Search Results

For in vitro diagnostic use in the calibration of Phenobarbital 2 (PHNB 2), Phenytoin 2 (PHNY_2), and Theophylline_2 (THEO_2) methods on the ADVIA Chemistry Systems .

ADVIA Chemistry DRUG Calibrator I is a multi-analyte, liquid, human serum based product containing multiple analytes. The kit consists of 2 vials each of 5 calibrator levels which are ready for use (no preparation is required). The volume per vial is 3.0 mL. Phenobarbital, Phenytoin, and Theophylline are value assigned for ADVIA Chemistry systems. In addition DRUG Calibrator I also contains Lithium and Digoxin with no specific value assignment on ADVIA Chemistry systems at this time.

The provided document is a 510(k) summary for the ADVIA® Chemistry DRUG Calibrator I, which is a calibrator device used in laboratory settings. This type of device does not typically involve the acceptance criteria, study designs, and human reader performance metrics that are common for diagnostic imaging or AI-driven decision support tools. Instead, the "acceptance criteria" for a calibrator are primarily related to its ability to accurately calibrate specific assays and its substantial equivalence to a predicate device.

Here's an analysis based on the information provided, framed to address your questions where applicable, but noting limitations for others given the device type:

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

For a calibrator like the ADVIA® Chemistry DRUG Calibrator I, the primary "acceptance criterion" for 510(k) clearance is demonstrated substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device. This is achieved by showing that the new device has the same intended use, technological characteristics, and performs as well as or better than the predicate device without raising new questions of safety or effectiveness.

The study presented focuses on justifying substantial equivalence rather than reporting a specific performance metric against a numerical acceptance criterion in the way an AI-driven diagnostic device might.

Summary of Acceptance: The device was accepted because it was found to be "substantially equivalent" to the predicate device, meaning it meets the regulatory requirements for safety and effectiveness for its intended use as a calibrator. All compared parameters were either identical or very similar, supporting this conclusion.

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

This type of information (sample size for a test set, data provenance, retrospective/prospective) is typically for studies evaluating the diagnostic performance of a device on patient samples. For a calibrator, the "study" is a comparison to a predicate device and verification of its intrinsic characteristics (e.g., stability, traceability, composition). The document does not describe patient-level data or a "test set" in the traditional sense. The "sample" here refers to the calibrator product itself, and its characteristics were evaluated. No country of origin for "data" is relevant as it's about product properties.

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. This calibrator device does not involve expert interpretation or ground truth establishment in the context of diagnostic performance on patient cases. Its "ground truth" (or accurate values) would be established through a rigorous metrological traceability chain, often to primary reference materials, as indicated by "USP traceability."

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

Not applicable. There is no diagnostic "test set" or human judgment requiring adjudication for a calibrator.

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 a diagnostic device involving human readers or AI assistance.

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

Not applicable. This is not an algorithm or AI device.

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

For a calibrator, the "ground truth" for the analytes within it is established through a chain of traceability to reference materials and/or established reference methods. The document states "Traceability: USP," meaning the values assigned to the analytes (Phenobarbital, Phenytoin, Theophylline) in the calibrator are traceable to standards set by the United States Pharmacopeia, which ensures their accuracy and consistency.

8. The sample size for the training set

Not applicable. This is not a machine learning or AI device that requires a training set.

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

Not applicable. As above, there is no training set for this device.

Ask a specific question about this device