Search Results

The Abbott TestPack®Plus™ H. pylori assay is a rapid, visually read, qualitative immunoassay for the detection of human IgG antibodies specific to Helicobacter pylori in serum, plasma, and whole blood specimens from symptomatic adults.

Abbott TestPack Plus H. pylori is a rapid, visually read, qualitative immunoassay for the detection of human IgG antibodies specific to Helicobacter pylori in human serum, plasma, or whole blood. The assay is intended for use by health professionals as an aid in the diagnosis of H. pylori infection in patients with clinical signs and symptoms of gastrointestinal disease. There are two kit configurations associated with the Abbott TestPack Plus H. pylori assay, one where the intended use is for testing serum, plasma, venous whole blood, and fingerstick whole blood specimens and a second where the intended use is for testing whole blood specimens collected by fingerstick or venipuncture.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information for the Abbott TestPack Plus H. pylori device, based on the provided text:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance

Note: The document explicitly states that the device is "substantially equivalent to" the HM-CAP™ Helicobacter pylori Enzyme Immunoassay. This implies that the acceptance criteria are met by demonstrating comparable performance to the predicate device. Specific numerical acceptance criteria were not explicitly stated beyond this comparative goal.

Study Details

1. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance:

   • Test Set 1 (vs. Biopsy): 107 symptomatic patients undergoing endoscopic examination.
     • Site 1: 49 specimens (4 excluded due to indeterminate biopsy results), 45 analyzed.
     • Site 2: 58 specimens analyzed.
     • Combined comparison with biopsy: 135 previously characterized serum specimens.
   • Test Set 2 (vs. HM-CAP): 135 previously characterized serum specimens (2 HM-CAP indeterminate, so 133 analyzed).
   • Data Provenance: The document does not explicitly state the country of origin. It mentions "two clinical sites," suggesting a prospective collection of fresh serum specimens from symptomatic patients. For the 135 "previously characterized serum specimens," the provenance is not detailed, but it implies they were collected earlier and their status regarding H. pylori was already established by some method.

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

   • The primary ground truth for the initial clinical study (107 specimens) was "endoscopic examination" and "biopsy test results." The number and qualifications of medical professionals (e.g., endoscopists, pathologists) involved in interpreting these biopsies are not specified in the provided text.
   • For the comparison with the HM-CAP assay and the 135 previously characterized samples, the HM-CAP assay itself served as a reference standard. The "experts" involved in establishing the ground truth for these samples would have been the developers/interpreters of the HM-CAP assay, but their number and qualifications are not specified.

3. Adjudication method for the test set:

   • The document does not describe a formal adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1). For biopsy results, it mentions some specimens were "indeterminate," implying a decision was made not to include them if a clear diagnosis couldn't be reached. For "previously characterized serum specimens," it's not clear how discrepancies (if any) in their characterization were resolved.

4. 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:

   • No, a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not performed. This device is a rapid, visually read immunoassay, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool.

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

   • Yes, the performance presented in the tables (sensitivity, specificity, agreement) is the standalone performance of the Abbott TestPack Plus H. pylori assay. As a visually read assay, a human does interpret the result on the test strip, but the performance metrics provided quantify the accuracy of the device itself in generating that interpretable result against established ground truth.

6. The type of ground truth used:

   • For the initial clinical study: Biopsy results from endoscopic examination.
   • For the comparative study: The HM-CAP™ Helicobacter pylori Enzyme Immunoassay (considered the predicate device and a reference standard for H. pylori specific IgG antibodies) and biopsy results for the 135 previously characterized samples.

7. The sample size for the training set:

   • The document does not explicitly mention a "training set" for the development of the Abbott TestPack Plus H. pylori assay. The provided data focuses on the validation or test sets used to demonstrate substantial equivalence. For a rapid diagnostic immunoassay like this, the "training" aspect would typically relate to assay development and optimization, not machine learning model training.

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

   • As no training set is explicitly mentioned for algorithm development, this information is not applicable from the provided text.

Ask a specific question about this device