Search Results

The MarDx ENA IgG ImmunoStripe Test System is intended for use in testing human serum for the presence of human IgG to extractable nuclear antigens, as an aid in the diagnosis of autoimmune disease, such as systemic lupus erythematosus. Siogren syndrome, scieroderma, and myositis.

The MarDx ENA IgG Immunostripe Test System is an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ElA) for the detection of IgG to extractable nuclear antigens in human serum.

The MarDx ENA IgG Immunostripe Test System is an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (EIA) for the detection of IgG to extractable nuclear antigens (SSA, SSB, Sm, RNP, Jo-1, Scl-70) in human serum. It is intended for use as an aid in diagnosing autoimmune diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus, Sjogren's syndrome, scleroderma, and myositis.

The device's performance was evaluated by comparing it against two predicate devices: the INOVA ENA's for SSA, SSB, Sm, RNP, Jo-1, Scl-70, and the MarDx ENA EIA 6 in 1 Test System.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and the Reported Device Performance

Although explicit "acceptance criteria" values were not formally stated as thresholds in the provided text, the study aimed to demonstrate "substantial equivalence" to predicate devices, implying that performance metrics (sensitivity and specificity) should be comparable. Based on the study results, the implied acceptance criteria were successfully met.

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

A total of 264 sera were used in the comparative study.

• 139 sera were from normal individuals.
• 125 sera were from patients "thought to have autoimmune disease and submitted as blind specimens for ENA antigen detection."

The data provenance is not explicitly stated in terms of country of origin. The study was conducted by the R&D laboratory at MarDx. The nature of the "blind specimens" suggests a prospective collection or at least blinding of historical samples for the purpose of the study. The phrasing "sera from patients thought to have autoimmune disease" indicates these were clinical samples.

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

No experts were used to establish the ground truth in this study. The ground truth was established by the predicate devices (INOVA ELISA for ENA antibodies and MarDx 6 in 1 ENA EIA), which served as the reference standards.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

No adjudication method was used for the test set. The results of the predicate devices were directly treated as the reference standard ("ground truth") against which the MarDx ENA IgG Immunostripe Test System was compared.

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 was not a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study, nor did it involve AI. The device is a diagnostic assay, and its performance was evaluated against established predicate assays. Therefore, no effect size related to human reader improvement with or without AI assistance is applicable or reported.

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

This study evaluates the performance of a diagnostic assay (MarDx ENA IgG Immunostripe Test System) in a standalone manner, comparing its results directly against those of predicate assays. The "human-in-the-loop" aspect for reading the strip and interpreting the results is inherently part of the assay's use, but the reported performance metrics (sensitivity, specificity, precision, cross-reactivity) refer to the device's ability to correctly identify the presence or absence of antibodies as determined by the assay itself, not an algorithm's interpretation without human oversight. The "manufacturer's package insert" states how the assays were performed, implying a standard, non-automated reading of the strip results.

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

The ground truth used was the results obtained from established predicate devices:

• INOVA ELISA for ENA antibodies (for SSA, SSB, Sm, RNP, Jo-1, Scl-70)
• MarDx ENA EIA 6 in 1 Test System

These predicate devices serve as the reference standard due to their prior clearance or established clinical use for detecting these specific antibodies.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

No explicit training set is mentioned as this is a traditional diagnostic assay validation, not a machine learning model. The assay itself (reagent formulation, stripe design) would have been developed and optimized, but the study focuses on the validation of the final product with a test set of clinical samples.

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

Not applicable, as there was no explicit separate training set for a machine learning model. The development of the assay itself would have involved internal validation and optimization, likely using characterized positive and negative control samples, but this information is not detailed in the summary.

Ask a specific question about this device

MarDx Lyme Disease (IgM) Marblot Strip Test System is a Western blot assay for the qualitative detection of human IgM antibody to B. burgdorferi. The MarDx Lyme Disease (IgM) Marblot Strip Test System is intended for use in testing human serum samples which have been found positive or equivocal using an EIA or IFA test procedure.

The MarDx Lyme Disease (IgM) Marblot Strip Test System is a Western blot device for the detection of human IgM antibodies directed to the organism Borrelia burgdorferi. The device is similar in function to other solid phase enzyme immunoassays (EIA), but differs in its ability to discriminate the individual antibody specificities directed against the organism.

Here's the information about the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets them, based on the provided text:

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

The document does not explicitly state numerical acceptance criteria in a table format. However, it implicitly sets the performance of predicate devices as the acceptance benchmark. The reported performance of the new device is stated descriptively.

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

• Sample Size for Test Set: 1341 sera
• Data Provenance: Not specified (country of origin or retrospective/prospective). The reference to "Academic Reference Centers (ARCs) panel maintained by the CDC, Fort Collins, CO" suggests US-based data, but this is for an internal reference panel, not explicitly for the 1341 sera.

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)

The ground truth was established using an Academic Reference Centers (ARCs) panel maintained by the CDC, Fort Collins, CO, and two reference methodologies (MarDx Lyme Disease IgM EIA Test System (K894293) and the Lyme Western blot procedure developed and utilized by Dr. Allen Steere, MD, Tufts Medical Center).

The document does not specify the number of experts or their specific qualifications if they were involved beyond the establishment of these reference methods. It mentions "The physicians diagnosis" for the ARC panel, indicating medical expertise was involved, but no further details.

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

The document describes the use of the Academic Reference Centers (ARCs) panel maintained by the CDC, Fort Collins, CO, and two established reference methodologies. It does not detail a specific adjudication method like "2+1" or "3+1" for discrepancies between readers or tests. The determination of agreement, sensitivity, and specificity implies comparison against these established references rather than a human adjudication process for each case.

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

A Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not applicable / not described. This is a device for detecting antibodies, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool that would involve human readers interpreting images.

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

Yes, this was a standalone (algorithm only) performance study. The MarDx Lyme Disease IgM Marblot Strip Test System is a Western blot device, which is a lab-based assay. Its performance was evaluated by comparing its results directly against reference methodologies on the serum samples. There is no "human-in-the-loop" component in the interpretation of the output of this specific assay as described.

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

The ground truth was established using:

• Expert Consensus/Clinical Diagnosis: "The physicians diagnosis of the Academic Reference Centers (ARCs) panel maintained by the CDC, Fort Collins, CO."
• Reference Laboratory Methods:
  • MarDx Lyme Disease IgM EIA Test System (K894293)
  • The Lyme Western blot procedure developed and utilized by Dr. Allen Steere, MD, Tufts Medical Center.

8. The sample size for the training set

The document does not mention a "training set." This is a laboratory diagnostic device, not a machine learning model that typically undergoes a training phase. The study described is a clinical validation (test set) against established reference methods.

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

As there was no training set mentioned or applicable for this type of device, this question is not applicable.

Ask a specific question about this device

MarDx Lyme Disease (IgG) Marblot Strip Test System is a Western blot assay for the qualitative detection of human IgG antibody to B. burgdorferi. The MarDx Lyme Disease (1gG) Marblot Strip Test System is intended for use in testing human serum samples which have been found positive or equivocal using an EIA or IFA test procedure.

The MarDx Lyme Disease (IgG) Marblot Strip Test System is a Western blot device for the detection of human IgG antibodies directed to the organism Borrelia burgdorferi. The device is similar in function to other solid phase enzyme immunoassays (EIA), but differs in its ability to discriminate the individual antibody specificities directed against the organism.

This document describes the MarDx Lyme Disease (IgG) Marblot Strip Test System, a Western blot device for detecting human IgG antibodies to Borrelia burgdorferi.

Here's an analysis of the provided information regarding acceptance criteria and the study:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The provided document doesn't explicitly state quantitative acceptance criteria (e.g., "sensitivity must be >90%"). Instead, it sets a qualitative acceptance criterion: "performs at least as well as the predicate devices." The predicate devices are:

• MarDx Lyme Disease IgG EIA Test System (K894224)
• The Lyme Western blot procedure developed and utilized by Dr. Allen Steere, MD, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA.
• The physicians' diagnosis of the Academic Reference Centers (ARCs) panel maintained by the CDC, Fort Collins, CO.

The reported device performance is: "The data indicates that the MarDx Marblot Lyme IgG Test has a high sensitivity and specificity relative to the Steere Western blot and the MarDx Lyme Disease IgG EIA Test System reference procedure."

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

The study used 1268 sera for the test set.

• Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated regarding country of origin. The reference devices and associated experts/organizations are from the USA (Tufts Medical Center, CDC Fort Collins). It is a retrospective study as it involved testing collected sera using established methodologies.

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

The document refers to three types of reference/ground truth:

• Dr. Allen Steere, MD, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA: His "Lyme Western blot procedure" was used as a reference. While not explicitly stated as an expert establishing ground truth for the test set, his established method serves as a strong reference, implying expert consensus or standardization. His qualifications are "MD." The document references a publication (Dressler et al. Journal of Infectious Diseases, 1993; 167:392-400), suggesting his method is a recognized standard.
• Academic Reference Centers (ARCs) panel maintained by the CDC, Fort Collins, CO: "The physicians diagnosis" from this panel was used as a reference. This implies multiple physicians were involved, establishing a form of expert consensus or clinically adjudicated ground truth. The number of physicians/experts is not specified, but they are qualified as "physicians."

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

The document does not explicitly state a specific adjudication method like "2+1" or "3+1" among experts for the test set. Instead, it refers to established external references:

• The "reference Western blot" (Steere's procedure) implies a standardized, expert-driven interpretation of Western blot results.
• "EIA methodologies" (MarDx Lyme Disease IgG EIA Test System) are an existing commercial test.
• "Physicians diagnosis of the Academic Reference Centers (ARCS) panel maintained by the CDC" suggests a clinical diagnosis by multiple physicians, implying a consensus or a decision by an expert panel.

Therefore, the adjudication relies on pre-established expert-defined criteria from recognized institutions/experts rather than a real-time adjudication process for the specific test set cases.

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 explicitly described. The study compared the new device's performance (sensitivity, specificity, agreement) against established reference methods and a commercial EIA, not against varying human interpretations of the new device with or without AI assistance. This device is a diagnostic test (Western blot), not an AI-powered image analysis tool for human readers.

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

Yes, implicitly. The MarDx Marblot Strip Test System is a Western blot device. When it states "Twelve hundred and sixty eight sera were tested by reference Western blot and EIA methodologies to determine the agreement, sensitivity, specificity of the MarDx Lyme Disease (IgG) Marblot Strip Test System," it describes the performance of the device itself (analogous to "algorithm only" if considering it as a standalone diagnostic tool) in producing a result, which is then compared to other references. There's no mention of human-in-the-loop for interpreting the new device's results and comparing that hybrid performance.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

There are effectively three types of "ground truth" or reference standards used:

• Expert-defined laboratory procedure: The "Lyne Western blot procedure developed and utilized by Dr. Allen Steere, MD."
• Established commercial diagnostic test: The "MarDx Lyme Disease IgG EIA Test System."
• Clinical expert consensus/diagnosis: "The physicians diagnosis of the Academic Reference Centers (ARCS) panel maintained by the CDC."

These represent a combination of expert consensus (clinical and laboratory) and established diagnostic standards.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

Not provided. The document describes a clinical study for validation (test set) but does not mention any specific training set for the development of the MarDx Lyme Disease (IgG) Marblot Strip Test System. As this is a traditional diagnostic kit (Western blot) and not an AI/machine learning algorithm, the concept of a "training set" in the context of machine learning is not directly applicable. The device's development would involve reagent optimization and protocol establishment rather than algorithm training.

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

Not applicable/Not provided. As stated above, this is a traditional diagnostic kit where the concept of a training set as understood in AI/ML is not relevant. The "ground truth" for developing such a kit would likely stem from extensive research into Borrelia burgdorferi antigens, antibody responses, and established clinical correlations, rather than a discrete "training set" with established ground truth.

Ask a specific question about this device

The assay is intended for use in detecting antibodies in a single serum specimen. The results of the assay are to be used as an aid in the diagnosis of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE).

The dsDNA Immunoglobulin EIA test system is an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (EIA) for the detection and semi-quantitation of Immunoglobulin to dsDNA in human sera.

This document describes the validation of the MarDx dsDNA Immunoglobulin EIA Test System, a device for detecting antibodies to dsDNA in human sera, intended as an aid in diagnosing Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE).

Here's an analysis of the provided information:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not explicitly state pre-defined acceptance criteria values for sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for the MarDx dsDNA EIA Test System. Instead, it demonstrates substantial equivalence to a predicate device (Clark ELISA for dsDNA IgG, IgM antibodies) by presenting the comparative performance.

However, based on the results, we can infer the desired performance levels relative to the predicate device. For precision, the acceptance criteria are implicit in the reported Coefficient of Variation (CV) values.

Ask a specific question about this device