Search Results

Acro Rapid THC (Marijuana) Urine Test is a lateral flow, one-step immunoassay for the qualitative detection of Tetrahydrocannabinol (Marijuana) in human urine at a cutoff of 50 ng/mL The test is used to obtain a visual qualitative result and is intended for laboratory use only.

This assay provides only a preliminary result. Clinical consideration and professional judgment must be applied to a drug test result, particularly in evaluating a preliminary positive result. In order to obtain a confirmed analytical result, a more specific alternate chemical method is needed. Gas Chromatography/ Mass Spectroscopy (GC/MS) analysis is preferred.

Acro Rapid THC (Marijuana) Urine Test is a lateral flow, one-step immunoassay for the qualitative detection of Tetrahydrocannabinol (Marijuana) in human urine at a cutoff of 50 ng/mL

This document is a 510(k) clearance letter from the FDA for the Acro Rapid (THC) Marijuana Urine Test, not a study report. Therefore, it does not contain the detailed information required to describe acceptance criteria and a study proving device performance in the manner requested.

Specifically, the document does not include:

• A table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance.
• Sample sizes for test sets, data provenance, or details on ground truth establishment and expert qualifications for those sets.
• Information on MRMC studies or standalone algorithm performance.
• Details regarding the training set.

The document only states the intended use of the device and its regulatory classification. It confirms that the FDA has determined the device is substantially equivalent to legally marketed predicate devices, allowing Acro Biotech LLC to market it.

Below is information that can be extracted from the provided text, and an explanation of why other requested details are not present.

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

• Acceptance Criteria (Implied from Indications for Use): Qualitative detection of Tetrahydrocannabinol (Marijuana) in human urine at a cutoff of 50 ng/mL. The device must produce a "preliminary positive result" when THC is present at or above this cutoff, and a "negative result" when below.
• Reported Device Performance: Not provided in this document. The FDA letter states that the device has been found "substantially equivalent" to predicate devices, implying its performance meets acceptable standards, but specific performance metrics (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, accuracy) are not listed here.

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

• Not provided. This document is a regulatory clearance letter, not a study report.

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)

• Not provided. The "ground truth" for drug tests like this typically involves a more specific analytical method, such as GC/MS. The document mentions: "In order to obtain a confirmed analytical result, a more specific alternate chemical method is needed. Gas Chromatography/ Mass Spectroscopy (GC/MS) analysis is preferred." This implies GC/MS is the reference method, but details on how this was applied in a test set, including expert involvement, are absent.

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

• Not applicable/Not provided. Adjudication methods are typically relevant for subjective interpretations (like medical imaging), not for qualitative chemical tests where a reference method (GC/MS in this case) provides the definitive answer.

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/Not provided. This device is a rapid urine test for THC, not an AI-based system or an imaging device requiring human reader interpretation in the context of an MRMC study.

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

• Not applicable/Not provided. This is a rapid immunoassay device, not an algorithm. The "standalone" performance would refer to the device's accuracy in detecting THC against a reference method (GC/MS), but specific study details are not in this document.

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

• Chemical Analysis: The document states, "In order to obtain a confirmed analytical result, a more specific alternate chemical method is needed. Gas Chromatography/ Mass Spectroscopy (GC/MS) analysis is preferred." This indicates that GC/MS is the 'gold standard' or ground truth method for confirmation.

8. The sample size for the training set

• Not applicable/Not provided. This is a chemical immunoassay, not a machine learning model, so there is no "training set" in the context of AI.

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

• Not applicable/Not provided. As above, there is no "training set" in the context of this device.

In summary: The provided FDA 510(k) clearance letter confirms regulatory approval based on substantial equivalence but does not detail the specific performance study results, methodologies, or data characteristics (like sample size, provenance, expert details) that would typically be found in a study report. For that level of detail, one would need to refer to the actual 510(k) submission itself or related performance studies if they were made public.

Ask a specific question about this device