Search Results

The MBT Sepsityper is a qualitative in vitro diagnostic device consisting of a MBT-CA (Sepsityper) software extension and a reagent kit (MBT Sepsityper Kit US IVD) for use in conjunction with other clinical and laboratory findings to aid in the early diagnosis of bacterial and yeast infections from positively flagged blood cultures using the MALDI Biotyper CA System.

The MBT Sepsityper Kit US IVD is a disposable blood culture processing device that includes associated reagents that are intended to concentrate and purify microbial cells from blood culture samples identified as positive by a continuous monitoring blood culture system and confirmed to demonstrate the presence of a single organism as determined by Gram stain. This sample preparation manual method is performed by laboratory health a clinical diagnostic setting.

Subculturing of positive blood cultures is necessary to recover organisms for identification of organisms not identified by the MBT-CA System, for susceptibility testing and for differentiation of mixed growth.

Positive MBT Sepsityper results do not rule out co-infection with organisms that may not be detected by the MBT-CA System. Results of the MBT Sepsityper should not be used as the sole basis for diagnosis, treatment, or other patient management decisions. Results of the MBT Sepsityper should be correlated with Gram stain results and used in conjunction with other clinical and laboratory findings to aid in the diagnosis of bacterial and yeast bloodstream infections.

The MBT Sepsityper is a qualitative in vitro diagnostic device consisting of a MBT-CA (Sepsityper) software extension and a reagent kit (MBT Sepsityper Kit US IVD). The MBT Sepsityper Kit US IVD is a disposable blood culture processing device that includes associated reagents that are intended to concentrate and purify microbial cells from blood culture samples identified as positive by a continuous monitoring blood culture system and confirmed to demonstrate the presence of a single organism as determined by Gram stain. This sample preparation manual method is performed by laboratory health a clinical diagnostic setting.

The provided text is related to an FDA 510(k) clearance for a medical device (MBT Sepsityper) and primarily describes its indications for use, regulatory classification, and the types of organisms it can identify. It does NOT contain the detailed information necessary to fully address all parts of your request regarding acceptance criteria and the study proving the device meets those criteria.

Specifically, the document does not include:

• A table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance.
• Sample sizes used for test and training sets, or data provenance.
• Information on expert ground truth establishment (number of experts, qualifications, adjudication).
• Details about MRMC comparative effectiveness studies or standalone algorithm performance.
• Specifics on how ground truth was established for training or test sets (e.g., pathology, outcomes data).

Therefore, I can only address the parts for which information is implicitly or explicitly available in the provided text.

Based on the provided information, here's what can be gathered:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance:

This information is not provided in the document. The document is an FDA clearance letter, which typically summarizes the outcome of the review rather than providing the raw performance data or the detailed acceptance criteria used in the validation study.

2. Sample sized used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g. country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective):

This information is not provided in the document. The document mentions that the device is "for use in conjunction with other clinical and laboratory findings to aid in the early diagnosis of bacterial and yeast infections from positively flagged blood cultures." It also lists a wide range of bacteria and yeasts the device is intended to identify, implying that a significant amount of data was used for validation, but specific sample sizes and provenance are absent.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts (e.g. radiologist with 10 years of experience):

This information is not provided in the document. For in vitro diagnostic microbiology devices like this, ground truth is typically established by definitive laboratory methods (e.g., sequencing, advanced biochemical tests) rather than expert human interpretation of images, but the specifics are not detailed here.

4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:

This information is not provided in the document. Adjudication methods are typically relevant for studies involving human interpretation of complex medical images, which is not the primary function of this device.

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 information is not provided in the document. MRMC studies are generally applicable to imaging devices where human interpretation plays a significant role. This device is an in vitro diagnostic system for microorganism identification using mass spectrometry, not an AI-assisted diagnostic imaging tool.

6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done:

The device is described as "a qualitative in vitro diagnostic device consisting of a MBT-CA (Sepsityper) software extension and a reagent kit." This implies that the software performs the identification based on mass spectrometry data, making it a standalone algorithm in terms of the identification process itself. However, the clearance states it is "for use in conjunction with other clinical and laboratory findings," and that "results should not be used as the sole basis for diagnosis," indicating that human oversight and integration with other clinical data are required downstream. The document does not explicitly state if standalone performance metrics (e.g., sensitivity, specificity) of the algorithm alone were evaluated as a distinct part of the study, separate from its overall clinical utility.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.):

While not explicitly stated in detail, for an in vitro diagnostic device identifying microorganisms, the ground truth would almost certainly be established by definitive microbiological methods, such as:

• Reference culture methods: Gold standard growth and biochemical identification.
• Molecular methods: DNA sequencing (e.g., 16S rRNA gene sequencing for bacteria, ITS region sequencing for fungi) which provides highly accurate species-level identification.
  The document lists specific organisms the device can identify, implying that the ground truth for these organisms was established by such highly accurate methods.

8. The sample size for the training set:

This information is not provided in the document.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established:

This information is not provided in the document, but similar to point 7, it would logically be established by definitive microbiological or molecular methods.

Ask a specific question about this device

The MALDI Biotyper CA System is a mass spectrometer system using matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization - time of flight (MALDI-TOF) for the identification and differentiation of microorganisms cultured from human specimens.

The MALDI Biotyper CA System is a qualitative in vitro diagnostic device indicated for use in conjunction with other clinical and laboratory findings to aid in the diagnosis of bacterial and fungal infections.

The MBT-CA System consists of the Microflex LT/SH mass spectrometer, reference library, kit reagents (US IVD HCCA, US IVD Bacterial Test Standard), US IVD 48 Spot Target or MBT Biotarget 96 US IVD plate, and software. The MALDI Biotyper CA System with closed safety covers is a Class 1 Laser product. With the safety cover opened it becomes a Class 4 Laser product.

The MALDI Biotyper CA System reference library was established by analyzing the type strain from each claimed species combined with 4 to ~30 additional strains from the same species provided by clinical laboratories or commercial strain collections. Currently a total of 3029 strains (covering 334 species / groups with 294 bacteria plus 40 yeasts) are contained in the clinically validated MBT-CA library.

Implementation methodology, construction parameters and quality assurance protocols use a standard operating protocol for generation of reference entries and all testing parameters are the same.

MBT-CA microorganism identification is based on isolate MALDI spectra using Bruker reference libraries with a 1:1 comparison of unknown MALDI spectra against each single entry of a given reference library. During a single identification event, an unknown MALDI spectra is compared against each single reference entry producing individual log(score) results. This number of log(scores) is sorted based on their value and the highest one is used to generate the final result. The addition of new reference entries does not influence the already included entries. If no reference entries are removed within a library update the log(score) calculation remains unchanged for the same MALDI spectra.

MALDI Biotyper CA System client software displays a user-interface which guides the user through the MALDI Biotyper CA System workflow. The MALDI Biotyper CA System client also interfaces to the flexControl software for automated acquisition of mass spectra on the microflex LT/SH instrument.

The MALDI Biotyper CA System server communicates with the MALDI Biotyper CA System client and the MBT-DB server. It performs preprocessing on acquired spectra, and matches peak lists against the Main Spectrum (reference pattern, (MSP)) for matching and calculates the score value (log (score)).

The MBT-DB server stores all information for the MALDI Biotyper CA System. The MBT-DB maintains spectra data (creation information and mass/intensity lists), project data (results of defined and executed runs), method data (parameter lists for spectra preprocessing and identification), user management data, reference patterns and other peak lists plus additional maintenance data.

GTPS firmware communicates with the flexControl PC software, controls and monitors the vacuum, moves the sample carrier and performs the docking of the target plate, controls and monitors high voltages in the ion source, generates trigger signals, and monitors instrument status.

The flexControl acquisition software communicates with the MALDI Biotyper CA System client, loads automatic run jobs, communicates with the GTPS firmware, communicates with the laser in the microflex LT/SH instrument, sets the acquisition parameters in the digitizer and reads the acquired data from the digitizer, performs automated data acquisition, evaluates acquired spectra, adjusts the laser power during automatic data acquisition, performs a re-calibration of the time-of-flight to mass transformation, stored acquired spectra on disk and performs source cleaning. The flexControl software does not display a user interface.

The optional Honeywell (Hyperion 1300g) Barcode Reader USB cable is connected to the MALDI Biotyper CA System computer. The barcode reader scans the unique ten-digit target ID which appears in the Target ID box on the target plate. After the target ID has been entered, the a new Run page opens and the ten-digit target ID appears as the Plate ID and is appended to the Run name. Sample identifications are entered into the computer corresponding to the target plate position for that run.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information for the MALDI Biotyper CA System, extracted from the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document describes performance for the addition of Candida auris to the existing MBT-CA reference library, rather than a full de novo clearance study of the entire device. Therefore, the "acceptance criteria" here refer to the performance required for the inclusion of this new organism into the established system.

Additionally, for analytical specificity (cross-identification studies):

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

• For C. auris performance evaluation:

  • Number of C. auris isolates: 28 isolates for performance evaluation, 22 of which were used for generating the truth tables (excluding 6 strains used for reference entries).
  • Total C. auris spectra: 22 strains * 3 sample preparations (DT, eDT, Ext) * 8 spots = 528 spectra for truth table counting. (The document states 888 spectra for identification across (37 strains * 3 sample preparations * 8 spots), where 37 strains includes 28 C. auris and 9 related yeasts).
  • Data Provenance: CDC & FDA Antibiotic Resistance Isolate Bank (USA), isolates from (b) (4) (Europe/US likely), and field strains (unspecified location).

• For Analytical Specificity (wet testing of claimed organisms):

  • Sample Size: 10 "cleared species" (e.g., E. coli, K. pneumoniae, S. aureus, C. albicans, C. glabrata).
  • Total Spectra: 10 species * 3 sample prep techniques * 3 replicates * 2 instruments = 360 spectra/log(scores).
  • Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated but inferred to be well-characterized strains from resource centers (e.g., ATCC).

• For Analytical Specificity (wet testing of RUO organisms):

  • Sample Size: 9 RUO species.
  • Total Spectra: Not explicitly stated (marked as (0) pectra / log(scores) which could be a typo or redaction for a large number). Each species tested with 3 replicates, 3 sample prep techniques, on 2 instruments.
  • Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated but inferred to be well-characterized strains from resource centers.

• For Analytical Specificity (in silico evaluation):

  • Sample Size: 6822 log(scores) from a subset of stored spectra for previously claimed organisms.
  • Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated but refers to historical data from previous studies (K130831, K142677, K163536).

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

The document does not explicitly state the number of experts or their qualifications for establishing the ground truth for the Candida auris test set. However, it indicates that the ITS sequence was determined for the 6 strains used for the new reference library entries, and implies that the remaining C. auris isolates were well-characterized from reputable sources (CDC & FDA, other resource centers). The "Reference Algorithm" is used as the comparative method for C. auris performance. Given this is a microbiology identification device, ground truth is typically established by established phenotypic, genotypic (e.g., DNA sequencing), or biochemical methods, often confirmed by expert microbiologists.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

The document does not describe an explicit adjudication method (like 2+1 or 3+1) involving multiple human readers for setting the ground truth for the test set. Instead, it relies on:

• Established sources for isolates (CDC & FDA Antibiotic Resistance Isolate Bank, other resource centers).
• ITS sequence determination for reference strains.
• "Reference Algorithm" as the gold standard for comparison (likely a combination of genotypic and phenotypic characterization).

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

No Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study is described in this document. The device is for automated microorganism identification, so human reader improvement with AI assistance is not directly applicable in the same way it would be for image interpretation tasks. The comparison is between the device's automated identification and a reference method.

6. Standalone Performance Study (Algorithm Only)

Yes, a standalone performance study was done. The entire evaluation focuses on the performance of the MALDI Biotyper CA System (algorithm plus instrument) in identifying microorganisms without human-in-the-loop during the identification process itself. Users "aid in the diagnosis" using the output, but the identification is automated. The log(score) output directly reflects the algorithm's confidence in its standalone identification.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

The ground truth used for the Candida auris evaluation was based on:

• Genetic Sequencing: ITS sequence determination for the 6 C. auris strains used for reference library generation.
• Established Reference Materials: Isolates obtained from reputable sources like the CDC & FDA Antibiotic Resistance Isolate Bank, which are generally well-characterized by various methods (genotypic and phenotypic). The document refers to it as the "Reference Algorithm" in performance tables.

For the analytical specificity studies, "well-characterized set of cleared species" and "well-characterized set of RUO species" from resource centers implies established identification through various, often molecular, methods.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

The document describes the content of the reference library (which serves as the training/reference data for the algorithm), but does not specifically refer to it as a "training set" in the context of machine learning model development. Instead, it's a reference database.

• Total Reference Entries (database): 3029 strains covering 334 species/groups (294 bacteria + 40 yeasts).
• C. auris specific reference entries: 6 strains.
• How reference entries are built: Each entry is based on analyzing the type strain from each claimed species combined with 4 to ~30 additional strains from the same species.

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

The ground truth for the reference library (training set) entries was established by:

• Analyzing type strains: For each claimed species.
• Analyzing additional strains: 4 to ~30 additional strains per species from clinical laboratories or commercial strain collections.
• Standard Operating Protocol: Implementation methodology, construction parameters, and quality assurance protocols use a standard operating protocol for the generation of reference entries.
• DNA Sequencing: For the newly added C. auris strains, ITS sequencing was performed for all 6 strains used for the new reference library entries. It's also mentioned as a requirement for "all type strains and at least 20% of the non-type strains of a species detected by the device" to be characterized by DNA sequence analysis (as part of special controls for this device type). This implies that a significant portion of the existing library entries also have DNA sequencing as part of their ground truth establishment.

Ask a specific question about this device

The MALDI Biotyper CA System is a mass spectrometer systems using matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization - time of flight (MALDI-TOF) for the identification of microorganisms cultured from human specimens.

The MALDI Biotyper CA System is a qualitative in vitro diagnostic device indicated for use in conjunction with other clinical and laboratory findings to aid in the diagnosis of bacterial and yeast infections.

The MBT-CA System is a mass spectrometer system using matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization - time of flight (MALDI-TOF) for the identification of microorganisms cultured from human specimens. The system uses a different methodology for organism identification based on unique protein patterns of the microorganisms obtained from mass spectrometry. The test organism's spectrum (a pattern of mass peaks) is compared with a reference spectra library (database). Using biostatistical analysis, a probability ranking of the organism identification is generated. The probability ranking is represented as a log(score) between 0.00 and 3.00. Organism identification is reported with high confidence if the log(score) is ≥2.00. An organism identification is reported with low confidence if the log(score) is between 1.70 and <2.00.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and the study details for the MALDI Biotyper CA (MBT-CA) System, based on the provided document:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The provided document does not explicitly state pre-defined acceptance criteria in terms of numerical thresholds for sensitivity, specificity, or overall accuracy. Instead, it presents performance results from various studies (reproducibility, challenge panel, method comparison) and concludes that the device performs acceptably.

However, based on the reported performance in the Method Comparison study, common metrics for identification systems would be:

Note: The "acceptance criteria" presented above are inferred from the strong performance and conclusions drawn in the document, rather than explicitly stated numerical targets prior to testing.

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

• Method Comparison Study (Overall Isolate Performance):

  • Sample Size: 2091 fresh and stored organisms.
  • Data Provenance: Organisms were tested at four (4) US clinical test sites and an in-house laboratory. Isolates were sub-cultured and sent to an interim reference laboratory and then to a sequencing reference laboratory for ground truth determination. This indicates prospective and retrospective data collection with a US origin.

• Reproducibility Study:

  • Sample Size: 9 unique organisms (REPRO-02 excluded). Each organism tested in duplicate, 5 days, 2 runs/day, 3 sites (9 organisms x 2 replicates x 5 days x 2 runs x 3 sites = 540 measurements). Total MBT-CA IDs for summary = 179/180 per site.
  • Data Provenance: Conducted at three (3) clinical study sites (US, likely, given the FDA submission context). The organisms were "well-characterized," suggesting they might be reference strains or previously identified clinical isolates.

• Challenge Panel Study:

  • Sample Size: 46 organisms.
  • Data Provenance: Selected from stored organisms from the clinical study, prepared by the interim reference laboratory. Tested at three (3) study sites (US, likely).

• Biological/Technical Equivalency Studies:

  • Sample Size: 34 species for laser equivalency (4080 spectra). Multiple species for target equivalency (e.g., 1000 measurements for repeatability/precision, 1500 for LOD, 2500 for sample stability prior to matrix, 3000 for post-matrix stability, 50 FDA cleared organisms, 1500 for mass accuracy/edge effects). Nocardia Study: 30 strains covering 6 species, resulting in ~15,000 measurements.
  • Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated for specific origin, but these are technical validation studies performed by the manufacturer, likely controlled lab settings.

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

• Method Comparison Study:

  • The ground truth was established by sequencing (16S rRNA or ITS sequencing and protein gene sequencing). This relies on established molecular biology techniques, not human expert interpretation. While experts run and interpret these sequences, the core ground truth is the genetic information itself. The document does not specify a number or qualification of "experts" in the sense of clinical reviewers for ground truth determination but implies reliance on the robust and objective results of gene sequencing performed by a sequencing reference laboratory.

• Reproducibility Study:

  • Organisms were "well-characterized." The ground truth was presumably established by prior definitive identification methods, likely including gene sequencing or reputable reference lab methods. No mention of independent experts for this study's ground truth.

• Challenge Panel Study:

  • Organism identifications were "blinded to test sites," and the panel was prepared by the study interim reference laboratory. The ground truth was established by the reference lab, again likely through gold standard methods like sequencing.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

The document does not describe an explicit adjudication method involving multiple human readers or a specific consensus process for discrepancies in the generated log(scores) or identifications against a human-read ground truth. Instead:

• The ground truth for the organism identity itself (reference algorithm) was established by molecular sequencing.
• The device's log(score) provides a quantitative measure of confidence. If the log(score) is too low (<1.70), the result is "no ID." If it's between 1.70 and <2.00, it's "low confidence."
• For discrepancies in the device's workflow (e.g., if Direct Transfer yields a low score), the protocol specifies progressive steps (extended Direct Transfer, then Extraction procedure) until a high confidence log(score) is achieved or the organism remains unidentified. This is an internal algorithmic "adjudication" within the device's workflow.
• The final interpretation is stated to be by a "trained microbiologist," who should consider "all relevant information available" (Gram staining, colony morphology, growth characteristics, sample matrix, etc.) in conjunction with the device's results. This implies human oversight and potential adjudication of the device's output in a clinical setting, but not as part of the ground truth establishment for the studies described.

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

No MRMC comparative effectiveness study is described where human readers' performance with and without AI (MALDI-TOF) assistance is measured to determine an effect size. The studies focus on the standalone performance of the MALDI Biotyper CA System against a molecularly derived ground truth. The device is intended to aid in diagnosis, implying it would be used by humans, but the studies do not quantify the improvement in human performance with the device.

6. Standalone Performance Study (Algorithm Only)

Yes, extensive standalone performance studies were done. The "Method Comparison" study, "Reproducibility" study, and "Challenge Panel" study, as well as the various "Equivalency Studies," all evaluate the MALDI Biotyper CA System's performance (algorithm only, with human operation but without human interpretation as the ground truth) against a molecularly derived ground truth or against itself under different conditions. The tables showing "Overall Isolate Performance" (Table 6, 7, 8) are prime examples of standalone performance evaluation.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

• Method Comparison and Challenge Panel Studies: The primary ground truth for organism identification was established by molecular sequencing, specifically 16S rRNA or ITS sequencing and protein gene sequencing.
• Reproducibility Study: Organisms were "well-characterized," implying a gold standard identification method, most likely molecular sequencing.
• Equivalency Studies: These compared the performance of different components of the MBT-CA system (e.g., laser types, target plates) against each other or against established performance metrics, rather than identifying unknown organisms from scratch using an external ground truth. The underlying ground truth for the organisms used in these studies would still be molecular identification.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not explicitly state the sample size used for training the MBT-CA System's reference database. It mentions the "MALDI Biotyper Reference Library for Clinical Applications (MBT-CA)" and states it's an "update" (K163536 vs. K142677). This reference library is what the device compares new spectra against. The training set would be the collection of reference spectra used to build this database. The provided text refers to new organisms added to the library but does not give a total size or the methodology used to build the original or updated library from a training perspective.

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

The document implies that the reference library is built from well-characterized and known organisms. For the specific organisms added to the claimed list (Table 5), they represent further development/validation. The initial development of the database entries would have likely involved:

• Definitive microbiological identification methods: Classic biochemical tests, microscopy, and, critically, molecular sequencing (e.g., 16S rRNA sequencing), which is mentioned as the ground truth method elsewhere (e.g., Acinetobacter baumannii complex resolution, Method Comparison).
• The "Matching Algorithm" calculates matches by comparing a new spectrum against each single reference entry of a reference database. This suggests that each entry in the database itself originates from a definitively identified organism whose mass spectrum was collected and included.

Ask a specific question about this device