Search Results

The Diamedix Is-anti-dsDNA an Enzyme Immunoassay (EIA) for the quantitative detection of IgG antibodies to double-stranded (ds) DNA in human serum as an aid in the diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). These reagents can be used either manually or in conjunction with the MAGO® Plus Automated EIA Processor.

The Is-anti-dsDNA Test Kit System is an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for the detection and quantitation of IgG antibodies to DNA in human serum.

Here's a summary of the acceptance criteria and the study details for the Is-anti-dsDNA Test System based on the provided document:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance

The acceptance criteria for the Diamedix Is-anti-dsDNA Test System are implied by its performance in comparison to a commercially available anti-dsDNA ELISA test and its clinical sensitivity and specificity in characterized sera. The reported device performance is summarized below:

Note: For the Single Point Calibration method, the Relative Sensitivity was 99.1% (95.1-100.0% CI), Relative Specificity was 92.6% (88.8-95.4% CI), and Overall Agreement was 94.7% (91.7-96.6% CI). Precision for positive samples with Single Point Calibration also showed comparable CVs.

Study Details

1. Test Set Sample Size and Data Provenance:

   • Relative Sensitivity and Specificity: 413 samples. These samples comprised 200 sera from normal blood donors, 209 sera from clinical patients with either a diagnosis of SLE or another autoimmune disease, and 4 sera from patients whose status was unknown. The country of origin is not explicitly stated but implies a clinical laboratory setting. The data appears to be retrospective as it involves pre-existing samples.
   • Clinical Sensitivity and Specificity: 200 normal samples, 70 sera from patients with a diagnosis of SLE, and 138 sera from patients with suspected autoimmune disease. Data provenance is similar to the relative sensitivity/specificity study – clinical patient samples, likely retrospective.
   • Precision: Six sera and kit positive and negative controls were assayed in triplicate in two runs per day.
   • Linearity: The WHO Reference preparation, the kit 200 IU/ml Standard, and an in-house reference 200 IU/ml Standard were serially diluted and tested.

2. Number of Experts and Qualifications: Not specified in the provided text. The diagnosis of SLE and other autoimmune diseases for the clinical samples would have been established by medical professionals, likely rheumatologists or other specialists.

3. Adjudication Method: Not specified. The determination of patient diagnoses (SLE, autoimmune disease, normal) would have relied on established clinical diagnostic criteria, but the specific adjudication method for the samples used in this study is not detailed. Equivocal and "ONS" (Optimal Noise Suppression, likely meaning "Out of Specification" or similar, though not explicitly defined) samples were excluded from calculations in the relative performance study, and equivocal results were excluded from calculations in the clinical performance study.

4. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study: No, an MRMC study was not done. This device is an in-vitro diagnostic (ELISA test) for detecting antibodies, not an imaging or diagnostic AI device that typically involves human readers and AI assistance.

5. Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the Loop) Performance: Yes, the performance metrics reported are for the standalone device (the Is-anti-dsDNA Test System) either used manually or on the MAGO Plus Automated EIA Processor. There is no human-in-the-loop component described for interpreting the assay results beyond reading the optical density and calculating antibody levels.

6. Type of Ground Truth Used:

   • For Relative Performance: The ground truth was established by comparison to another "commercially available anti-dsDNA ELISA test with traceability to the WHO Standard." This is a comparative ground truth based on an established reference assay.
   • For Clinical Performance: The ground truth was based on "diagnosis of SLE" and "diagnosis of suspected autoimmune disease" for patient groups, and "normal samples." This implies clinical diagnosis as the ground truth.
   • For Precision/Linearity: Ground truth is intrinsic to the assay (known concentrations, internal controls, reference standards).

7. Training Set Sample Size: Not applicable. This document describes a traditional ELISA diagnostic kit, not a machine learning or AI model that requires a training set in that sense. The "training" and optimization of the assay would have been part of the product development and validation process, but it's not described as a distinct training set for an algorithm.

8. How Ground Truth for Training Set was Established: Not applicable, as it's not an AI/ML device with a training set. The assay's performance characteristics (calibration, cut-offs) would have been established using well-defined standards and reference materials during its development.

Ask a specific question about this device