, PBSnone available (Coulter) | Substantiallyequivalent |
| 7. | Sample prep.methods | whole blood | whole blood | Substantiallyequivalent |
Comparisons of Caltag Monoclonal Antibody Components to Caltag and Coulter Single Monoclonal Antibodies
NON CLINICAL TESTS SUPPORTING A DETERMINATION OF SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE:
EXPECTED VALUE DATA
Blood samples were collected from a total of 155 apparently healthy normal donors in an age range of 16 to 72, with a mean age of 41, for the determination of expected values of the Caltag CD3/CD19/CD45 monoclonal antibody combination. Samples were collected and analyzed in each of three independent laboratories. An approximately equal number of males and females were collected and analyzed in each laboratory.
{3}------------------------------------------------
The population contained members of differing ethnic origins, including adult Caucasians, Blacks, Orientals and Hispanics. Donors in geographically diverse areas of the United States, including the Eastern, SouthCentral and Western regions, participated in this study.
Summary of expected values for CALTAG CD3 FITC CD19 R-PE and CD45 TRI-COLOR components for 155 normal donors:
| procedure | S.D.mean% positive | Range+2 S.D. | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CD3 FITC component | 72.8 | 7.7 | 57-88 | |
| CD19 R-PE component | 13.3 | 4.5 | 4-22 | |
| CD45 TRI-COLOR component | 100.0 | 0.1 | 100-100 |
Comparison of CALTAG CD3 FITC, CD19 R-PE and CD45 TRI-COLOR components to the CALTAG CD3 FITC, CD19 R-PE and CD45 TRI-COLOR single antibodies. Blood samples were collected from different randomly selected populations of adult normal donors having similar age, gender and ethnic distributions for the determination of expected values for the Caltag CD3 FITC and CD45 TRI-COLOR single monoclonal antibodies, and from the same population of adult normal donors for the determination of expected values for Caltag CD19 R-PE single antibody.
SINGLE ANTIBODIES
| procedure | mean% positive | S.D. | Range±2 S.D. | n |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CD3 FITC | 71.8 | 6.9 | 58-86 | 130 |
| CD19 R-PE | 13.0 | 4.2 | 5-21 | 155 |
| CD45 TRI-COLOR | 99.0 | 0.9 | 97-100 | 40 |
Expected values for pediatrics and adolescents have not been determined.
The values obtained from normal individuals may vary from laboratory to laboratory; therefore, it is recommended that each laboratory establish its own normal range.
SPECIFICITY DATA
Blood samples were obtained from healthy normal donors of Caucasian, Black, Hispanic and Oriental ethnic origins. Samples of each donor were stained with CALTAG CD3 FITC/CD19 R-PE/CD45 TRI-COLOR monoclonal antibody combination. Cells contained in the lymphocyte, monocyte and granulocyte regions were selected for analysis. Separate samples from the same donors were prepared for analysis of red blood cells and platelets and stained with each of the CALTAG monoclonal antibodies.
{4}------------------------------------------------
| CD3 FITC Component | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EthnicOrigin | Lymph. | Mono. | Gran. | Plt. | RBC |
| Caucasian | 65.2 | 1.7 | 1.5 | 0.6 | 0.3 |
| Caucasian | 81.4 | 1.4 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.4 |
| Hispanic | 79.2 | 1.9 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 0.4 |
| Oriental | 81.2 | 1.3 | 0.9 | 0.4 | 0.2 |
| Black | 84.9 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.4 |
| Mean | 78.4 | 1.4 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 0.3 |
| ± 1 S.D. | 7.6 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.1 |
| CD19 R-PE Component | |||||
| EthnicOrigin | Lymph. | Mono. | Gran. | Plt. | RBC |
| Caucasian | 18.1 | 1.3 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.2 |
| Caucasian | 12.9 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.2 |
| Hispanic | 13.4 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 0.6 |
| Oriental | 12.1 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.3 |
| Black | 12.7 | 0.9 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.2 |
CD45 TRI-COLOR Component
13.8
2.4
0.8
0.3
| EthnicOrigin | Lymph. | Mono. | Gran. | Plt. | RBC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Percent of Stained Cells | |||||
| Caucasian | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 0.8 | 0.2 |
| Caucasian | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 0.5 | 0.3 |
| Hispanic | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 0.3 | 0.4 |
| Oriental | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 0.4 | 0.3 |
| Black | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 0.3 | 0.2 |
| Mean | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 0.5 | 0.3 |
| ± 1 S.D. | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.1 |
0.5
0.1
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.2
Specific and/or nonspecific antibody Fc binding to monocytes in a patient sample can be excluded by proper gating on lymphocytes on the flow cytometer.
CLINICAL TESTS SUPPORTING A DETERMINATION OF SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE:
CORRELATION DATA
Mean
± 1 S.D.
The Correlation study was performed on 175 donors, including 155 normal and 20 abnormal donors.
Comparison of the CALTAG CD3 FITC conjugated monoclonal antibody component of CD3 FITC/CD19 R-PE/CD45 TRI-COLOR with the CALTAG CD3 FITC conjugated single monoclonal antibody:
{5}------------------------------------------------
| procedure | mean% positive | r2value | slope | Y intercept |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CD3 FITC component | 69.7 | 94.8 | 1.01 | 0.33 |
| CD3 FITC single | 68.3 | |||
| CD3 FITC componentSlope | + 1.01 | |||
| y intercept | + 0.33 | |||
| Linear regression | y = 0.33 + 1.01x |
Comparison of the CALTAG CD19 R-PE conjugated monoclonal antibody component of CD3 FITC/CD19 R-PE/CD45 TRI-COLOR with the Caltag CD19 R-PE conjugated single monoclonal antibody:
| procedure | mean% positive | r2value | slope | Yintercept |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CD19 R-PE component | 16.8 | 98.9 | 1.02 | 0.08 |
| CD19 R-PE single | 16.4 | |||
| CD19 R-PE componentSlope + 1.02y intercept + 0.08Linear regression y = 0.08 + 1.02x |
Comparison of the CALTAG CD19 R-PE conjugated monoclonal antibody component of CD3 FITC/CD19 R-PE/CD45 TRI-COLOR with the Coulter CD19 RD1 conjugated single monoclonal antibody:
| procedure | mean% positive | r2value | slope | Yintercept |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CD19 R-PE component | 16.8 | 98.1 | 0.95 | 1.29 |
| Coulter CD19 RD1 | 16.2 | |||
| CD19 R-PE componentSlope + 0.95y intercept + 1.29Linear regression y = 1.29 + 0.95x |
BIBLIOGRAPHY
-
- Hsu S., Cossman J., Jaffe E.; Lymphocyte subsets in normal human lymphoid tissues. Am. J. Clin. Path. 80:21-30, 1983.
-
- Morimoto C., Letvin N.L., Distaso J.A., et al: The cellular basis for the induction of antigen-specific T8-suppressor cells. Eur. J. Immunol. 16:198-204, 1986.
-
- Kurrle R., Cluster Report: CD3, in Fourth International Workshop And Conference On Human Leukocyte Differentiation Antigens, pp 290-293, Vienna, 1989.
- Transy C., Moingeon P.E., Marshall B., et al: Most murine anti-human CD3 mAb recognize the human 4. CD3 epsilon subunit. in Fourth International Leukocyte Workshop and Conference On Human Leukocyte Differentiation Antigens. pp 293-295, Vienna, 1989.
- ട. Dorken B., Moller P., Pezzutto A., Schwartz-Albiez R., Moldenhauer G., B-cell antigens:CD19, in Fourth International Workshop and Conference On Human Leucocyte Differentiation Antigens, pp 34-36, Vienna, 1989.
{6}------------------------------------------------
- Pirruccello S.J., Johnson D.R., Reagents for flow cytometry: Monoclonal antibodies and hematopoietic 6. cell antigens, in Flow Cytometry And Clinical Diagnosis, pp 56-78, pub. American Society of Clinical Pathologists, 1994.
- Shields J.G., Rigley K.P., Callard R.E., Regulation of human Bcell proliferation by the CD19 cell-surface 7. glycoprotein, in Fourth International Workshop and Conference On Human Leucocyte Differentiation Antigens, pp 40-43, Vienna, 1989.
- Schwinzer R., Cluster Report CD45/CD45R, in Fourth International Workshop and Conference On 8. Human Leucocyte Differentiation Antigens, pp 628-634, Vienna, 1989.
- Fifth International Workshop and Conference On Human Leucocyte Differentiation Antigens, Leucocyte 9. Typing V, White Cell Differentiation Antigens, Boston, 1993.
- Reinherz E.L., Cooper M.D., Schlossman S.F., Abnormalities of T cell maturation and regulation in 10. human beings with immunodeficiency disorders. J. Clin. Invest. 68:609-705, 1981.
- Schmidt R.E., Monoclonal antibodies for diagnosis of immunodeficiencies. Blut 59:200-206, 1989. 11.
- Smolen J.S., Morimoto C., Steinberg A.D., et al: Systemic lupus erythematosus: delineation of 12. subpopulations by clinical serologic and Tcell marker analysis. Am. J. Med. Sci. 289:139-141, 1985.
-
- Morimoto C., Steinberg A.D., Letvin A.L., et al: A defect of immunoregulatory T cell subsets in SLE patients demonstrated with anti-2H4. J. Clin. Invest. 79:762-765, 1987.
- Duke O., Panayi G.S., Janossy G., et al: Analysis of T cell subsets in the peripheral blood and synovial 14. fluid of patients with rheumatoid arthritis by means of monoclonal antibodies. Ann Rheum Dis. 42:357-364, 1983.
- Reinherz E.L., O'Brien C., Rosenthal P., et al: The cellular basis for viral-induced immunodeficiency: 15. Analysis by monoclonal antibodies. J. Immunol. 125:1266-1274, 1980.
- Nadler L.M., in Leukocyte Typing II, Volume 2, B cell/Leukemia Panel Workshop: Summary and 16. Comments, Chapter 1:2-20, Springer Verlag, New York, 1986.
- Wedgwood R.J., X-linked agammaglobulinemia, in CRC Handbook Series In Clinical Laboratory 17.. Science. CRC Press. West Palm Beach Florida, pp 41-50, 1978.
-
- Pearl E.R., Vogler L.B., Okos A.J. et al, B lymphocyte precursors in bone marrow. An analysis of normal individuals and patients with antibody-deficiency states, J. Immunol. 120:1169-175, 1978.
- Spickett G.P., Webster A.D., Farrant J., Cellular abnormalities in common variable immunodeficiency, 19. Immunodefic. Rev. 2:199-219, 1990.
- Small T.N., Keever C., Collins N. et al, Characterization of B cells in severe combined 20. immunodeficiency disease, Hum. Immunol. 25:181-193, 1991.
- Goldstein R., Izaguirre L.C., Douglas J. et al, Systemic lupus erythematosus and common variable 21. panhypogammaglobulinemia. Theoretical and practical considerations, Fed. Proc. 29:1606-1611, 1985.
-
- Schwinzer R., Cluster Report CD45/CD45R, in Fourth International Workshop and Conference On Human Leucocyte Differentiation Antigens, pp 628-634, Vienna, 1989.
-
- Loken M.L., Brosnan N.N., Back, B.A., Ault K.A .: Establishing optimal lymphocyte gates for immunophenotyping for flow cytometry, Cytometry 11:453-459, 1990.
-
- Mandy F.F., Bergeron M., Recktenwald D., Izaguirre C.A., A simultaneous three color T cell subsets analysis with single laser flow cytometers using T cell gating protocol, J. Immunol. Methods 156:151-162, 1992.
-
- Stelzer G.T., Schults K.S., Loken M.R., CD45 gating for routine flow cytometric analysis of human bone marrow specimens, in Clinical Flow Cytometry, A. Landay, K. Ault, K. Bauer, P. Rabinovitch, eds, pp 265-280, 1993.
- Stewart C.C., Stewart S.J., Multiparameter analysis of leukocytes by flow cytometry, in Methods Of 26. Cell Biology, Z. Darzynkiewicz, H. Crissman eds, in press, 1994.
-
- 1994 Revised Guidelines for the Performance of CD4 + T-Cell Determinations in Persons with Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection, Morbidity And Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), Volume 43/No. RR-3, March 4, 1994.
-
- Nicholson J.K.A., Green T.A. and Collaborative Laboratories, Selection of anticoagulants for lymphocyte immunophenotyping. J. Immunol. Methods 165:31-35, 1993 .
- Tennant J.R., Evaluation of the Trypan Blue technique for determination of cell viability, 29. Transplantation 2:685-694, 1964.
-
- Koepke J.A., Landay A.L.: Precision and Accuracy of Absolute Lymphocyte Counts, Clin. Immunol. and Immunopath. 52:19-27, 1989.
-
- Brown M.C., Hoffman R.A., Kirchanski S., Controls for flow cytometers in hematology and cellular immunology, Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 468:93-103, 1986.
-
- Durrand R.E., Calibration of flow cytometer detector systems, Cytometry 2:192-193, 1981.
§ 864.5220 Automated differential cell counter.
(a)
Identification. An automated differential cell counter is a device used to identify one or more of the formed elements of the blood. The device may also have the capability to flag, count, or classify immature or abnormal hematopoietic cells of the blood, bone marrow, or other body fluids. These devices may combine an electronic particle counting method, optical method, or a flow cytometric method utilizing monoclonal CD (cluster designation) markers. The device includes accessory CD markers.(b)
Classification. Class II (special controls). The special control for this device is the FDA document entitled “Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Premarket Notifications for Automated Differential Cell Counters for Immature or Abnormal Blood Cells; Final Guidance for Industry and FDA.”