Search Results

CHOLESTEROL: Reagent kit intended for the quantitative determination of Cholesterol in human serum. Cholesterol measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of disorders involving excess cholesterol in the blood, of lipid and lipoprotein metabolism disorders.

HDL-Cholesterol: Reagent kit intended for the quantitative determination of high-density lipoprotein in human serum. Measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of lipid disorders mellitus), atherosclerosis, and various liver and renal diseases.

LDL-Cholesterol: Reagent kit intended for the quantitative determination of low-density lipoprotein in human serum. Lipoprotein measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of lipid disorders (such as diabetes mellitus), atherosclerosis, and various liver and renal diseases.

TRIGLYCERIDES: Reagent kit intended for the quantitative determination of triglycerides (neutral fat) in human serum. Measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with diabetes mellitus, nephrosis, liver obstruction, other diseases involving lipid metabolism, or various endocrine disorders.

CHOLESTEROL: The Cholesterol Oxidase peroxidase (CHOD-PAP) enzymatic method is used. The cholesterol esterase enzyme catalyzes the hydrolysis of cholesterol and free fatty and free fatty acids. Free cholesterol, including that originally present in the sample, is then oxidized by the enzyme cholesterol oxidase (CHOD) to cholest-4-en-3-one, by using molecular oxygen as the electron acceptor and concurrently producing hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). The H2O2 produced is then used in a subsequent chromogenic oxidative coupling reaction, catalyzed by the enzyme peroxidase, in the presence of a redox indicator system, which leads to the formation of a colored compound, absorbing light at 550 nm. The increase in absorbance is directly proportional to the cholesterol concentration in the sample.

HDL-Cholesterol: The Accelerator Selective Detergent method is applied. The determination of HDL-Cholesterol is based on the following reactions: LDL, VLDL, and chylomicrons are neutralized by the combined action of the enzymes Cholesterol Oxidase, Peroxidase, accelerators and N,N-bis-(4-sulfobutyl)-m-toluidine-disodium (DSBmT). HDL remaining in the sample is disrupted by the action of a selective detergent and cholesterol is converted to △4 Cholestenone by the enzymatic action of Cholesterol Esterase and Cholesterol Oxidase, with the subsequent production of H2O2, which reacts with DSBmT and 4-aminoantipyrine in the presence of Peroxidase to a colored complex that absorbs light at 590 nm. The absorbance measured is proportional to the concentration of HDL-Cholesterol in the sample.

LDL-Cholesterol: The Selective Detergent method is applied. The method is in a two-reagent format and depends on the properties of a unique detergent. The first detergent solubilizes only the non-LDL lipoprotein particles. The cholesterol released is consumed by cholesterol esterase and cholesterol oxidase in a non-color forming reaction. The second detergent solubilizes the remaining LDL particles, and a chromogenic coupler allows for color formation. The enzyme reaction with LDL-Cholesterol in the presence of the coupler at 590 nm produces color that is proportional to the amount of LDL cholesterol present in the sample.

TRIGLYCERIDES: The enzymatic glycerol-3-phosphate-peroxidase (GPO-POD) method is used. The method enzymatically hydrolyzes by lipase to free fatty acids and glycerol is phosphorylated by adenosine triphosphate (ATP) with glycerokinase (GK) to produce glycerol-3-phosphate and adenosine diphosphate (ADP). Glycerol-3-phosphate-oxidase oxidizes glycerol-3-phosphate to dihydroxyacetone phosphate and H2O2. The catalytic action of peroxidase (POD) forms quinoneimine from H202, aminoantipyrine, and Dihydrate (N-Ethyl-N-(2hydroxy-3-sulfopropyl)-m-toluidine (TOOS). The absorption change at 550 nm is proportional to the triglycerides concentration in the sample.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and the study information for the Medicon Hellas Cholesterol, HDL-Cholesterol, LDL-Cholesterol, and Triglycerides test systems, based on the provided document:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The acceptance criteria are generally established by comparison to legally marketed predicate devices and alignment with clinical laboratory guidelines (CLSI). The document presents a clear comparison in the "Device Comparison Table" sections. For this summary, I'll focus on the key performance indicators for each analyte.

CHOLESTEROL

HDL-Cholesterol

LDL-Cholesterol

TRIGLYCERIDES

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance

• Accuracy (Method Comparisons):

  • A minimum of 75 leftover specimens.
  • For the specific analytes:
    • CHOLESTEROL: 93 human serum samples
    • HDL-Cholesterol: 141 human serum samples
    • LDL-Cholesterol: 107 human serum samples
    • TRIGLYCERIDES: 163 human serum samples
  • Data Provenance: The document states "left-over specimens," implying retrospective use of clinical samples. The country of origin is not explicitly stated, but the company is Medicon Hellas, S.A. based in Greece, and testing was performed at the company premises.

• Precision/Reproducibility:

  • Three human serum pools for Cholesterol and Triglycerides.
  • Two pools for HDL-Cholesterol.
  • Four pools for LDL-Cholesterol.
  • Each sample was tested for 20 testing days, two different runs, and two replicate measurements per run (morning and afternoon run), for a total of 80 results per level concentration (e.g., for Cholesterol, 3 pools * 80 results/pool = 240 results).
  • Data Provenance: Human serum pools, likely prepared in-house or acquired for the study.

• Linearity:

  • 11 to 13 levels per analyte, prepared by dilution of a human serum pool.
  • Each level was tested in 4 replicates.
  • Data Provenance: Human serum pool.

• Analytical Specificity / Interference:

  • Serum pools at low and high levels of each analyte.
  • Each measurement of the blank and the sample containing the interferent was repeated at least 5 times.
  • Data Provenance: Serum pools.

• Detection Limit:

  • LoB: 5 blank serum samples measured in 4 replicates for 3 days (total of 60 measurements).
  • LoD: 5 low-level samples measured in 4 replicates for 3 days (total of 60 measurements).
  • LoQ: 10 samples that span the low end of linearity, measured 5 times each day for 3 days (total of 150 measurements).
  • Data Provenance: Serum samples.

• Stability and Calibration Frequency:

  • Two fresh serum pools and two serum-based commercial controls.
  • Measurements were repeated in triplicate at regular time points.
  • Data Provenance: Serum pools and commercial controls.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts

This information is not provided in the document. The ground truth for performance studies like those described (method comparison, precision, linearity, interference, detection limits) for in vitro diagnostic (IVD) devices like these typically involves established reference methods or highly accurate comparative analyzers, rather than expert human interpretation of results. The document states that the performance of the Medicon Hellas reagents was compared with "comparator methods" (Beckman Coulter reagents on AU400, Abbott Diagnostics reagents on Architect c8000), which serve as the reference for ground truth in these types of analytical performance studies. The qualifications of the operators performing these studies are not specified.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

This information is not applicable and therefore not provided. Adjudication methods (e.g., 2+1, 3+1) are typically used in studies where human interpretation of complex data (like medical images) is involved and a consensus is needed to establish ground truth. For quantitative chemical assays, the ground truth is established by the highly precise and accurate measurement of reference methods or predicate devices.

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

This information is not applicable and therefore not provided. MRMC studies are specific to evaluating diagnostic devices where human readers interpret medical cases, often with and without AI assistance (e.g., radiology AI). The Medicon Hellas devices are in vitro diagnostic reagents for quantitative chemical measurements in serum, not image-based diagnostic tools that require human "readers" in the context of an MRMC study.

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

This concept is not applicable in the traditional sense for these in vitro diagnostic reagents. These devices are chemical assays that produce a quantitative numerical output (e.g., cholesterol level in mg/dL). There isn't an "algorithm" making a diagnostic interpretation independently in the way AI software would. The device is the standalone measurement system. Its performance is evaluated independently through analytical studies (precision, linearity, accuracy against reference methods, etc.). The results are then read and interpreted by a human clinician.

7. The type of ground truth used

The ground truth for the analytical performance studies (precision, linearity, interference, detection limits, and method comparison) was established against:

• Reference Methods/Predicate Devices: For method comparison, the device's performance was compared against established comparator methods (Beckman Coulter reagents on AU400 and Abbott Diagnostics reagents on ABBOTT Architect c8000). The document explicitly states these as the comparators.
• A Priori Values/Established Standards: For linearity, precision, and detection limits, the ground truth is based on the known concentrations of prepared samples (e.g., serially diluted pools, spiked samples, blank serum) and statistical analysis according to CLSI guidelines.
• Traceability to Reference Methods/Materials: For Cholesterol and Triglycerides, traceability is to Gas-chromatography-isotope dilution mass spectrometry (GC-IDMS). For HDL-Cholesterol and LDL-Cholesterol, traceability is to the Abell-Kendall (AK) reference method.

8. The sample size for the training set

This information is not applicable and therefore not provided. These are chemical reagent kits, not machine learning (AI/ML) models that require a "training set" in the computational sense. The development of such reagents involves chemical and enzymatic research and optimization, often tested with various batches and concentrations of samples during R&D. The studies described in this document are for validation and verification of the final device, not for "training" an algorithm.

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

As noted above, the concept of a "training set" with ground truth established in the AI/ML sense is not applicable to these chemical reagent devices. The "ground truth" for evaluating the analytical performance of the developed reagent kits is established through the reference methods and standardized protocols described in section 7.

Ask a specific question about this device

Choledochoscope System is intended to be used by physicians through percutaneous insertion to access, visualize, and perform procedures in the pancreaticobiliary system including the hepatic ducts and the common bile duct.

The image processor provides illumination for the choledochoscope, and is also used to receive the signal from the endoscope, convert it into an image and display it on the examination monitor.

The instrument enables delivery and use of accessories such as biopsy forceps, laser fibers, graspers and retrieval baskets at a surgical site.

The Choledochoscope System consists of a single-use choledochoscope to provide illumination and intuitive images in endoscopic surgery of the pancreatic ductal system and serves as a guide to diagnosis and management with accessories and an image processor for clinical image processing.

The single-use choledochoscope is a sterile single-use flexible choledochoscope and has the following 4 models: CH-M50, CH-M52, CH-M40, CH-M32. The four models are the same except for the difference in the characteristics of the insertion tube, including diameter of the insertion tube, maximum insertion portion width and minimum insertion channel width.

The image processor is a reusable monitor.

The single-use choledochoscope is comprised of a control body with articulation controls and accessory access ports, and a flexible insertion tube with an on-tip camera module and LED lighting source. The image processor processes the images from the choledochoscope and outputs video signals to a display.

The provided text describes the regulatory clearance of a medical device, the "Choledochoscope System," and highlights the tests performed to demonstrate its substantial equivalence to a predicate device. However, it does not include the detailed information needed to answer many of the questions regarding acceptance criteria and the study proving the device meets those criteria, particularly for performance metrics related to AI or image analysis beyond general optical performance.

Specifically, the document states: "No clinical study is included in this submission" which is critical. This means the device's performance was primarily demonstrated through bench testing and compliance with standards, not through clinical trials or comparative effectiveness studies with human readers.

Therefore, for many of the requested points, the answer will be that the information is "Not available in the provided text" or "Not applicable as no clinical or AI-based performance study was conducted."

Here's the breakdown based on the provided text:

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

The document mentions several performance tests and compliance with standards, but does not provide a table with specific acceptance criteria (e.g., minimum resolution, specific SNR values) and reported performance values for each. It generally states "Comply with" or "evaluated in accordance with."

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

• Sample Size (Test Set): Not applicable for human-data based test sets, as "No clinical study is included in this submission." For bench tests (e.g., optical, mechanical), the sample sizes are not specified in the document.
• Data Provenance: Not applicable for clinical data. For manufacturing and testing, the company is based in Shenzhen, Guangdong, China. The testing appears to be primarily bench-top and engineering performance testing rather than human clinical data.
• Retrospective/Prospective: Not applicable, as no clinical studies were conducted using human data.

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)

• Number of experts: Not applicable. No clinical expert-driven ground truth was established, as no clinical study was conducted.
• Qualifications of experts: Not applicable.

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

• Adjudication method: Not applicable. No clinical test set requiring expert adjudication was used.

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

• MRMC study: No, a MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. The document explicitly states: "No clinical study is included in this submission."
• Effect size: Not applicable, as no MRMC study was conducted.

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

• Standalone performance: Not applicable. This device is an endoscope system (hardware and image processor), not an AI algorithm analyzing medical images. Its performance is related to its ability to capture and display images, not interpret them. The document refers to "Software Verification and Validation Testing" but treats the software as a "moderate" level of concern, indicating it's mainly for control and image processing, not diagnostic AI.

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

• Type of ground truth: For the engineering and performance tests (optical, mechanical, electrical, biocompatibility), the "ground truth" would be established physical measurements, engineering standards, chemical analyses, and standardized test methodologies. There is no biological/clinical "ground truth" in the form of expert consensus or pathology within this submission.

8. The sample size for the training set

• Sample size (Training Set): Not applicable. This submission is for a medical device (endoscope system), not an AI/ML model for which a training set would be described in this context. The software mentioned is for device operation and image display, not for learning from data.

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

• Ground truth (Training Set): Not applicable, as this device does not involve a machine learning training set with biological or clinical ground truth.

In summary, the provided document focuses on demonstrating the substantial equivalence of the Choledochoscope System to a predicate device through adherence to established regulatory standards for medical device safety and performance (biocompatibility, sterilization, electrical safety, mechanical, and optical bench tests), rather than clinical efficacy or AI-driven performance.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Cholestech LDX™ System is a small, portable analyzer and test cassette system is for in vitro diagnostic use only and should not be used for testing in children under the age of 2 years. The Cholestech LDX™ System is comprised of the Cholestech LDX Analyzer and the following cassettes:

The Lipid Profile GLU cassette is for the quantitative determination of total cholesterol, HDL (high-density Ilpoprotein) cholesterol, triglycerides and glucose in whole blood. The TC/HDL (total cholesterol) ratio and estimated values for LDL (low-density lipoprotein) and non-HDL cholesterol are also reported.

The TC+HDL GLU cassette is for the quantitative determination of total cholesterol, HDL (high-density lipoprotein) cholesterol, and glucose in whole blood.

The TC GLU cassette is for the quantitative determination of total cholesterol and glucose in whole blood.

The Lipid Profile cassette is for the quantitative determination of total cholesterol. HDL (high-density lipoprotein) cholesterol, and triglycerides in whole blood. The TC/HDL (total cholesterol) ratio and estimated values for LDL (low-density lipoprotein) and non-HDL cholesterol are also reported.

The TC+HDL cassette is for the quantitative determination of total cholesterol and HDL (high-density lipoprotein) cholesterol in whole blood.

The TC cassette is for the quantitative determination of total cholesterol in whole blood.

· Cholesterol measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of disorders involving excess cholesterol in the blood and lipid and lipoprotein metabolism disorders.

· HDL (lipoprotein) measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of lipid disorders (such as diabetes mellitus), atherosclerosis, and various liver and renal diseases.

· Triglyceride measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment with diabetes mellitus, nephrosis, liver obstruction, other diseases involving lipid metabolism, or various endocrine disorders.

· Glucose measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of carbohydrate metabolism disorders including diabetes mellitus, idiopathic hypoglycemia, and of pancreatic islet cell carcinoma.

The Cholestech LDX ™ system combines enzymatic methodology and solid-phase technology to measure total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides and glucose. Samples used for testing can be whole blood from a fingerstick (collected in a lithium heparin-coated capillary tube) or venipuncture. The sample is applied to the Cholestech LDX™ cassette®.

The cassette is then placed into the Cholestech LDX™ Analyzer where a unique system on the cassette separates the plasma from the blood cells. A portion of the plasma flows to the right side of the cassette and is transferred to both the total cholesterol and triglyceride reaction pads. Simultaneously, plasma flows to the left side of the cassette where the low- and very low-density lipoproteins (LDL and VLDL) are precipitated with dextran sulfate (50,000 MW) and magnesium acetate precipitating reagent.The filtrate, containing both glucose and HDL cholesterol, is transferred to both the glucose and HDL cholesterol reaction pads.

The Cholestech LDX ™ Analyzer measures total cholesterol and HDL cholesterol by an enzymatic method based on the method formulation of Allain et al, and Roeschlau. Cholesterol esterase hydrolyzes the cholesterol esters in the filtrate or plasma to free cholesterol and the corresponding fatty acid. Cholesterol oxidase, in the presence of oxygen, oxidizes free cholesterol to cholest-4-ene-3-one and hydrogen peroxide. In a reaction catalyzed by horseradish peroxidase, the peroxide reacts with 4-Aminoantipyrine and N-ethyl-N-sulfohydroxypropyl-m-toluidine, sodium sale (TOOS) to form a purple-colored quinoneimine dye proportional to the total cholesterol and HDL cholesterol concentrations of the sample.

The analyzer measures triglycerides by an enzymatic method based on the hydrolysis of triglycerides by lipase to glycerol and free fatty acids. Glycerol, in a reaction catalyzed by glycerol kinase, is converted to glycerol-3-phosphate. In a third reaction, glycerol-3phosphate is oxidized by glycerol phosphate oxidase to dihydroxyacetone phosphate and hydrogen peroxide. The color reaction utilizing horseradish peroxidase is the same as for the total cholesterol and HDL cholesterol. Estimated LDL cholesterol and non-HDL cholesterol and a TC/HDL ratio are calculated using the measured values for TC, HDL, and Triglycerides.

The analyzer measures glucose by an enzymatic method that uses glucose oxidase to catalyze the oxidation of glucose to gluconolactone and hydrogen peroxide. The color reaction utilizing horseradish peroxidase is the same as that for total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol and triglycerides. The resultant color in all the reactions is measured by reflectance photometry.

A brown (magnetic) stripe on each cassette contains the calibration information required for the Cholestech LDX ™ Analyzer to convert the reflectance reading (% R) to the total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides and glucose concentrations.

The provided text is a 510(k) summary for the Cholestech LDX™ System and primarily discusses device modifications and comparison to a predicate device. It certifies that verification studies were performed as required by risk analysis and all acceptance criteria were met. However, it does not provide the specific details of the acceptance criteria or the reported device performance for these studies. It also does not contain information about the sample size, data provenance, number of experts, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, standalone algorithm performance, or how ground truth was established for test and training sets.

Therefore, based solely on the provided text, I cannot fulfill most of the requested information regarding the study that proves the device meets the acceptance criteria. The document states that such studies were done and met acceptance criteria, but omits the specifics.

Here's what can be inferred or stated from the provided text, and what is missing:

Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Information Not Available in the Text: The document explicitly states, "Verification studies were performed as required by risk analysis and all acceptance criteria were met." However, it does not list the specific acceptance criteria (e.g., specific accuracy thresholds, precision ranges, etc.) or the detailed reported device performance (e.g., actual measured accuracy, precision values, etc.) from these studies. The modification pertains to updating the performance claim related to conjugated and unconjugated Bilirubin interference. While it mentions that less than 10% interference was seen at specified levels for various substances, this is a general statement from the predicate device's limitations, not a specific acceptance criterion for the current modification or the exact performance data achieved.

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

Information Not Available in the Text: The document states that "verification studies" were performed, but it does not specify the sample size (e.g., number of patients, number of samples) used for any test set or the provenance of the data (e.g., country of origin, retrospective or prospective nature of the data collection).

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

Information Not Available in the Text: The document details changes to an in vitro diagnostic (IVD) device for measuring cholesterol, triglycerides, and glucose. For IVD devices, ground truth is typically established by reference laboratory methods, not by human experts interpreting images or clinical cases. Therefore, the concept of "experts" as in radiologists or pathologists establishing ground truth is not applicable here. Even if it were (e.g., for method comparison studies requiring expert clinical correlation), the document does not mention any role for experts in establishing ground truth.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Information Not Available in the Text: Since the ground truth for an IVD device is generally established using reference methods (as opposed to human interpretation needing adjudication), an adjudication method as typically used in AI studies of imaging (e.g., 2+1, 3+1) is not applicable or described in this document.

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

Information Not Applicable/Available in the Text: This is an in vitro diagnostic (IVD) device, not an AI-assisted diagnostic imaging device. Therefore, MRMC studies comparing human readers with and without AI assistance are not relevant to this type of device and are not mentioned in the documentation.

6. If a Standalone (i.e., Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Was Done

Information Not Applicable/Available in the Text: The Cholestech LDX™ System is a chemical analyzer, not an AI algorithm. Its performance is inherent to the device's enzymatic and solid-phase technology. The concept of "standalone algorithm performance" without human-in-the-loop is not directly applicable in the same way it would be for a software-as-a-medical-device (SaMD) that processes and interprets data for human review. The document describes the device's direct measurement capabilities.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

Inferred from Text: For an in vitro diagnostic device measuring analytes (cholesterol, HDL, triglycerides, glucose), the ground truth is typically established by reference laboratory methods (e.g., highly accurate and precise methods run on core laboratory instruments). While the document does not explicitly state "reference laboratory comparison" for ground truth, the context of an IVD device submission, especially one measuring these specific analytes, strongly implies this method.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

Information Not Applicable/Available in the Text: This is a chemical analyzer, not a machine learning or AI-based device that requires a "training set" in the computational sense. The device's operation is based on established enzymatic and chemical reactions, not on data-driven learning. Therefore, there is no "training set" in the context of AI/ML.

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

Information Not Applicable/Available in the Text: As noted above, there is no "training set" for this type of IVD device in the context of AI/ML. The device's calibration and performance are based on chemical principles and validation studies, not on learning from a training dataset.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Cholesterol2 assay is used for the quantitation of cholesterol in human serum or plasma on the ARCHITECT c System. The Cholesterol2 assay is to be used as an aid in the diagnosis and treatment of disorders involving excess cholesterol in the blood and lipid and lipoprotein metabolism disorders.

The Cholesterol2 assay is an automated clinical chemistry assay for the quantitation of cholesterol in human serum or plasma on the ARCHITECT c System. Cholesterol esters are enzymatically hydrolyzed by cholesterol esterase to cholesterol and free fatty acids. Free cholesterol, including that originally present, is then oxidized by cholesterol oxidase to cholest-4-ene-3-one and hydrogen peroxide. The hydrogen peroxide oxidatively couples with N,N-Bis(4-sulfobutyl)-3-methylaniline (TODB) and 4-aminoantipyrine to form a chromophore (quinoneimine dye) which is quantitated at 604 nm.

The provided text describes the Abbott Cholesterol2 assay, an in vitro diagnostic device for quantifying cholesterol in human serum or plasma.

Here's an analysis of 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 for each performance characteristic. Instead, it presents the results of various studies as proof of device performance. The table below summarizes the reported performance, which implicitly serves as the "met" criteria.

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

• Precision Study: 2 controls and 3 human serum panels were tested. Each sample was tested in duplicate, twice per day for 20 days. This means 80 measurements per sample (2 duplicates x 2 times/day x 20 days).
• Lower Limits of Measurement Study: n ≥ 60 replicates for LoB, LoD, and LoQ determinations. They used low-analyte level samples and zero-analyte samples.
• Linearity Study: The number of samples for the linearity study is not explicitly stated, but it covered the range of 5 to 748 mg/dL.
• Interference Studies: Each endogenous substance was tested at 2 analyte levels (approximately 150 mg/dL and 220 mg/dL). Exogenous substances were tested at various specified interferent levels. The number of samples for each interferent is not provided.
• Method Comparison Study: 138 serum samples were used.
• Tube Type Study: Samples were collected from a minimum of 40 donors.
• Dilution Verification: 8 human serum samples.

Data Provenance: The document does not specify the country of origin of the data or whether the studies were retrospective or prospective. Given the context of medical device regulatory submission, these are typically prospective studies conducted in a controlled laboratory environment. The "human serum panels" and "human serum samples" imply human-derived biological samples.

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)

This device is an in vitro diagnostic (IVD) chemistry assay. The concept of "experts establishing ground truth" as it applies to image interpretation or clinical diagnosis by medical professionals (like radiologists) does not directly apply here in the same way.

For IVDs like this, the "ground truth" or reference values are established through:

• Reference methods: The Cholesterol2 reagent is certified to be traceable to the National Reference System for cholesterol, against the Abell-Kendall reference method in a CDC-Certified Cholesterol Reference Method Laboratory Network (CRMLN). The Abell-Kendall method is considered the gold standard for cholesterol measurement.
• Analytically Validated Methods: For values outside the AMI but within the EMI, samples were "value assigned using the analytically validated method."
• Known concentrations: For studies like linearity, spiked samples with known concentrations are used.

Therefore, the "experts" are the methodologists and laboratory professionals overseeing and validating the reference methods and the analytical validation processes. No specific number or qualification of clinical experts (e.g., radiologists) is relevant for establishing the ground truth for a quantitative chemistry assay.

This is a standalone performance evaluation of the assay itself, demonstrating its analytical accuracy, precision, and robustness.

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

The concept of "adjudication" (e.g., 2+1, 3+1 where multiple human readers agree or have a tie-breaker by an expert) is not applicable to this type of quantitative diagnostic assay. The results are numerical values generated by the automated instrument and reagents. Deviations or discrepancies would be resolved through re-testing, quality control, or investigation into instrument or reagent issues, rather than human expert adjudication of a "diagnosis."

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

No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. This is an in vitro diagnostic assay, not an AI-powered diagnostic imaging device or an AI assistant for human readers. Its output is a quantitative measurement of cholesterol, not an interpretation that requires human "reading" or decision support.

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

Yes, a standalone performance evaluation of the device (Cholesterol2 assay on the ARCHITECT c8000 System) was done. The studies described (reportable interval, precision, lower limits of measurement, linearity, interference, method comparison, tube type, dilution verification) all evaluate the analytical performance of the assay and instrument directly, without human interpretation as part of the primary outcome measure. The output is a numerical concentration of cholesterol.

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

The ground truth used for this quantitative assay primarily relies on:

• Reference Methods: Specifically, the Abell-Kendall reference method, which is considered the gold standard for cholesterol measurement and is used in CDC-Certified Cholesterol Reference Method Laboratory Networks (CRMLN). The device's traceability to this method is explicitly stated.
• Analytically Validated Methods: For verifying values in the extended measuring interval.
• Known Spiked Concentrations: For studies such as linearity and dilution verification, where samples are prepared with precisely known concentrations.

This is an analytical ground truth, not a clinical ground truth derived from pathology or patient outcomes.

8. The sample size for the training set

This document does not describe a typical "training set" in the context of machine learning or AI. This is a chemistry assay that uses reagents and enzymatic reactions, not an algorithm that is "trained" on data. Therefore, the concept of a training set as used in AI development is not applicable here. The assay's analytical characteristics are determined through standard laboratory validation studies.

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

As explained above, there is no "training set" in the AI sense for this device. The analytical accuracy and reliability are established through comparisons to certified reference methods and known standard concentrations, as described in point 7.

Ask a specific question about this device

For the quantitative in vitro determination of Cholesterol in serum and plasma. Cholesterol measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatments of disorders involving excess cholesterol in the blood and lipoprotein metabolism disorders.

The Cholesterol kit assay consists of ready to use reagent solutions.

CATALOGUE NUMBER: CH8310

R1. Reagent 4 x 20 ml

REAGENT COMPOSITION

Contents: R1. Reagent 4-Aminoantipyrine, Phenol, Peroxidase (E.C.1.11.1.7, Horse Radish, +25°C), Cholesterol esterase (E.C.3.1.1.13. Pseudomonas, +37°C), Cholesterol oxidase (E.C.1.1.3.6. Nocardia, +37°C), Sodium Azide

Concentrations in the Test: 0.25 mmol/l, 6.00 mmol/l, >=0.50 U/ml, >= 0.20 U/ml, >=0.10 U/ml, 0.09%

MATERIALS REQUIRED BUT NOT PROVIDED: Randox Assayed Multisera Level 2 (Cat. No. HN 1530) and Level 3 (Cat. No. HE 1532); 510(k) # K942458, Randox Calibration Serum Level 3 (Cat. No. CAL 2351); 510(k) # K053153, RX series Saline (Cat. No. SA 8396)

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information for the Randox Laboratories Ltd. Cholesterol device, based on the provided FDA 510(k) summary:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document doesn't explicitly state "acceptance criteria" for all tests in a single table, but rather presents the performance results of various analytical studies that demonstrate the device's capability. I've compiled the relevant performance data from the document into a table, noting the implicit acceptance measures (e.g., meeting CLSI guidelines, certain correlation coefficients, or imprecision percentages).

2. Sample Sizes and Data Provenance for the Test Set

• Precision/Reproducibility:
  • Controls: Not explicitly stated as "sample size" but data is reported for commercial control materials (717UE, 724UE, 952UN).
  • Patient Samples: 4 concentrations of unaltered human serum samples (3 diluted, 1 spiked for Linearity Pool, 1 Sensitivity Pool). Each sample run in 2 replicates per run, twice per day for 20 non-consecutive days, using 2 reagent lots on 2 RX Daytona plus systems.
  • Data Provenance: "unaltered human serum samples" implies human origin, likely retrospective for spiking/dilution. No country of origin is specified.
• Linearity/Assay Reportable Range:
  • Sample Size: 11 levels of samples covering the measuring range. Each level run in 5 replicates.
  • Data Provenance: "linearity samples" were prepared. Implies in-vitro prepared samples to cover the range, likely based on human serum/plasma.
• Detection Limit (LoD), Limit of Blank (LoB), Limit of Quantitation (LoQ):
  • Sample Size: LoD was based on 240 determinations with 4 low-level samples.
  • Data Provenance: Not specified, but generally prepared samples for low-level determination.
• Analytical Specificity (Interference):
  • Sample Size: Not explicitly stated for the number of interferent samples, but tested at Cholesterol concentrations of 150 mg/dl and 250 mg/dl for each interferent.
  • Data Provenance: Prepared samples spiked with interferents.
• Method Comparison with Predicate Device:
  • Sample Size: 107 serum patient samples.
  • Data Provenance: "serum patient samples" spanning 25 to 599 mg/dl. Retrospective. No country of origin specified.
• Matrix Comparison:
  • Sample Size (Lithium Heparin): Minimum of 54 matched patient sample pairs (serum vs. lithium heparin plasma).
  • Sample Size (Potassium 2 EDTA): Minimum of 50 matched patient sample pairs (serum vs. potassium 2 EDTA plasma).
  • Data Provenance: "Patient samples were drawn in matched pairs". Retrospective from human subjects. No country of origin specified.

3. Number of Experts and Qualifications for Ground Truth for the Test Set

This device is an in vitro diagnostic (IVD) for quantitative measurement of cholesterol. The "ground truth" for such devices is established by precise laboratory reference methods or established commercially available controls and calibrators with known values.

• No "experts" in the sense of radiologists or pathologists establishing ground truth as would be the case for imaging devices.
• Ground truth is established by:
  • Reference materials (e.g., NIST 1952a for the calibrators, mentioned under traceability).
  • Established analytical methods used by the predicate device and in clinical laboratories.
  • CLSI guidelines for experimental design and data analysis.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Not applicable for this type of quantitative IVD device. Adjudication methods (like 2+1, 3+1) are typically used for qualitative or semi-quantitative assessments, especially in imaging or pathology, where human expert discrepancy resolution is needed. For quantitative chemical measurements, the ground truth is often numerical and objectively determined.

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

No. This is an in vitro diagnostic device for chemical analysis of cholesterol, not an imaging or qualitative assessment device involving human readers. Therefore, an MRMC study is not relevant.

6. Standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) Study

Yes, the entire performance evaluation presented is a standalone study of the device (Cholesterol assay on the RX Daytona plus system). The device performs the analytical measurement autonomously once the sample is loaded. The studies demonstrate the analytical performance of the device itself.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

The ground truth for the performance studies is multi-faceted:

• Reference Materials: Randox Calibration Serum Level 3 is traceable to Cholesterol reference material NIST 1952a. This is a primary ground truth for calibration and accuracy.
• Predicate Device: For method comparison studies, the predicate device (Randox Cholesterol reagent, K923504) serves as a comparative ground truth, aiming to demonstrate substantial equivalence rather than absolute biological truth.
• CLSI Guidelines: The studies adhere to CLSI (Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute) guidelines (EP5-A2 for precision, EP6-A for linearity, EP17-A2 for detection limits, EP9-A2 for method comparison), which represent an industry-accepted "ground truth" for how these analytical performance characteristics should be determined and evaluated.
• Prepared Samples: For linearity, sensitivity, detection limits, and interference, samples were prepared to known concentrations or spiked with known substances to create specific "ground truth" scenarios.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

There is no mention of a "training set" in the context of machine learning or AI, as this device is a traditional in vitro diagnostic reagent system, not an AI/ML-based device.

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

Not applicable, as there is no training set for an AI/ML algorithm in this context.

Ask a specific question about this device

For the quantitative measurement of triglycerides in serum. Triglycerides measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with diabetes mellitus. nephrosis, liver obstruction and other diseases involving lipid metabolism or various endocrine disorders. For in-vitro use only.

For the quantitative measurement of Total cholesterol in serum. Cholesterol measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of disorders involving excess cholesterol in the blood and lipoprotein metabolism disorders. For in-vitro use only.

Not Found

This document is a 510(k) premarket notification acceptance letter from the FDA for medical devices: "Cholesterol Oxidase JAS" and "Glycerol Kinase Triglycerides." This type of document does not contain the detailed study information, acceptance criteria, or performance data typically found in a clinical study report or a summary of safety and effectiveness (SSE). The 510(k) essentially states that the FDA has reviewed the submission and found the device substantially equivalent to a legally marketed predicate device, allowing it to be marketed.

Therefore, I cannot extract the requested information from the provided text because it is not present in this regulatory acceptance letter. This document is not a study report.

Ask a specific question about this device

Ask a specific question about this device

The Cholinesterase Gen.2 Test System is an in vitro test for the quantitative determination of the catalytic activity of cholinesterase (EC 3.1.1.8; acylcholine acylhydrolase) in serum and plasma. Measurements obtained by this device are used in the diagnosis and treatment of cholinesterase inhibition disorders.

The Cholinesterase Gen.2 Test System is an in vitro test for the quantitative determination of the catalytic activity of cholinesterase in serum and plasma. The test is based on the butyrylthiocholine method. Cholinesterase catalyzes the hydrolysis of butyrylthiocholine to thiocoline and butyrate. Thiocholine reduces the yellow substrate hexacyanoferrate III to the almost colorless hexacyanoferrate II. The decrease in color is measured spectrophotometrically. The calibrator is the Calibrator for automated systems (C.f.a.s; and the recommended control materials are Precinorm U or Precinorm U Plus; and Precipath U or Precipath U plus.

The provided text describes the Cholinesterase Gen.2 test system, a device for in vitro quantitative determination of cholinesterase catalytic activity. The submission compares this new device to a predicate device (Cholinesterase Test System, K951595) to establish substantial equivalence.

Here's a breakdown of the requested information based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The submission primarily focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device, rather than explicit "acceptance criteria" against pre-defined performance goals for a new medical device. However, performance characteristics are presented, which implicitly serve as the basis for demonstrating equivalence.

Study Proving Device Meets Acceptance Criteria:

The "study" refers to the entire submission and the performance data presented within it, which are used to show the new device is substantially equivalent to the predicate. The "Method comparison" section specifically details a direct comparison study.

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance

The sample size for the method comparison (test set) is not explicitly stated. The provenance of the data (country of origin, retrospective/prospective) is also not specified.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts

This information is not applicable and not provided. The study compares the performance of two in vitro diagnostic devices measuring an analyte, not an interpretation of images or clinical diagnoses by human experts.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

This information is not applicable and not provided. The study involves quantitative measurements by automated systems, not subjective assessments requiring adjudication.

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

This information is not applicable. This is an in vitro diagnostic device for quantitative measurement, not an AI-assisted diagnostic imaging device or an interpretation task by human readers.

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

The context is an in vitro diagnostic test system, which inherently operates as a standalone algorithm/system to produce a quantitative result. The results are then used by a human clinician for diagnosis and treatment. The performance metrics reported (precision, measuring range, detection limit, method comparison) represent the standalone performance of the Cholinesterase Gen.2 Test System.

7. The type of ground truth used

The "ground truth" for this type of quantitative diagnostic device is established by comparison to a reference method or a legally marketed predicate device, and through fundamental analytical validation methods.

• For Method Comparison: The predicate device ("Integra cholinesterase (granulate)") serves as the comparative standard.
• For Traceability/Standardization: The device is "Standardized against a reference method using a manual application of the butyrylthiocholine/hexacyanoferrate (III) method on a photometer and the published molar absorptivity of hexacyanoferrate (III)." This manual reference method acts as a form of ground truth for calibration and accuracy.

8. The sample size for the training set

This information is not provided. For this type of IVD, a "training set" in the machine learning sense is not typically applicable. Development involves optimizing reagents and analytical conditions, and validation involves characterizing performance.

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

This information is not applicable as there is no mention of a "training set" in the context of an AI/ML algorithm. The "standardization" and "traceability" sections describe how the device's measurements are referenced to established analytical methodologies.

Ask a specific question about this device

Cholestech LDX high sensitivity C-Reactive Protein (hs-CRP) is an in vitro diagnostic test for the quantitative determination of CRP in whole blood or serum. Measurement of CRP is useful as an aid in the detection and evaluation of infection, tissue injury, inflammatory disorders and associated diseases.

The Cholestech LDX System combines immunoassay and solid-phase technology to measure CRP. Samples used for testing can be whole blood from a fingerstick (collected in a lithium heparin coated capillary tube), venous whole blood or serum. The sample is applied to a Cholestech LDX hs-CRP cassette. The cassette is then placed into the Cholestech LDX Analyzer where a unique system on the cassette separates the plasma from the blood cells. The resultant color in the reaction is measured by reflectance photometry. A brown magnetic stripe on each cassette contains the calibration information required for the Cholestech LDX Analyzer to convert the reflectance reading to the CRP concentration in mg/L.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets them, based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Note on Acceptance Criteria: The document does not explicitly state numerical acceptance criteria for slope, y-intercept, and "r" values. However, for a device claiming substantial equivalence to a predicate, the expectation is that these metrics demonstrate a strong correlation and agreement with the predicate. The reported values of r (correlation coefficient) being close to 1 (0.975, 0.976, 0.981) and slopes being close to 1 (1.01, 1.06, 1.08) with small y-intercepts (-0.02, 0.07, 0.22) indicate good agreement and likely meet the implicit acceptance criteria for substantial equivalence. The assay range and interference criteria are explicitly stated and met. Precision values are reported but no explicit acceptance thresholds are provided.

2. Sample Size and Data Provenance

• Test Set Sample Sizes:
  • Accuracy (Serum vs. Predicate): 70 matched serum samples
  • Accuracy (Whole Blood vs. Predicate): 76 whole blood samples (both venous and fingerstick)
  • Precision: 2 levels of controls (Low and High) and one serum sample (6.5 mg/L). Each control was tested in duplicate, twice a day, over 20 days (total 80 replicates per level).
  • Hematocrit Tolerance & Interference: No specific sample sizes provided, but tested with "evaluated levels" of endogenous substances.
• Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated, but clinical studies for such devices typically involve samples from a geographically diverse patient population. The document does not specify country of origin or whether the data was retrospective or prospective. Given the nature of a 510(k) submission for an in vitro diagnostic, it is generally assumed to be prospective clinical study data collected for the purpose of demonstrating device performance.

3. Number of Experts and Qualifications for Ground Truth (Test Set)

• Number of Experts: Not applicable. This study does not involve expert readers assessing images or clinical cases to establish ground truth.
• Qualifications of Experts: Not applicable.

4. Adjudication Method (Test Set)

• Adjudication Method: Not applicable. This study does not involve expert adjudication as it is a quantitative diagnostic test compared to a predicate device. The "ground truth" is established by the predicate device's measurement.

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

• Was it done? No. This is not an imaging AI device that relies on human interpretation. It's an in vitro diagnostic test that provides a quantitative measurement.

6. Standalone (Algorithm Only) Performance Study

• Was it done? Yes. The entire accuracy study comparing the Cholestech LDX hs-CRP device to the Dade Behring N high sensitivity CRP test is a standalone performance study. The device's output (CRP concentration) is directly compared to the predicate's output. There is no human-in-the-loop component in the measurement itself.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

• Ground Truth Type: Predicate device measurement. The Dade Behring N High Sensitivity CRP test on the BN100 (K991385) is used as the reference standard to establish the "ground truth" for the accuracy study. This is a common approach for demonstrating substantial equivalence for new in vitro diagnostic devices.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

• Training Set Sample Size: Not applicable. This device is an in vitro diagnostic immunoassay, not a machine learning or AI algorithm that requires a "training set" in the conventional sense. The device's performance is determined by its inherent chemical and optical properties, and its "calibration information" is encoded on the magnetic stripe of each cassette, not learned from a dataset.

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

• Ground Truth Establishment (Training Set): Not applicable, as there is no "training set" in the context of this device. The device's calibration is factory-set and encoded on each cassette.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Cholestech LDX aspartate aminotransferase (AST) test is for the in vitro quantitative determination of AST in whole blood or serum on the Cholestech LDX Analyzer. AST measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of certain liver diseases (e.g., viral hepatitis and cirrhosis), and heart diseases.

The Cholestech LDX System combines enzymatic methodology and solid-phase technology to measure AST. Samples used for testing can be whole blood from a fingerstick (collected in a lithium heparin coated capillary tube), venous whole blood or serum. The sample is applied to a Cholestech LDX AST cassette. The cassette is then placed into the Cholestech LDX Analyzer where a unique system on the cassette separates the plasma from the blood cells. The plasma flows to both sides of the cassette and is transferred to the AST reaction pad. The Cholestech LDX Analyzer measures Aspartate aminotransferase by an enzymatic method based on the method formulation of Katsuyama et al. 12- Aspartic acid aminotransferase catalyzes the transfer of amino groups from L-Aspartic acid to alpha-Ketoglutarate producing oxaloacetate and glutamate. Oxaloacetate Decarboxylase converts the Oxaloacetate to Pyruvate by the removal of CO2. Pyruvate oxidase, in the presence of oxygen, oxidizes the pyruvate to acetylphosphate and hydrogen peroxide. In a reaction catalyzed by horseradish peroxidase, the peroxide reacts with an indicator dye to form a blue color at a rate proportional to the AST concentration of the sample. The resultant color in the reaction is measured by reflectance photometry. A brown magnetic stripe on each cassette contains the calibration required for the Cholestech LDX Analyzer to convert the reflectance reading to the AST concentration in U/L. 37°C.

The Cholestech LDX aspartate aminotransferase (AST) Test, a colorimetric assay for the determination of AST, has been found substantially equivalent to the Synchron CX® AST system. The device uses enzymatic methodology and solid-phase technology to measure AST in whole blood or serum.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The submission does not explicitly state pre-defined acceptance criteria with pass/fail thresholds for each performance metric. Instead, it presents performance data for accuracy, precision, and linearity, which are implicitly compared against the performance characteristics of the predicate device (Synchron CX® AST) and laboratory standards.

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

• Accuracy (LDX AST vs. Synchron CX AST): 109 matched serum samples.
• Accuracy (LDX AST: Venous Whole Blood vs. Serum): 46 matched samples.
• Accuracy (LDX AST: Fingerstick Whole Blood vs. Serum): 21 matched samples.
• Precision: 2 levels of controls tested in duplicate, twice a day, over 20 days (80 replicates per level). One whole blood sample tested with the same protocol (80 replicates).

Data Provenance: The document does not specify the country of origin for the data or explicitly state whether the studies were retrospective or prospective. Given the nature of a 510(k) submission for a new device, it is highly likely that these were prospective studies conducted in a controlled environment as part of the device's validation. No specific patient demographics or disease states are detailed beyond the general "diagnosis and treatment of certain liver diseases (e.g., viral hepatitis and cirrhosis), and heart diseases."

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

N/A. This is an in vitro diagnostic device for quantitative determination of a biomarker (AST). The "ground truth" for the test set is established by comparative measurements against a legally marketed predicate device (Synchron CX® AST system) or by internal comparison to reference methods/sample types within the new device's system. It does not involve human expert interpretation of images or clinical assessments to establish a ground truth in the way medical imaging AI devices do. Therefore, no experts for ground truth establishment are applicable in this context.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

N/A. This is not applicable as the test set involves quantitative measurements against a comparator device and internal comparisons, not subjective assessments requiring expert adjudication.

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

N/A. This is an in vitro diagnostic device, not a medical imaging AI device requiring human reader interpretation or multi-reader studies. The device provides a quantitative measurement, and its effectiveness is determined by its analytical performance metrics (accuracy, precision, linearity) compared to established methods.

6. Standalone Performance Study

Yes, a standalone performance study was done in the sense that the Cholestech LDX AST device's performance was evaluated independently through precision studies, interference testing, hematocrit tolerance, and then compared to a predicate device (Synchron CX AST) as well as within its own system for different sample types. The reported accuracy metrics directly compare the LDX AST to the predicate and also compare results from various sample types processed by the LDX AST itself (venous whole blood, fingerstick whole blood vs. serum). This represents the algorithm's (device's) performance in generating the quantitative AST value.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

The primary ground truth used for performance evaluation is comparative measurement against a legally marketed predicate device (Synchron CX® AST system) for accuracy. Additionally, internal comparisons of different sample types (venous whole blood, fingerstick whole blood) against serum samples measured by the same device serve as a verification of consistency and accuracy across intended sample matrices. The precision studies use control materials with known or established AST levels.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not specify a separate training set or its sample size. For in vitro diagnostic (IVD) devices like this, the development process might involve initial experimentation and optimization, but the "training set" concept common in machine learning for image analysis or risk prediction is typically not directly applicable in the same way. Performance data presented relates to validation studies, not necessarily a distinct "training set" as understood in AI/ML contexts.

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

N/A. As mentioned above, the concept of a "training set" with established ground truth as it applies to AI/ML is not explicitly detailed or typically relevant for this type of quantitative IVD submission in the same manner. The device's methodology is based on established enzymatic reactions, and its parameters would likely have been optimized during development rather than "trained" on a dataset with a defined ground truth in a machine learning sense.

Ask a specific question about this device