Search Results

The DSL ULTRA-SENSITIVE UNCONJUGATED ESTRIOL EIA assay is intended for the quantitative determination of Unconjugated Estriol in human serum. The measurement of Unconjugated Estriol is used as a diagnostic aid in the diagnosis and treatment of fetoplacental distress.

The DSL Ultra-Sensitive Unconjugated Estriol EIA kit was developed for the quantitative measurement of Unconjugated Estriol in human serum. The ElA format is a competitive binding protein assay. Horseradish peroxidase labelled unconiugated estriol competes with un-labeled Unconjugated Estrict in the serum sample for antibody binding sites. After incubation and washing the wells are incubated with the substrate tetramethylbenzidine (TMB). An acidic stopping solution is then added and the decree of enzymatic turnover of the substrate is determined by dual wavelength absorbance measurement.

This document describes the DSL 10-3700 Ultra-Sensitive Unconjugated Estriol EIA Kit and its equivalence to an existing device, the DSL ULTRA-SENSITIVE UNCONJUGATED ESTRIOL RIA. However, it does not provide a clear set of acceptance criteria with specific thresholds or present a study comparing the device against those criteria. Instead, it describes a comparative study showing substantial equivalence to a predicate device.

Given the information provided, here's an attempt to answer the questions based on what is available:

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

The document does not explicitly state pre-defined acceptance criteria with pass/fail thresholds for this specific device. It relies on demonstrating "substantial equivalence" to a predicate device. The performance reported for this equivalence study is:

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

• Sample Size for Test Set: 106 patient samples.
• Data Provenance: The document does not specify the country of origin. It states "patient samples (n = 106) were collected". It does not explicitly state if these were retrospective or prospective, but the wording "were collected and assayed using both methods" suggests they were existing or newly collected samples for the purpose of the comparison, which could be either. The statement "Samples were chosen based on expected Unconjugated Estriol levels so that samples with low, intermediate and high levels would be evaluated" indicates a conscious selection strategy.

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 applicable. The "ground truth" in this context is the measurement obtained by the predicate device (DSL ULTRA-SENSITIVE UNCONJUGATED ESTRIOL RIA), not established by human experts.

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

Not applicable. This study focuses on comparing a new assay to a predicate assay, not on expert adjudication of diagnostic outcomes.

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 device, and no human reader study is described.

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

Yes, the study described is a standalone performance comparison of the new assay (DSL ULTRA-SENSITIVE UNCONJUGATED ESTRIOL EIA) against a predicate assay (DSL ULTRA-SENSITIVE UNCONJUGATED ESTRIOL RIA). Both are laboratory assays and operate without direct human-in-the-loop diagnostic interpretation in the context of this comparison.

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

The "ground truth" for the purpose of demonstrating substantial equivalence was the measurement obtained from the predicate device, the DSL ULTRA-SENSITIVE UNCONJUGATED ESTRIOL RIA.

8. The sample size for the training set

Not applicable in the typical sense of machine learning. This is a biochemical assay, not an AI/ML algorithm that requires training data in the same way. The development and calibration of such assays typically involve internal development samples and validation samples, but not a "training set" as understood in AI/ML. The document does not provide details on such internal development samples.

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

Not applicable for the reasons stated in point 8.

Ask a specific question about this device