Search Results

The ACON PCP One Step Phencyclidine Test Strip and ACON PCP One Step Phencyclidine Test Device are rapid chromatographic immunoassays for the qualitative detection of phencyclidine in human urine at a cut-off concentration of 25 ng/mL. They are intended for healthcare professionals including point of care sites.

The ACON PCP One Step Phencyclidine Test Strip and ACON PCP One Step Phencyclidine Test Device are competitive binding, lateral flow immunochromatographic assays for the qualitative detection of phencyclidine 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 phencyclidine in urine at a cut-off concentration of 25 ng/ml. These tests can be performed without the use of an instrument.
A drug-positive urine specimen will not generate a red-colored line in the designated test region, while a negative urine specimen will generate a red-colored line in the test region. To serve as a procedural control, a red-colored line will always appear at the control region if the test has been performed properly.

Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and study detailed in the provided text:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance

Note: The acceptance criteria are implicitly derived from the comparative study. For devices seeking 510(k) clearance, "substantial equivalence" means the new device is as safe and effective as a legally marketed predicate device. The high agreement percentages with both the predicate and the GC/MS method indicate that the device meets the implicit acceptance criteria for substantial equivalence.

Study Details

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

   • Sample Size: 212 clinical urine specimens.
   • Data Provenance: The text does not explicitly state the country of origin. It indicates "clinical urine specimens," implying they were collected from real-world patients. The study is retrospective, as it utilized collected specimens for evaluation. The sample set also included 10% samples with drug concentrations at -25% to +25% of the cutoff, suggesting a targeted selection to test performance near the cutoff.

2. 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 using Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) analysis. GC/MS is a highly accurate and widely accepted method for drug identification and quantification, often considered the "gold standard" in toxicology. It does not typically involve human experts interpreting results in the same way, for example, a radiologist interprets an imaging study. Therefore, the "number of experts" is not applicable in the traditional sense for GC/MS. The expertise lies in the certified laboratory personnel operating and interpreting GC/MS data, but the document doesn't specify how many people were involved.

3. Adjudication method for the test set:

   • Since the primary ground truth was established by GC/MS, an objective analytical method, a human adjudication method (like 2+1 or 3+1 by experts) was not applicable or described. The comparison was directly between the rapid test results and the GC/MS results.

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, an MRMC study was not performed. This device is a rapid diagnostic test performed by healthcare professionals, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool requiring human interpretation comparison. The study compared the device's accuracy against a predicate device and a reference method (GC/MS).

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

   • Yes, the performance study essentially represents a standalone performance evaluation. The ACON PCP One Step Phencyclidine Test Strip and Device are designed to provide a qualitative result directly (a line appearing or not). The study assessed the accuracy of these devices themselves without human interpretive intervention beyond reading the visual result. It's an "algorithm only" in the sense that the immunochromatographic reaction provides the "result."

6. The type of ground truth used:

   • The primary ground truth used was Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS), which is an objective, analytical "laboratory reference method."

7. The sample size for the training set:

   • The document describes a clinical evaluation using 212 specimens, which served as the test set for performance assessment. As this is a rapid diagnostic test based on immunoassay principles, it does not involve machine learning algorithms that typically require a distinct "training set" of data. The "training" for such devices is inherent in their chemical and biological design and manufacturing process. Therefore, a separate training set as understood in AI/ML contexts is not applicable and not reported.

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

   • As there is no separate "training set" in the machine learning sense for this type of device, the concept of establishing ground truth for a training set is not applicable. The device's underlying chemical/biological mechanisms are designed to detect phencyclidine, and its performance (agreement with GC/MS) confirms its ability to establish accurate "truth" compared to a gold standard.

Ask a specific question about this device