Search Results

The Cryptococcal Antigen Lateral Flow Assay (CrAg LFA) is an immunochromatographic test system for the qualitative or semi-quantitative detection of capsular polysaccharide antigens of Cryptococcus species complex (Cryptococcus neoformans and Cryptococcus gattii) in serum and cerebral spinal fluid (CSF).

The CrAg Lateral Flow Assay is a prescription-use laboratory assay, which can aid in the diagnosis of cryptococcosis.

The CrAg Lateral Flow Assay is a dipstick sandwich immunochromatographic assay, which detects cryptococcal antigen in serum and CSF. For the qualitative procedure, specimens are diluted 1:2 in 1x Specimen Diluent and analyzed. For the semi-quantitative procedure, specimens are diluted 1:5 in 1x Specimen Diluent followed by 1:2 serial dilutions. All dilutions are then analyzed as in the qualitative procedure. Specimens are placed into an appropriate reservoir, such as a test tube or microtiter plate, and the lateral flow device is then placed into the reservoir allowing the specimen to come into contact with the test membrane. The test uses specimen wicking to capture gold-conjugated, anti-cryptococcal monoclonal antibodies and gold-conjugated control antibodies that are deposited onto a membrane. If cryptococcal antigen is present in the specimen, it binds to the gold-conjugated, anti-cryptococcal antibodies. The gold-labeled antibody-antigen complex will continue to wick up the membrane where it will interact with the Test Line (T). The Test Line is immobilized anti-cryptococcal monoclonal antibodies. If the specimen contains cryptococcal antigen, a sandwich is created with the gold-labeled antibodies and the immobilized antibodies, causing a visible line to develop at the test line site (T). If proper flow occurs and the reagents are reactive at the time of use, the wicking of any specimen, positive or negative, will cause the gold-conjugated control goat IgG antibody to move to the Control Line (C) which is immobilized bovine anti-goat IgG antibody. The immobilized anti-goat antibody will bind to the gold-conjugated goat IgG Control antibody and will cause a visible line to develop (C). A positive test result will create two lines, while a negative test result will create one line (Figure 1). If the control line fails to develop a line, then the test is not valid.

Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding the acceptance criteria and study for the CrAg Lateral Flow Assay:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Note on Acceptance Criteria: The document does not explicitly state numerical acceptance criteria (e.g., "sensitivity must be >95%"). However, it implicitly aims for "very high sensitivity and specificity" based on the background information and the excellent results presented. The repeatability and analytical sensitivity are reported as measured, indicating the performance achieved. The high dose hook effect is identified as a limitation rather than a criterion met.

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

• Test Set Sample Size (CSF for Method Comparison):
  • Positive (Culture/India Ink): 65 specimens
  • Negative (Culture/India Ink): 99 specimens
  • Total: 164 specimens
• Data Provenance: The studies contained a mix of both prospective and retrospective specimens. The country of origin is not specified, but the device is indicated for use in the US (implied by FDA submission).

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

• The document does not specify the number of experts or their qualifications for establishing the ground truth (Culture/India Ink).
• For the repeatability and reproducibility study (CSF), "five different operators" across "three different sites" were involved. Their specific qualifications are not detailed beyond "internal" and "US reference/hospital laboratory" personnel.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• The document does not describe any adjudication method for the test set. The "gold standard" (culture and/or India Ink) is presented as the definitive truth.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done, and Effect Size

• No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not explicitly described in this 510(k) summary. The study focuses on the standalone performance of the CrAg LFA compared to a gold standard, not on the improvement of human readers with or without AI assistance (as this is a point-of-care type diagnostic, not an AI-assisted interpretation tool for images).

6. If a Standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) Was Done

• Yes, a standalone performance study was conducted. The CrAg Lateral Flow Assay is a rapid diagnostic test where the result (presence/absence of lines) is directly interpreted. The reported sensitivity and specificity values represent the performance of the device itself (algorithm only, in a sense, as it's a defined chemical reaction leading to a visible outcome) against the gold standard. While a human reads the lines, the core performance metrics are about the device's ability to detect the antigen.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• For the method comparison study (CSF), the ground truth used was "gold standard for the diagnosis of cryptococcosis (culture and/or India Ink)."

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• The document does not specify a training set sample size. This is common for lateral flow assays, which are typically developed and optimized through laboratory analytical studies rather than machine learning models that require distinct training sets. The studies described are primarily performance validation studies.

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

• Since a distinct "training set" in the context of machine learning is not mentioned as such, the method of establishing ground truth for development/optimization would likely involve spiking known concentrations of cryptococcal antigen into mock specimens (as seen in the analytical sensitivity sections) and testing against other validated methods or known positive/negative samples. The document refers to "mock CSF that was negative by the IMMY Latex-Cryptococcal Antigen Detection System" for repeatability/reproducibility.

Ask a specific question about this device