Search Results

Ask a specific question about this device

The Lp(a)-Latex SEIKEN Assay kit is an in vitro diagnostic test for the quantitative determination of lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] in human serum and plasma samples with Hitachi 917 analyzer. The measurement of Lp(a) is useful in evaluating lipid metabolism disorders and assessing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in specific populations, when used in conjunction with clinical evaluation and other lipoprotein tests.

The Lp(a)-Latex SEIKEN Assay Kit is a latex in vitro diagnostic immunoassay for the quantitative determination of Lipoprotein (a) in human serum and plasma. Antigen in the sample binds to the specific anti-Lp(a) antibody, which has been adsorbed to latex particles, and agglutinates. The agglutination is detected as an absorbance change when read on Hitachi 917 analyzer, with the magnitude of the change being proportional to the quantity of Lp(a) in the sample. The actual concentration is then determined by interpolation from a calibration curve prepared from calibrators of known concentrations.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study details based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not explicitly state pre-defined acceptance criteria in terms of specific thresholds for correlation coefficient, sensitivity, or precision. Instead, it presents the results of the performance studies and concludes that these findings demonstrate the device's "robustness and substantial equivalence to the predicate device."

However, we can infer the implied acceptance criteria from the reported performance, which demonstrates that the device's performance is acceptable for its intended use, especially in comparison to the predicate device.

Ask a specific question about this device

The CRP-Latex (II) SEIKEN High Sensitivity Assay kit is a quantitative assay for use with an Automated Chemical Analyzer for the determination of C-reactive protein in human serum and in heparinized and EDTA-plasma. Measurement of C-reactive protein is useful in the detection and evaluation of infection, tissue injury, and inflammatory disorders.

The CRP-Latex (II) SEIKEN High Sensitivity Assay Kit is a latex in vitro diagnostic immunoassay for the quantitative determination of C-reactive protein in human serum. Antigen in the sample bonds to the specific anti-CRP antibody, which has been adsorbed to latex particles, and agglutinates. The agglutination is detected as an absorbance change when read on an automated analyzer (the Hitachi 717 was used for these studies), with the magnitude of the change being proportional to the quantity of CRP in the sample. The actual concentration is then determined by interpolation from a calibration curve prepared from calibrators of known concentration.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information for the DENKA SEIKEN CO.,LTD. CRP-Latex (II) SEIKEN High Sensitivity Assay Kit, based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

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

• Sample Size:
  • 70 donor samples for comparative performance studies against the predicate device.
  • 388 normal adult donor samples for supportive clinical data.
• Data Provenance: The document does not explicitly state the country of origin for the data or whether it was retrospective or prospective. It refers to "donor samples" and "normal adult donor samples," suggesting a clinical setting for sample collection.

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

The document does not mention the use of experts to establish ground truth for the test set. The study compares the new device against a legally marketed predicate device, using the predicate device's results as the reference for comparison.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Not applicable. The study involved a direct comparison of a new device's readings with a predicate device's readings, rather than an expert review process requiring adjudication.

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

No, a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not conducted. This study is focused on the analytical performance of an in vitro diagnostic assay, comparing its results to a predicate device, not on the impact of human readers with or without AI assistance.

6. Standalone Performance Study

Yes, a standalone performance study was done in the sense that the device's analytical performance (precision, sensitivity, assay range) was evaluated independently. However, the primary "standalone" output as commonly understood for AI/CAD devices (algorithm-only performance) is not directly applicable here. The device itself is an assay, and its performance is measured by its output values. The comparison with the predicate device also represents a form of standalone performance evaluation in relation to an established method.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

The "ground truth" for the comparative performance study was established by the results obtained from the legally marketed predicate device (N High Sensitivity CRP Assay [Dade Behring Inc.]). For analytical performance metrics like precision, the "ground truth" would be derived from the inherent analytical properties of the assay and control materials.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

Not applicable. This is an in-vitro diagnostic assay based on immunological principles, not an AI/machine learning device that requires a training set in the conventional sense. The device's mechanism is based on antigen-antibody reactions, not on learning from a dataset.

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

Not applicable, as there is no training set in the context of an AI/machine learning algorithm for this device.

Ask a specific question about this device

VTEC-RPLA "SEIKEN" is an in vitro diagnostic device for the detection and identification of verotoxic device for in culture isolates of E. coli and is intended as an aid in the diagnosis of Enterohemorrhagic E. coli (EHEC) infections.

VTEC-RPLA "SEIKEN" is a reagent system which can be used for the detection of verotoxins in culture isolates of E. coli to aid in the diagnosis of EHEC infections. It employs antibody-antigen reactions as part of the assay and is based on reversed passive latex agglutination (RPLA). VTEC-RPLA utilizes polyclonal antibodies specific for each verotoxin type, VT1 and VT2, and thus may be used to identify toxins.

This document describes the VTEC-RPLA "SEIKEN" device, an in vitro diagnostic procedure for detecting and identifying verotoxins in E. coli culture isolates to aid in diagnosing Enterohemorrhagic E. coli (EHEC) infections.

Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets them:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Note on Sensitivity: While the VTEC-RPLA "SEIKEN" has a higher minimum detectable concentration (25 pg/well for both VT1 and VT2) compared to the predicate device Premier EHEC (7 pg/well for VT1 and 15 pg/well for VT2), the correlation study still showed 100% sensitivity and specificity when directly comparing both devices with clinical isolates. The FDA's substantial equivalence determination implies that this difference in analytical sensitivity does not compromise clinical performance for the intended use.

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

• Study 1 (in-house, Correlation):
  • Sample Size: 100 Escherichia coli strains (80 verotoxin-producing, 20 non-verotoxin producing).
  • Data Provenance: Obtained from the Japanese National Institute of Infectious Disease. Retrospective (as strains were obtained and then tested).
• Study 2 (external, Correlation):
  • Sample Size: 178 Escherichia coli strains (147 verotoxin-producing, 31 non-verotoxin producing) isolated from humans.
  • Data Provenance: Tested by the Tokyo Metropolitan Research Laboratory of Public Health. Retrospective.
• Sensitivity: 2 verotoxin-producing strains (DK-EC-VT1 and DK-EC-VT2).
• Specificity: 8 verotoxin-producing and 12 non-producing strains of E. coli.
• Reproducibility: Same 2 verotoxin-producing strains as Sensitivity study.
• Dilution: 3 verotoxin-producing strains (DK-EC-PS 1 (VT1), DK-EC- PS 4 (VT2), and DK-EC-PS 7 (VT1 and VT2)).
• Stability: Same 3 reagent lots as Sensitivity study, tested over time.

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

The document does not specify the number or qualifications of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set.

However, for the external correlation study (Study 2), the ground truth for the 178 E. coli strains was established by parallel testing using:

• VTEC-RPLA "SEIKEN"
• PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction)
• Vero cell assay

The Vero cell assay is a widely accepted method for detecting verotoxicity. PCR is also a molecular method often considered a gold standard for pathogen detection and characterization. The document implies these methods collectively served as the reference for determining whether a strain was "verotoxin-producing" or "non-verotoxin producing."

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

The document does not explicitly describe an adjudication method for conflicting results if they occurred. However, given that both correlation studies reported 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity for VTEC-RPLA "SEIKEN" compared to the predicate (Study 1) and compared to PCR and Vero cell assay (Study 2), it suggests there were no conflicting results or that discrepancies were resolved in a manner not detailed here. The ground truth seems to be established by the consensus of the reference methods (for Study 2) or the predicate device (for Study 1).

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

No, a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not performed. This device is an in-vitro diagnostic (IVD) reagent system, not an imaging device or algorithm requiring human interpretation. Therefore, the concept of "human readers improving with AI vs. without AI assistance" is not applicable here.

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

Yes, the studies conducted are essentially standalone performance evaluations of the VTEC-RPLA "SEIKEN" device. It is a laboratory-based assay where the "performance" is the device's ability to detect and identify verotoxins. There is no "human-in-the-loop" component in the sense of an algorithm providing assistance for human interpretation; the device generates a result directly.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• Study 1 (Correlation): The ground truth for the 100 E. coli strains was established by comparison with the Premier EHEC Reagent System, a legally marketed predicate device.
• Study 2 (Correlation): The ground truth for the 178 E. coli strains was established using a combination of PCR and the Vero cell assay. The Vero cell assay can be considered a form of biological activity assay or functional assay, which approximates outcomes data in terms of cellular toxicity, and PCR provides definitive genetic identification of toxin genes.
• Sensitivity, Specificity, Reproducibility, Dilution: The ground truth involved using known verotoxin-producing and non-producing strains, and purified verotoxin preparations with defined concentrations. This is based on established expert classification through prior characterization of these strains and preparations.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not mention a "training set" in the context of machine learning or AI development. This is an in-vitro diagnostic test, not an AI/ML-based device. The studies described are validation and verification studies for its performance.

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

Since there is no "training set" for an AI/ML model, this question is not applicable. The document describes how the reference materials (strains, purified toxins) used in the verification studies were characterized, as outlined in point 7.

Ask a specific question about this device