Search Results

The ACON MDMA One Step Ecstasy Test Strip and ACON MDMA One Step Ecstasy Test Device are rapid chromatographic immunoassays for the qualitative detection of MDMA in urine at a cutoff concentration of 500 ng/mL. They are intended for healthcare professionals including professionals at point-of-care sites.

The ACON MDMA One Step Ecstasy Test Strip and ACON MDMA One Step Ecstasy Test Device are competitive binding, lateral flow immunochromatographic assays for the qualitative screening of MDMA in a urine sample. The test is based on the principle of antigen-antibody immunochemistry. It utilizes the antibody to selectively detect elevated levels of MDMA in urine at a cutoff concentration of 500 ng/mL. These tests can be performed without the use of an instrument.

A drug-positive urine specimen will not generate a colored-line in the designated test region, while a negative urine specimen or a urine specimen containing MDMA at the concentration below the cutoff level will generate a colored-line in the test region. To serve as a procedural control, a colored-line should always appear at the control region, indicating that proper volume of specimen has been added and membrane wicking has occurred.

Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding the ACON MDMA One Step Ecstasy Test Strip and Device, focusing on the acceptance criteria and study data:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not explicitly state pre-defined acceptance criteria. Instead, it presents the results of a comparison study against an FDA-cleared predicate device and Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS). The performance is reported in terms of agreement (positive, negative, and overall). Based on the context of a 510(k) submission, the "acceptance criteria" can be inferred to be the achieved performance levels, which the FDA deemed substantially equivalent to the predicate.

Given this, the table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance is constructed as follows:

Note: The 95% Confidence Intervals are for the "FDA-cleared MDMA Ecstasy Test" but are used here as an indicator of the expected range for substantial equivalence. The document doesn't provide explicit, pre-defined numerical thresholds for acceptance.

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

• Sample Size for Test Set: 240 clinical urine specimens were used for the comparative evaluation against an FDA-cleared MDMA Ecstasy Test.
  • For the more detailed breakdown against GC/MS: 93 MDMA positive urine samples and 147 MDMA negative urine samples were used for both the Strip and Device.
• Data Provenance: The document does not explicitly state the country of origin. The data is described as "clinical urine specimens," implying human-derived samples. It is retrospective, as the samples were collected and then tested. Nine of the positive samples were "derived from concentrated MDMA clinical specimens" to ensure representation within the +/- 25% cutoff range, while the rest were "true clinical specimens."

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

The ground truth for the test set was established primarily through Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS). GC/MS is an analytical chemistry technique, not a human expert. Therefore, the concept of "experts" as human reviewers for ground truth establishment does not apply in the traditional sense for this study. GC/MS is considered the gold standard for confirmatory drug testing.

For negative samples, a "commercial MDMA rapid test kit" was used for initial screening, and approximately 10% of these negative samples were then confirmed by GC/MS.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

The adjudication method wasn't a human-based consensus or 2+1/3+1 model. Instead, it was based on a direct comparison of the device's results against a gold standard (GC/MS) or a predicate device. Discrepancies (if any, though the reported agreement is very high) would be resolved by the GC/MS result.

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

No, a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not explicitly done. This type of study typically involves multiple human readers evaluating cases with and without AI assistance to measure the impact of AI on human performance. The devices are diagnostic test kits, and the study focuses on their standalone performance rather than assisting human interpretation.

6. Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Study

Yes, a standalone performance study was conducted. The ACON MDMA One Step Ecstasy Test Strip and Device are designed to generate a visual, qualitative result (presence or absence of a colored line) without requiring an instrument. The study evaluates this standalone performance where the result is directly read from the device itself.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

The primary ground truth used for establishing the accuracy of the device was Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS). This is a highly accurate analytical method considered definitive for drug identification and quantification. In addition, an "FDA-cleared MDMA Ecstasy Test" served as a predicate for comparison.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not mention a separate "training set" or "training data" in the context of machine learning or algorithm development. This is because the ACON MDMA tests are immunochromatographic assays, which are based on chemical and biological principles (antibody-antigen interactions) rather than data-driven machine learning algorithms that typically require training data. The development of such a test involves reagent selection, optimization, and characterization rather than algorithmic training.

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

As noted above, there isn't a "training set" in the machine learning sense. The "ground truth" for the development and validation of the immunochromatographic assay itself would be established through rigorous laboratory testing using known concentrations of MDMA and interferents, likely validated by GC/MS or other established analytical methods during the research and development phase before clinical evaluation.

Ask a specific question about this device