Search Results

CHOLESTEROL: Reagent kit intended for the quantitative determination of Cholesterol in human serum. Cholesterol measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of disorders involving excess cholesterol in the blood, of lipid and lipoprotein metabolism disorders.

HDL-Cholesterol: Reagent kit intended for the quantitative determination of high-density lipoprotein in human serum. Measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of lipid disorders mellitus), atherosclerosis, and various liver and renal diseases.

LDL-Cholesterol: Reagent kit intended for the quantitative determination of low-density lipoprotein in human serum. Lipoprotein measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of lipid disorders (such as diabetes mellitus), atherosclerosis, and various liver and renal diseases.

TRIGLYCERIDES: Reagent kit intended for the quantitative determination of triglycerides (neutral fat) in human serum. Measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with diabetes mellitus, nephrosis, liver obstruction, other diseases involving lipid metabolism, or various endocrine disorders.

CHOLESTEROL: The Cholesterol Oxidase peroxidase (CHOD-PAP) enzymatic method is used. The cholesterol esterase enzyme catalyzes the hydrolysis of cholesterol and free fatty and free fatty acids. Free cholesterol, including that originally present in the sample, is then oxidized by the enzyme cholesterol oxidase (CHOD) to cholest-4-en-3-one, by using molecular oxygen as the electron acceptor and concurrently producing hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). The H2O2 produced is then used in a subsequent chromogenic oxidative coupling reaction, catalyzed by the enzyme peroxidase, in the presence of a redox indicator system, which leads to the formation of a colored compound, absorbing light at 550 nm. The increase in absorbance is directly proportional to the cholesterol concentration in the sample.

HDL-Cholesterol: The Accelerator Selective Detergent method is applied. The determination of HDL-Cholesterol is based on the following reactions: LDL, VLDL, and chylomicrons are neutralized by the combined action of the enzymes Cholesterol Oxidase, Peroxidase, accelerators and N,N-bis-(4-sulfobutyl)-m-toluidine-disodium (DSBmT). HDL remaining in the sample is disrupted by the action of a selective detergent and cholesterol is converted to △4 Cholestenone by the enzymatic action of Cholesterol Esterase and Cholesterol Oxidase, with the subsequent production of H2O2, which reacts with DSBmT and 4-aminoantipyrine in the presence of Peroxidase to a colored complex that absorbs light at 590 nm. The absorbance measured is proportional to the concentration of HDL-Cholesterol in the sample.

LDL-Cholesterol: The Selective Detergent method is applied. The method is in a two-reagent format and depends on the properties of a unique detergent. The first detergent solubilizes only the non-LDL lipoprotein particles. The cholesterol released is consumed by cholesterol esterase and cholesterol oxidase in a non-color forming reaction. The second detergent solubilizes the remaining LDL particles, and a chromogenic coupler allows for color formation. The enzyme reaction with LDL-Cholesterol in the presence of the coupler at 590 nm produces color that is proportional to the amount of LDL cholesterol present in the sample.

TRIGLYCERIDES: The enzymatic glycerol-3-phosphate-peroxidase (GPO-POD) method is used. The method enzymatically hydrolyzes by lipase to free fatty acids and glycerol is phosphorylated by adenosine triphosphate (ATP) with glycerokinase (GK) to produce glycerol-3-phosphate and adenosine diphosphate (ADP). Glycerol-3-phosphate-oxidase oxidizes glycerol-3-phosphate to dihydroxyacetone phosphate and H2O2. The catalytic action of peroxidase (POD) forms quinoneimine from H202, aminoantipyrine, and Dihydrate (N-Ethyl-N-(2hydroxy-3-sulfopropyl)-m-toluidine (TOOS). The absorption change at 550 nm is proportional to the triglycerides concentration in the sample.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and the study information for the Medicon Hellas Cholesterol, HDL-Cholesterol, LDL-Cholesterol, and Triglycerides test systems, based on the provided document:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The acceptance criteria are generally established by comparison to legally marketed predicate devices and alignment with clinical laboratory guidelines (CLSI). The document presents a clear comparison in the "Device Comparison Table" sections. For this summary, I'll focus on the key performance indicators for each analyte.

CHOLESTEROL

HDL-Cholesterol

LDL-Cholesterol

TRIGLYCERIDES

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance

• Accuracy (Method Comparisons):

  • A minimum of 75 leftover specimens.
  • For the specific analytes:
    • CHOLESTEROL: 93 human serum samples
    • HDL-Cholesterol: 141 human serum samples
    • LDL-Cholesterol: 107 human serum samples
    • TRIGLYCERIDES: 163 human serum samples
  • Data Provenance: The document states "left-over specimens," implying retrospective use of clinical samples. The country of origin is not explicitly stated, but the company is Medicon Hellas, S.A. based in Greece, and testing was performed at the company premises.

• Precision/Reproducibility:

  • Three human serum pools for Cholesterol and Triglycerides.
  • Two pools for HDL-Cholesterol.
  • Four pools for LDL-Cholesterol.
  • Each sample was tested for 20 testing days, two different runs, and two replicate measurements per run (morning and afternoon run), for a total of 80 results per level concentration (e.g., for Cholesterol, 3 pools * 80 results/pool = 240 results).
  • Data Provenance: Human serum pools, likely prepared in-house or acquired for the study.

• Linearity:

  • 11 to 13 levels per analyte, prepared by dilution of a human serum pool.
  • Each level was tested in 4 replicates.
  • Data Provenance: Human serum pool.

• Analytical Specificity / Interference:

  • Serum pools at low and high levels of each analyte.
  • Each measurement of the blank and the sample containing the interferent was repeated at least 5 times.
  • Data Provenance: Serum pools.

• Detection Limit:

  • LoB: 5 blank serum samples measured in 4 replicates for 3 days (total of 60 measurements).
  • LoD: 5 low-level samples measured in 4 replicates for 3 days (total of 60 measurements).
  • LoQ: 10 samples that span the low end of linearity, measured 5 times each day for 3 days (total of 150 measurements).
  • Data Provenance: Serum samples.

• Stability and Calibration Frequency:

  • Two fresh serum pools and two serum-based commercial controls.
  • Measurements were repeated in triplicate at regular time points.
  • Data Provenance: Serum pools and commercial controls.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts

This information is not provided in the document. The ground truth for performance studies like those described (method comparison, precision, linearity, interference, detection limits) for in vitro diagnostic (IVD) devices like these typically involves established reference methods or highly accurate comparative analyzers, rather than expert human interpretation of results. The document states that the performance of the Medicon Hellas reagents was compared with "comparator methods" (Beckman Coulter reagents on AU400, Abbott Diagnostics reagents on Architect c8000), which serve as the reference for ground truth in these types of analytical performance studies. The qualifications of the operators performing these studies are not specified.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

This information is not applicable and therefore not provided. Adjudication methods (e.g., 2+1, 3+1) are typically used in studies where human interpretation of complex data (like medical images) is involved and a consensus is needed to establish ground truth. For quantitative chemical assays, the ground truth is established by the highly precise and accurate measurement of reference methods or predicate devices.

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 applicable and therefore not provided. MRMC studies are specific to evaluating diagnostic devices where human readers interpret medical cases, often with and without AI assistance (e.g., radiology AI). The Medicon Hellas devices are in vitro diagnostic reagents for quantitative chemical measurements in serum, not image-based diagnostic tools that require human "readers" in the context of an MRMC study.

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

This concept is not applicable in the traditional sense for these in vitro diagnostic reagents. These devices are chemical assays that produce a quantitative numerical output (e.g., cholesterol level in mg/dL). There isn't an "algorithm" making a diagnostic interpretation independently in the way AI software would. The device is the standalone measurement system. Its performance is evaluated independently through analytical studies (precision, linearity, accuracy against reference methods, etc.). The results are then read and interpreted by a human clinician.

7. The type of ground truth used

The ground truth for the analytical performance studies (precision, linearity, interference, detection limits, and method comparison) was established against:

• Reference Methods/Predicate Devices: For method comparison, the device's performance was compared against established comparator methods (Beckman Coulter reagents on AU400 and Abbott Diagnostics reagents on ABBOTT Architect c8000). The document explicitly states these as the comparators.
• A Priori Values/Established Standards: For linearity, precision, and detection limits, the ground truth is based on the known concentrations of prepared samples (e.g., serially diluted pools, spiked samples, blank serum) and statistical analysis according to CLSI guidelines.
• Traceability to Reference Methods/Materials: For Cholesterol and Triglycerides, traceability is to Gas-chromatography-isotope dilution mass spectrometry (GC-IDMS). For HDL-Cholesterol and LDL-Cholesterol, traceability is to the Abell-Kendall (AK) reference method.

8. The sample size for the training set

This information is not applicable and therefore not provided. These are chemical reagent kits, not machine learning (AI/ML) models that require a "training set" in the computational sense. The development of such reagents involves chemical and enzymatic research and optimization, often tested with various batches and concentrations of samples during R&D. The studies described in this document are for validation and verification of the final device, not for "training" an algorithm.

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

As noted above, the concept of a "training set" with ground truth established in the AI/ML sense is not applicable to these chemical reagent devices. The "ground truth" for evaluating the analytical performance of the developed reagent kits is established through the reference methods and standardized protocols described in section 7.

Ask a specific question about this device

Medicon Hellas Albumin: Reagent for the quantitative measurement of albumin in serum. Albumin measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of numerous diseases involving primarily the liver or kidneys.

Medicon Hellas Calcium: Reagent for the quantitative measurement of calcium in serum or urine. Calcium measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of parathyroid disease, a variety of bone diseases, chronic renal disease and tetany (intermittent muscular contractions or spasms).

Medicon Hellas Creatinine: Reagent for the quantitative measurement of creatinine in serum and urine. Creatinine measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of renal diseases and in monitoring renal dialysis.

Medicon Hellas Glucose: Reagent for the quantitative measurement of glucose in serum and urine. Glucose measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of carbohydrate metabolism disorders including diabetes mellitus, neonatal hypoglycemia, and idiopathic hypoglycemia, and of pancreatic islet cell carcinoma.

Medicon Hellas Direct Bilirubin; Reagent for the quantitative measurement of direct bilirubin (conjugated) in serum. Measurements of the level of direct bilirubin is used in the diagnosis and treatment of liver, hemolytic, hematological, and metabolic disorders, including hepatitis and gall blader block.

Medicon Hellas Total Bilirubin: Reagent for the quantitative measurements of total bilirubin in serum. Measurements of the levels of total bilirubin is used in the diagnosis and treatment of liver. hemolytic hematological, and metabolic disorders, including hepatitis and gall bladder block.

Medicon Hellas Urea Nitrogen: Reagent is for the quantitative measurement of urea nitrogen in serum and urine. Measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of certain renal and metabolic diseases.

The Medicon Hellas Albumin, Medicon Hellas Calcium, Medicon Hellas Creatinine, Medicon Hellas Glucose, Medicon Hellas Direct Bilirubin, Medicon Hellas Total Bilirubin, and Medicon Hellas Urea Nitrogen are reagents for use with Diatron Pictus 500 Clinical Chemistry Analyzers. They are test systems for the quantitative measurement of albumin, calcium, creatinine, glucose, direct and total bilirubin, and urea nitrogen in human serum and urine where clinically applicable. The methods employed are photometric, utilizing reactions between the sample and reagents to produce a colored chromophore or a change in absorbance that is proportional to the concentration of the analyte. The analyzer photometer reads the absorbances at time intervals dictated by the method application stored in the analyzer memory, and the change in absorbance is calculated automatically.

The provided text describes the performance of several Medicon Hellas assays (Albumin, Calcium, Creatinine, Glucose, Direct Bilirubin, Total Bilirubin, and Urea Nitrogen) when run on the Diatron Pictus 500 Clinical Chemistry Analyzer, demonstrating their substantial equivalence to predicate devices (Beckman Coulter AU reagents on AU2700 analyzer, and Abbott Architect Direct Bilirubin on Architect c8000 analyzer).

Here's an analysis of the provided information, structured to address your specific points regarding acceptance criteria and study details:

1. A Table of Acceptance Criteria and the Reported Device Performance:

The document doesn't explicitly state "acceptance criteria" in a single, overarching table with pass/fail remarks. Instead, it describes each performance characteristic and then presents the results. The "Summary" sections for each study type imply that the results met the pre-defined acceptance criteria for demonstrating substantial equivalence. For instance, for accuracy, it states "Accuracy studies completed on at least three lots of each candidate reagent confirm that Medicon albumin... are substantially equivalent to the related predicate devices." This implies that the statistical analyses (Deming regression, R2, slope, intercept) fell within acceptable ranges. Similarly, for precision, it states "All lots passed acceptance criteria for each applicable sample type at each level."

Since explicit acceptance criteria are not presented, they are inferred from the demonstrated performance and the statement that the devices "passed acceptance criteria" or "met statistical acceptance criteria." Below is a table summarizing the reported device performance for each analyte. The "Acceptance Criteria" column will reflect the general statements of success or the implied ranges from the results themselves, as explicit numerical targets for individual tests are not given.

Implied Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

2. Sample sizes used for the test set and the data provenance:

• Sample Size for Test Set:

  • Accuracy (Method Comparison): "A minimum of 70 clinical specimens, spanning the dynamic ranges, were assayed." Specific numbers are provided per analyte:
    • Medicon Hellas Albumin: 112 samples (Serum)
    • Medicon Hellas Calcium: 94 samples (Serum), 81 samples (Urine)
    • Medicon Hellas Creatinine: 126 samples (Serum), 98 samples (Urine)
    • Medicon Hellas Direct Bilirubin: 77 samples (Serum)
    • Medicon Hellas Glucose: 99 samples (Serum), 100 samples (Urine)
    • Medicon Hellas Total Bilirubin: 95 samples (Serum)
    • Medicon Hellas Urea Nitrogen: 116 samples (Serum), 81 samples (Urine)
  • Reportable Range (Linearity): "At least nine levels of each sample types were tested." (N=4 per level on Pictus P500)
  • Sensitivity (LOD/LOQ):
    • LoB/LoD: "5 Blank samples and 5 Low Levels samples respectively which were measured 4 times each day for a total of 60 measurements in 3 days."
    • LoQ: "10 samples that span the low end of linearity were measured 5 times each day for a total of 150 measurements in 3 days."
  • Interferences: "Serum and urine sample pools at low and high levels were prepared." The exact number of individual samples forming these pools is not specified beyond being "pools."
  • Precision: "Precision study results from running applicable serum and urine samples (Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3) were tested in duplicate, twice a day, for 20 days, for a total of 80 results per level."

• Data Provenance (e.g., country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective):

  • The document implies that the studies were conducted by Medicon Hellas, S.A. in Greece, given their address on the first page.
  • The data appears to be prospective as it describes experiments conducted ("studies were performed," "testing confirmed," "protocol followed"). It references the collection and analysis of clinical specimens specifically for these validation studies. It does not mention retrospective analysis of existing patient data.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts:

This is not applicable in the context of this 510(k) submission. This type of submission is for in vitro diagnostic (IVD) reagents, which measure specific analytes in bodily fluids. The "ground truth" for these measurements is typically established by comparative analysis against predicate devices and well-characterized reference methods (e.g., those detailed in CLSI guidelines for accuracy, linearity, precision). These are not image-based AI models requiring human expert interpretation for ground truth.

The "experts" involved would be the laboratory personnel performing the assays according to established clinical laboratory standards and the statistical analysis, rather than medical experts providing subjective interpretations. The document does not specify the number or qualifications of the laboratory personnel who conducted the tests.

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

Not applicable. This concept (e.g., 2+1, 3+1 reader adjudication) is primarily used in studies where human readers provide subjective interpretations (e.g., radiology studies). For IVD devices, the "ground truth" is based on the analytical performance against established reference methods or predicate devices, which involves quantitative measurements and statistical analysis, not human adjudication of subjective interpretations.

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 is not an AI-assisted diagnostic imaging device. It is a chemical reagent intended for quantitative measurement of analytes in bodily fluids. Therefore, MRMC studies and the effect size on human readers are not relevant.

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

The device (reagent) essentially operates in a "standalone" fashion in terms of its chemical reaction and measurement, independent of human interpretive intervention for the measurement itself. The performance data (accuracy, precision, linearity, etc.) presented is the standalone performance of the reagent on the specified analyzer. Human involvement is in operating the instrument, quality control, and interpreting the numerical results in a clinical context, but not in the measurement process being tested for substantial equivalence.

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

The "ground truth" in this context is established by:

• Comparative Method: The primary method for proving substantial equivalence is by demonstrating strong correlation and agreement with legally marketed predicate devices (Beckman Coulter AU reagents and Abbott Architect Direct Bilirubin reagent) using real patient clinical specimens. This acts as the standard for comparison.
• CLSI Guidelines: Various performance characteristics (linearity, sensitivity, precision, interferences) were evaluated according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guidelines (e.g., CLSI EP09c for accuracy, CLSI EP06-A for linearity, CLSI EP17-A2 for sensitivity, CLSI EP07-A and EP37 for interferences, CLSI EP05-A3 for precision). These guidelines represent accepted industry standards for validating in vitro diagnostic devices, thereby defining the "ground truth" for these analytical measurements.
• Reference Values: For linearity studies, "samples were assigned their reference values arithmetically from serial dilutions of the high-level sample," indicating a quantitatively derived reference for linearity.

Therefore, the ground truth is based on a combination of comparison to predicate devices and adherence to established analytical reference methods and industry standards (CLSI guidelines).

8. The sample size for the training set:

Not applicable. This device is not an AI/ML algorithm that requires a "training set" in the conventional sense. It is a chemical reagent. The "training" here would be the chemical formulation and manufacturing process, which is established through R&D and QA/QC, not data input to an algorithm.

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

Not applicable, as there is no "training set" for a chemical reagent. The "ground truth" for the development of the reagent itself would be the established chemical principles and desired analytical performance characteristics (e.g., reactivity, specificity, stability, sensitivity) based on scientific literature and previous experience with similar assays.

Ask a specific question about this device