Search Results

The Dimension Vista® High-Sensitivity Troponin I (TNIH) assay is for in vitro diagnostic use in the quantitative measurement of cardiac troponin I in human plasma using the Dimension Vista system. The assay can be used to aid in the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

The Dimension Vista® TNIH assay is a homogeneous, sandwich chemiluminescent immunoassay based on LOCI® technology. The LOCI reagents include two synthetic bead reagents and two biotinylated anti-cardiac troponin I monoclonal antibody fragments. The first bead reagent (Sensibeads) is coated with streptavidin and contains photosensitizer dye. The second bead reagent (Chemibeads) is coated with a third anticardiac troponin I monoclonal antibody and contains chemiluminescent dye. Sample is incubated with Chemibeads and biotinylated antibodies to form bead-cardiac troponin Ibiotinylated antibody sandwiches. Sensibeads are added and bind to the biotin to form bead-pair immunocomplexes. Illumination of the complex at 680 nm generates singlet oxygen from Sensibeads which diffuses into the Chemibeads, triggering a chemiluminescent reaction. The resulting signal is measured at 612 nm and is a direct function of the cardiac troponin I concentration in the sample. Lithium heparin plasma specimens may be used. The reagent is stored unopened at 2 – 8 °C, is stable sealed on system for 30 days and opened on the system for 7 days. Calibration is performed every 30 days for a reagent lot.

The provided document describes the Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Dimension Vista High-Sensitivity Troponin I (TNIH) Assay. The following information regarding its acceptance criteria and a study proving its performance is extracted:

Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Study Information

1. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance:

   • 99th Percentile Determination: 2021 apparently healthy individuals from the United States (1017 female, 1004 male) for lithium heparin plasma. Provenance is prospective from the United States.
   • Clinical Performance Study: Approximately 2500 subjects in lithium heparin plasma. Specimens collected at 29 emergency departments across the United States. Provenance is prospective.

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

   • 99th Percentile Determination: No explicit mention of experts establishing ground truth for healthy individuals; values were statistically determined.
   • Clinical Performance Study: Panels of certified cardiologists and emergency physicians. The exact number of experts per panel is not specified, but panels are plural.

3. Adjudication method for the test set:

   • For the clinical performance study, subject diagnoses were adjudicated by panels of certified cardiologists and emergency physicians according to the Third Universal Definition Of Myocardial Infarction - a consensus guideline endorsed by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), the American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF), the American Heart Association (AHA), and the World Heart Federation (WHF). This indicates a consensus-based adjudication process guided by established clinical criteria. The exact number of clinicians per panel or specific rules (e.g., 2+1) are not provided, but the use of "panels" implies multiple reviewers.

4. 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, a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not done. This study describes the performance of an in vitro diagnostic assay for measuring cardiac troponin I, not an AI or human-assisted diagnostic device.

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

   • Yes, this is a standalone study. The device is an in vitro diagnostic assay (a test kit for laboratory use) and its performance is evaluated directly. There is no AI or software algorithm being assessed for human-in-the-loop performance. Its output (troponin I concentration) is then used by clinicians for diagnosis.

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

   • 99th Percentile Determination: Ground truth for healthy reference ranges was established by statistical analysis (non-parametric method) of values from apparently healthy individuals.
   • Clinical Performance Study: Ground truth for Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI) diagnosis was established by expert consensus based on the Third Universal Definition Of Myocardial Infarction by panels of certified cardiologists and emergency physicians. This combines clinical presentation, ECG changes, and biomarker elevation (including troponin, but adjudicated independently from the device under test).

7. The sample size for the training set:

   • No training set is mentioned in the context of machine learning or AI, as this is an in vitro diagnostic assay that reports quantitative measurements. The "training" in this context refers to the development and optimization of the assay's chemical reagents and detection method.

8. How the ground truth for the training set was established:

   • Not applicable, as this is not a machine learning model with a distinct training set and corresponding ground truth. The assay's performance characteristics (e.g., LoB, LoD, LoQ, linearity, precision, interference) are established through analytical studies using reference materials, spiked samples, and native clinical samples, as detailed in the "Summary of Performance Testing" section.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Dimension Vista® LOCI Total Testosterone Flex® reagent cartridge is an in vitro diagnostic test for the quantitative measurement of total testosterone in human serum and plasma on the Dimension Vista® System. Measurements of testosterone are used in the diagnosis and treatment of disorders involving the male sex hormones (androgens), including primary and secondary hypogonadism, delayed or precocious puberty, impotence in males, and in females, hirsutism (excessive hair), and virilization (masculinization) due to tumors, polycystic ovaries, and adrenogenital syndromes.

The Dimension Vista® Testosterone Calibrator is an in vitro diagnostic product for the calibration of the Total Testosterone (TTST) assay on the Dimension Vista® System.

The Dimension Vista® LOCI Total Testosterone Flex® Reagent Cartridge (TTST) method is a homogeneous, competitive chemiluminescent immunoassay based on LOCI® technology. LOCI reagents include two synthetic bead reagents and labeled testosterone antibody. The first bead reagent (Chemibeads) is coated with a testosterone analog and contains a chemiluminescent dye. The second bead reagent (Sensibeads) is coated with streptavidin and contains photosensitive dye. Chemibeads and labeled testosterone antibody are added sequentially to the reaction vessel. Testosterone from the patient sample competes with the testosterone-analog-chemibead for a limited amount of labeled testosterone antibody. Sensibeads are then added and bind to the biotinylated portion of the labeled testosterone antibody to form bead pair immunocomplexes. Illumination of the complex by light at 680 nm generates singlet oxygen from the Sensibeads which diffuses to the Chemibeads triggering a chemiluminescent reaction. The resulting signal is measured at 612 nm and is an inverse function of the concentration of total testosterone in the sample.

Dimension Vista® LOCI Total Testosterone reagents are liquid and contained in reagent wells of a Flex® reagent cartridge. There are twelve (12) wells in each Flex® reagent cartridge. A barcode label on the Flex® reagent cartridge identifies the test method, lot number, expiration date, and fixed number of tests for which the Flex® reagent cartridge can supply reagent. There are eighty (80) tests per Flex® reagent cartridge and four (4) Flex® reagent cartridges per carton.

The Dimension Vista® Testosterone Calibrator (TTST CAL) is a lyophilized human serum based calibrator set containing testosterone and preservatives. Within each set of twelve (12) vials there are two (2) 1.0 mL amber glass vials for each calibrator level. There are six (6) calibrator levels labeled A, B, C, D, E, and F, which span the assay range. Each glass vial is closed with a plug and a color coded plastic cap. Vials are stored at 2-8°C. Lyophilized calibrators are reconstituted with reagent grade water using the steps listed in the instructions for use (IFU).

The provided document describes the Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Inc. Dimension Vista® LOCI Total Testosterone Flex® reagent cartridge and its associated calibrator, seeking substantial equivalence to predicate devices. The study focuses on the performance characteristics of the new device.

Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and study details based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not explicitly state pre-defined "acceptance criteria" in a quantitative, pass/fail format for each performance characteristic. Instead, it presents the results of various performance studies and implies that these results demonstrate substantial equivalence to the predicate device. The predicate device itself and recognized CLSI guidelines serve as implicit benchmarks for acceptable performance.

However, based on the provided data, we can infer some targets or observed ranges that indicate acceptable performance. The "Reported Device Performance" column reflects the results of the studies described.

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

• Method Comparison: 120 serum samples were initially measured. After removing 7 samples (6 below range, 1 above range), 113 samples were used for regression analysis.
  • Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated but clinical samples were used, likely from a patient population within the US given the submission to the FDA. The study was performed at Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics' Newark, DE site. This is a retrospective analysis in the sense that samples were collected and then tested.
• Precision: Serum pools, a plasma pool, and commercial controls were used.
  • Sample Size: Tested in singlicate from two independent cups twice a day for 20 days. This implies 40 measurements per sample type.
  • Data Provenance: Not specified, but likely proprietary pools or commercial controls. Study performed at Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics' Newark, DE site.
• Analytical Measuring Range/Linearity: High and low pools for serum, lithium heparin, sodium heparin, and EDTA samples.
  • Sample Size: Each level was assayed N=5 replicates. The number of distinct pools (high/low) is not specified for each sample type, but implied to be sufficient to cover the range.
  • Data Provenance: Not specified, likely internal laboratory prepared pools. Study performed at Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics' Newark, DE site.
• Limits of Detection and Quantitation: Testosterone free serum samples and low testosterone serum samples.
  • Sample Size: Not explicitly stated for LoB/LoD, but LoQ was determined based on precision data (implied 40 measurements).
  • Data Provenance: Not specified, likely internal laboratory prepared samples.
• Interferences: Serum samples with various interfering substances spiked in.
  • Sample Size: Not specified per substance, typically multiple replicates at each concentration.
  • Data Provenance: Not specified, likely internal laboratory prepared samples.
• Heterophilic Antibody Interference: Individual human serum samples with low and high endogenous HAMA.
  • Sample Size: Not specified, but implied individual samples were tested.
  • Data Provenance: Not specified.
• Cross-reactivity: Spiked test samples.
  • Sample Size: Not specified per cross-reactant, typically multiple replicates at each concentration and testosterone level.
  • Data Provenance: Not specified, likely internal laboratory prepared samples.
• Serum and Plasma Equivalency: Sixty (60) matched sets of fresh draws.
  • Sample Size: 60 matched sets. One sample removed, so 59 sets for regression analysis.
  • Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated, but implies prospectively collected clinical samples.
• Expected Values (Reference Interval):
  • Adult Males ≤50 years old: 174 samples
  • Adult Males >50 years old: 174 samples
  • Pre-menopausal females: 174 samples
  • Post-menopausal females: 174 samples
  • Pediatric (various age/gender/Tanner stages): Ranges from 20 to 125 samples per group.
  • Data Provenance: Not specified, but likely from healthy volunteers (prospective) or carefully selected retrospective samples to establish reference ranges for different demographics.

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

• Ground Truth for Method Comparison: The reference method was the CDC Isotope dilution/liquid chromatographic-tandem mass spectrometry (CDC ID/LC-MS/MS). This is a highly accurate and precise analytical method that by its nature serves as its own "expert" or gold standard. It does not rely on human interpretation or consensus for ground truth.

• Ground Truth for Reference Intervals: The reference intervals were established using the "robust" method or non-parametric methods described in CLSI EP28-A3c, applied to samples from healthy individuals. The "ground truth" here is the biological range observed in these populations, rather than an expert interpretation of the result from a single patient. The selection of "healthy" individuals likely involves criteria established by medical professionals, but this is not detailed as a panel of experts.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

This type of in-vitro diagnostic device (immunoassay for a quantitative measurement) does not typically involve an adjudication method in the way medical imaging AI devices do (e.g., 2+1 radiologist review). The output is a quantitative value. Agreement is assessed statistically against a reference method or through precision studies, not through expert consensus on the device's output for individual cases.

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

No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. This type of study is relevant for diagnostic devices where human readers interpret results, and the AI system acts as an aid to improve their performance. This document concerns a fully automated in-vitro diagnostic immunoassay which provides a numerical result directly, rather than an image or complex data needing human interpretation.

6. Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Study

Yes, the entire submission and the performance studies detailed (Method Comparison, Precision, Linearity, Limits of Detection/Quantitation, Interferences, Cross-reactivity, Serum/Plasma Equivalency, Reference Intervals) effectively describe the standalone performance of the algorithm, as it's an automated device that provides quantitative results without human interpretation in the determination of the final value. The performance evaluation focuses on the analytical performance of the Dimension Vista® LOCI Total Testosterone Flex® reagent cartridge and system itself.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

• Method Comparison: CDC Isotope dilution/liquid chromatographic-tandem mass spectrometry (CDC ID/LC-MS/MS) (a highly accurate reference analytical method, considered a gold standard).
• Precision, Linearity, LoD/LoQ, Interferences, Cross-reactivity, Serum/Plasma Equivalency: These studies rely on known concentrations (e.g., spiked samples, control materials, or reference method values from the method comparison) to establish the accuracy and reliability of the device's measurements.
• Expected Values (Reference Interval): Data from well-defined populations of healthy individuals, analyzed using statistical methods (non-parametric or "Robust" method).

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

The provided document does not mention a training set in the context of machine learning or AI algorithms as the primary development method for the immunoassay. This device is based on a "homogeneous, competitive chemiluminescent immunoassay based on LOCI® technology" (a biochemical detection method), not a software algorithm that learns from a training dataset in the typical AI sense. The development of such an assay involves extensive biochemical optimization, reagent formulation, and analytical validation.

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

As no training set (in the AI/ML context) is discussed, this question is not applicable. The "ground truth" for developing this type of immunoassay would involve precise chemical standards and assays to characterize reagent performance and assay kinetics during R&D.

Ask a specific question about this device

Dimension Vista® MMB Assay:
The MMB method is an in vitro diagnostic test for the quantitative measurement of mass creatine kinase MB isoenzyme in human serum and plasma on the Dimension Vista® System for confirmation of acute myocardial infarction.

Dimension Vista® 1500 System:
The Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Dimension Vista® 1500 System is an in vitro diagnostic device intended to duplicate manual analytical procedures such as pipetting, mixing, and measuring spectral intensities to determine a variety of analytes in human body fluids. Dimension Vista® chemical and immunochemical applications use photometric, turbidimetric, chemiluminescence, nephelometric and integrated ion-selective multisensor technology for clinical use.

Dimension Vista® MMB Assay:
The MMB method is a homogeneous sandwich chemiluminescent immunoassay based on LOCI® technology. LOC10 reagents include two synthetic bead reagents and a biotinylated antimass creatine kinase MB isoenzvme monoclonal antibody fragment. The first bead reagent (Sensibeads) is coated with streptavidin and contains photosensitive dye. The second bead reagent (Chemibeads) is coated with a second anti-mass creatine kinase MB isoenzyme monoclonal antibody and contains chemiluminescent dye. Sample is incubated with Chemibeads and biotinylated antibody to form a beadmass creatine kinase MB isoenzyme-biotinylated antibody sandwich. Sensibeads are added and bind to the biotin to form bead-pair immunocomplexes. Illumination of the complex by light at 680 nm generates singlet oxygen from Sensibeads which diffuses into the Chemibeads, triggering a chemiluminescent reaction. The resulting signal is measured at 612 nm and is a direct function of the mass creatine kinase MB isoenzyme concentration in the sample.

The Dimension Vista® 1500 System:
The Dimension Vista® 1500 System is a floor model, fully automated, microprocessor-controlled, integrated instrument system that uses prepackaged Flex reagent test cartridges to measure a variety of analytes in human body fluids. The system is a multi-functional analytical tool that processes chemical and immunochemical methodologies, utilizing photometric, turbidimetric, chemiluminescence, nephelometric, and integrated ion selective multisensor detection technologies for clinical use. The Dimension Vista® 1500 System can analyze up to 1500 tests/hour (typical, depending on the method mix) using a variety of analytical detection capabilities. Dimension Vista® 1500 System detection technologies are: Photometric, Turbidimetric, Chemiluminescent, Nephelometric, Multisensor, ion selective technology

The Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Dimension Vista® MMB Assay is an in vitro diagnostic test for the quantitative measurement of mass creatine kinase MB isoenzyme in human serum and plasma for confirmation of acute myocardial infarction. The K143720 submission describes the modification of the Dimension Vista® 1500 System with a new photomultiplier tube (PMT) and its impact on the MMB assay.

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 formal "acceptance criteria" in a separate section with pass/fail thresholds. Instead, it presents performance characteristics (method comparison, precision, linearity, LoB, LoD, LoQ) for the modified system and implicitly assumes that these demonstrate substantial equivalence to the predicate device. For this response, I will interpret the performance data provided as the "reported device performance" and infer the implied "acceptance criteria" based on the comparison to the existing predicate and typical performance expectations for such devices.

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

• Test Set Sample Size: 111 native de-identified human serum and plasma samples were used for the method comparison study.
• Data Provenance: The samples were described as "native de-identified human serum and plasma samples," implying they were clinical samples. The country of origin is not explicitly stated, but given the manufacturer (Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Inc. Newark, DE) and the submission to the FDA, it is likely the studies were conducted in the US or using samples relevant to the US market. The study is prospective in the sense that the samples were analyzed on both the predicate and modified devices specifically for this comparison study.

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

N/A - This device is an in vitro diagnostic assay that provides a quantitative measurement of an analyte (CK-MB). The "ground truth" for method comparison and performance evaluation is typically established by comparing the device's results to a legally marketed predicate device, a reference method, or by analyzing samples with known concentrations (e.g., in linearity or precision studies using controls or spiked samples). There are no human "experts" establishing a "ground truth" diagnosis for the purpose of validating the assay's analytical performance; rather, the predicate device serves as the comparator.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

N/A - No human adjudication was performed or is relevant for this type of analytical performance study. The comparison is objective, based on quantitative measurements against a predicate device.

5. If a Multi Reader Multi Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done

No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. This type of study is typically relevant for devices where human interpretation of images or other qualitative data is involved, and the AI's role is to assist human readers. The Dimension Vista® MMB Assay is an IVD device that provides quantitative measurements, not requiring interpretation by multiple readers in an MRMC setting for its analytical validation.

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

Yes, the studies presented are effectively "standalone" performance evaluations of the Dimension Vista® MMB Assay on the modified Dimension Vista® 1500 System. The device's performance (accuracy, precision, linearity, limits) is assessed purely analytically, without human intervention in the measurement process itself, beyond sample loading and general system operation. The comparison is between two automated systems (predicate vs. modified).

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

The "ground truth" for the test set (111 samples) in the method comparison study was the measurements obtained from the predicate device (Dimension Vista® MMB assay on the Dimension Vista® 1500 Integrated System K051087). For precision, linearity, LoB, LoD, and LoQ studies, the ground truth was established by using characterized control materials, pooled plasma samples, or serially diluted samples with known theoretical concentrations.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

N/A - This device is not an AI/ML-driven algorithm that requires a "training set" in the conventional sense of machine learning. The system is based on chemiluminescent immunoassay technology and instrumental measurements, not a learned algorithm that processes data like images. Therefore, the concept of a "training set" for an algorithm is not applicable here.

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

N/A - As explained above, there is no "training set" for this type of IVD device.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Dimension Vista® Magnesium Flex® reagent cartridge (MG) method is an in vitro diagnostic test for the quantitative measurement of magnesium in human serum, plasma and urine on the Dimension Vista® System. Magnesium measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of hypomagnesemia (abnormally low plasma levels of magnesium) and hypermagnesemia (abnormally high plasma levels of magnesium).

The Dimension Vista® Chemistry 1 Calibrator (CHEM 1 CAL) is an in vitro diagnostic product for the calibration of Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN),Calcium (CA), Cholesterol (CHOL), Creatinine (CRENCRE2), Glucose (GLU), Lactic Acid (LA), Magnesium (MG), Thyroxine (T4), Thyronine Uptake (TU) and Uric Acid (URCA) methods on the Dimension Vista® System.

CHEM 1 CAL is a liquid, frozen multi-analyte, bovine serum albumin based product used to calibrate blood urea nitrogen, calcium, cholesterol, creatinine, glucose, lactic acid, magnesium, thyroxine, thyronine uptake and uric acid. The kit consists of six vials, three vials of Calibrator A and three vials of Calibrator B.

The Dimension Vista® MG Flex® reagent cartridge uses a modified methylthymol blue (MTB) complexometric technique. MTB forms a blue complex with magnesium. Calcium interference is minimized by forming a complex between calcium and Ba-EGTA (chelating agent). The amount of MG-MTB complex formed is proportional to the magnesium concentration and is measured using a bichromatic (600 and 510 nm) endpoint technique.

The provided text describes the performance characteristics of the Dimension Vista® Magnesium Flex® reagent cartridge (MG) and the Dimension Vista® Chemistry 1 Calibrator (CHEM 1 CAL). The focus is on demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices and meeting established clinical laboratory guidelines. However, the information is primarily focused on analytical performance rather than clinical effectiveness or diagnostic accuracy in specific patient populations.

Here's an attempt to extract the requested information, acknowledging that some categories may not be directly applicable or fully detailed given the nature of an in vitro diagnostic device's analytical validation.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Device: Dimension Vista® Magnesium Flex® reagent cartridge (MG) for quantitative measurement of magnesium.

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

• Method Comparison Study:
  • Serum and Plasma: 239 samples (combined total).
  • Urine: 99 samples.
  • Data Provenance: Retrospective, internal testing by Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics R&D personnel. The country of origin is not specified but implicitly assumed to be the location of the Siemens R&D facility.
• Precision Testing:
  • Not reported as individual patient samples. Instead, it used control materials (Multiqual QC, Liquichek Urine QC) and pooled serum/urine samples.
  • Each test material was run with two test samples over 20 days, in two separate runs.
• Limit of Blank/Detection (LoB/LoD):
  • Serum (LoB/LoD): 96 determinations (based on 4 blank and 4 low-level samples, tested n=5 over 3 days, using 2 reagent lots).
  • Urine (LoB/LoD): 96 determinations (based on 4 blank and 4 low-level samples, tested n=5 over 3 days, using 2 reagent lots).
• Limit of Quantitation (LoQ):
  • Serum: 6 serum samples, 5 replicates (n=5) of each, with 2 reagent lots, over 3 days (total of 90 replicates per lot for serum).
  • Urine: 6 urine samples, 5 replicates (n=5) of each, with 2 reagent lots, over 3 days (total of 90 replicates per lot for urine). Total 180 determinations for LoQ overall.
• Linearity Testing:
  • Serum: 9 prepared samples (dilutions).
  • Urine: 9 prepared samples (dilutions).

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

The term "ground truth" typically applies to diagnostic accuracy studies where expert consensus or a gold standard (e.g., pathology) is used to classify cases. For an in vitro diagnostic device measuring an analyte concentration, the "ground truth" for the test set is established by testing the same samples using a legally marketed predicate device (Beckman AU Magnesium assay in this case) or through reference materials (e.g., NIST SRM 929 for traceability of the calibrator).

• For Method Comparison: No external experts were explicitly mentioned for interpreting results. The comparison itself uses the Beckman AU Magnesium assay as the reference.
• For Calibrator Traceability: Magnesium is traceable to NIST SRM 929 (National Institute of Standards and Technology Standard Reference Material). This implies the ground truth for calibration levels is established by a highly reputable and standardized reference.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Adjudication methods (like 2+1, 3+1) are typically used in studies involving subjective interpretation (e.g., imaging) to resolve disagreements among human readers. This concept is not directly applicable to the analytical performance studies of a quantitative in vitro diagnostic device, where results are numerical values. Discrepancies in quantitative measurements would typically be investigated through repeat testing, instrument troubleshooting, or sample re-preparation, rather than expert adjudication of an interpretation.

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

No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. This type of study assesses how human readers' diagnostic performance changes with and without AI assistance. The submitted device is a quantitative in vitro diagnostic reagent cartridge and calibrator, not an AI-powered diagnostic imaging or interpretation tool designed to assist human readers. Therefore, the concept of "human readers improve with AI vs without AI assistance" is not relevant to this device.

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

While the device itself is a standalone analytical system (it measures magnesium concentrations automatically), the studies conducted are analytical performance studies, not a standalone diagnostic performance study in the sense of an algorithm interpreting clinical data to make a diagnosis without human input. The output is a quantitative measure of magnesium, which a clinician then interprets in the context of a patient's overall health.

The device itself represents "algorithm only" performance in the sense that it mechanically and biochemically performs the assay without human interpretation during the measurement process. The analytical studies (precision, linearity, LoD, etc.) demonstrate this standalone analytical performance.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• For Method Comparison: The "ground truth" was established by comparison with a legally marketed predicate device, the Beckman AU Magnesium assay (K981743). This is a common approach for demonstrating substantial equivalence for in vitro diagnostics.
• For Calibrator Traceability: The ground truth for magnesium levels in the calibrator is traced to NIST SRM 929, which is a primary reference standard. This provides a highly accurate and standardized "ground truth" for the calibrator values.
• For Studies like LoB, LoD, LoQ, Linearity, Precision: The ground truth for these analytical performance characteristics is derived from statistical analysis of repeated measurements against well-defined samples (e.g., blank samples, low-level samples, serially diluted samples) and comparison to established CLSI guidelines for acceptable performance.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not specify a "training set" in the context of machine learning or AI algorithm development. This device is a traditional in vitro diagnostic reagent, relying on a biochemical reaction and photometric measurement, not a machine learning model that requires a discrete training phase. Therefore, the concept of a separate training set is not applicable here. The development and optimization of the reagent formulation and instrument settings would have involved extensive R&D, but this is not typically characterized as a "training set" in the AI/ML sense.

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

As noted above, there is no "training set" in the AI/ML sense for this device. The physical and chemical properties of magnesium and the methylthymol blue reaction are the underlying "truth" guiding the development of the assay. Calibrator values leverage traceability to NIST SRM 929.

Ask a specific question about this device

The FT4L method is an in vitro diagnostic test for the quantitative measurement of Free Thyroxine in human serum and plasma on the Dimension® EXL™ integrated chemistry system with LOCI® Module. Measurements of free thyroxine are used in the diagnosis and monitoring of thyroid disease.

The TSH method is an in vitro diagnostic test for the quantitative measurement of Thyroid Stimulating Hormone in human serum and plasma on the Dimension Vista® System. Measurements of thyroid stimulating hormone produced by the anterior pituitary are used in the diagnosis of thyroid or pituitary disorders.

The submission describes the Dimension® Vista Free Thyroxine Flex® reagent cartridge, FT4 and the Dimension Vista® Thyroid Stimulating Hormone Flex® reagent cartridge, TSH. These are in vitro diagnostic tests for the quantitative measurement of Free Thyroxine and Thyroid Stimulating Hormone in human serum and plasma, respectively, on the Dimension Vista® System. The submission is for the inclusion of pediatric reference intervals to the labeling (Package Inserts) of these assays. No changes were made to the reagents, device design, or manufacturing process.

The document describes the establishment of pediatric reference intervals for the Dimension Vista® Free Thyroxine (FT4) and Thyroid Stimulating Hormone (TSH) Flex® reagent cartridges. It does not contain an acceptance criteria table related to the device's performance against specific metrics of accuracy or precision in the traditional sense, but rather focuses on establishing biological reference intervals. The study's primary goal was to define these pediatric reference intervals.

Here's an analysis of the provided information:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

As noted, the document doesn't provide a table of discrete acceptance criteria for device performance (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, accuracy against a gold standard). Instead, the acceptance in this context relates to the establishment and statistical validation of reference intervals for pediatric populations.

The reported "performance" for the Dimension Vista® FT4 and TSH assays, in the context of this submission, is the established pediatric reference intervals. These are compared against adult reference intervals and the assay's analytical measuring range to demonstrate suitability for pediatric use.

Justification of Suitability for Pediatric Use (Acceptance Criteria Implicitly Met):

The document states two key rationales for accepting the pediatric reference intervals, implicitly acting as "acceptance criteria" for the device's application in this population:

• 1. Alignment with Indications for Use: "Testing of pediatric patients is within the established indications for use in the diagnosis and treatment of thyroid disease..."
• 2. Analytical Compatibility: "The newly-established pediatric reference intervals are either within or are above the previously-established reference intervals for euthyroid (normal thyroid) adult populations and they are within the analytical measuring ranges of the Dimension Vista® FT4 and TSH assays. Therefore, the Dimension Vista® FT4 and TSH assays have appropriate analytical performance to test pediatric patients."

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

• Sample Size: A total of 421 patients were analyzed to establish the pediatric reference intervals:
  • Infants (01 - 23 months): 82
  • Children (02 - 12 years): 191
  • Adolescents (13 – 20 years): 148
• Data Provenance: The document does not explicitly state the country of origin or if the data was retrospective or prospective. It implies the samples were collected specifically for this study ("Data from a total of 421 patients... were analyzed to establish..."). Given the context of establishing reference intervals, it is likely prospective collection from healthy individuals within the specified age groups, though this is not explicitly stated.

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

This type of information is not applicable to this study. The "ground truth" here is the biological variation of FT4 and TSH levels in healthy pediatric populations. Reference intervals are established statistically from a cohort of presumably healthy individuals, not through expert consensus on individual cases.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

This is not applicable. There was no need for adjudication as the study focused on quantitative measurements and statistical analysis of those measurements to define reference ranges.

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

This is not applicable. The device is an in-vitro diagnostic test for quantitative measurement, not an imaging device or a diagnostic aid requiring human interpretation that benefits from AI assistance. Therefore, an MRMC study and effect size for human improvement are not relevant.

6. Standalone Performance

Yes, this study inherently focuses on the standalone performance of the Dimension Vista® FT4 and TSH assays. The goal was to determine the measured analyte levels in a specific population (pediatrics) using the device alone, to establish reference intervals. There is no human-in-the-loop component for the determination of the numeric values.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

The ground truth used to establish the reference intervals is biological reference data from a population of presumably healthy subjects within specified age groups. This involves statistical methods (non-parametric for children/adolescents, robust symmetric for infants, sometimes after log transformation for skewed data) to determine the central 95% of values.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

This study is not framed in terms of a "training set" for an algorithm. The samples of 421 pediatric patients (82 infants, 191 children, 148 adolescents) directly served as the dataset from which the reference intervals were derived using statistical methods, which could be considered the "training" for the reference interval definition.

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

The "ground truth" (i.e., the reference intervals) for the pediatric populations was established through statistical analysis of quantitative measurements of FT4 and TSH in serum/plasma samples from the 421 pediatric subjects.

• CLSI C28-A3c Guideline: The study followed the "Defining, Establishing and Verifying Reference Intervals in the Clinical Laboratory; Approved Guideline -- Third Edition (CLSI C28-A3c)" standard.
• Non-parametric approach: Used for children and adolescents, where the 2.5th and 97.5th percentiles of the distribution of values were calculated. This technique is typically used when the sample size is sufficient (usually >120).
• Robust symmetrical method (Horn and Pesce, CLSI EP28-A3c): Used for infants due to a sample size of less than 120 (82 patients).
• Log transformation: For the TSH assay in infants, the data was highly positively skewed, so a natural log transformation was applied to achieve a normal distribution before applying the robust symmetric method.
• Confirmation with Simulated Reference Intervals: Both methods were confirmed with two simulated reference intervals (non-parametric and robust symmetric) estimated as the means of the 95% upper and lower bounds from 1000 data sets.

Ask a specific question about this device

The CRE2 method is an in vitro diagnostic test for the quantitative measurement of creatinine in human serum, plasma, and urine on the Dimension Vista® System. Creatinine measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of certain renal disease, in monitoring renal dialysis, and as a calculation basis for measuring other urine analytes.

The Dimension Vista® Creatinine (CRE2) Flex® reagent cartridge uses a modified kinetic Jaffe technique. In the presence of a strong base such as sodium hydroxide, picrate reacts with creatinine to form a red chromophore. The rate of increasing absorbance at 510 nm due to the formation of this chromophore is directly proportional to the creatinine concentration in the sample and is measured using a bichromatic (510, 577 nm) rate technique.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information for the Dimension Vista® System Creatinine (CRE2) Flex® reagent cartridge, based on the provided text:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance

Study Details

1. Sample sizes used for the test set and the data provenance:

   • Method Comparison (Predicate Device):
     • Serum: 140 patient samples. Remnant de-identified serum samples. No patient history. Inclusion/exclusion criteria not applicable. Both native and spiked samples.
     • Urine: 112 patient samples. Remnant de-identified urine samples (implied). No patient history. Inclusion/exclusion criteria not applicable.
   • Method Comparison (IDMS Reference Method):
     • Serum: 48 patient samples. Remnant de-identified serum samples. No patient history. Inclusion/exclusion criteria not applicable. All native samples.
   • Serum Plasma Equivalency: 56 matched serum and lithium heparin plasma samples. All samples fresh and never frozen. 8 spiked sample sets.
   • Precision: Not a direct "test set" in the sense of patient samples, but testing involved: 2 serum pools, 3 levels of BioRad Multiqual material, 2 levels of BioRad Liquicheck material, and 2 urine pools. Each tested multiple times (over 20 days, 2 runs, 2 samples per run).
   • Limit of Blank/Detection (Serum): 4 samples with no analyte (N=5 reps for 3 days), 4 low patient serum samples (N=5 reps for 3 days).
   • Limit of Blank/Detection (Urine): 4 samples with no analyte (N=5 reps for 3 days), 4 low patient urine samples (N=5 reps for 3 days).
   • Linearity: 12 equally spaced samples for serum, 12 for urine.
   • Analytical Specificity (Interference): Low (~1.5 mg/dL) and High (~5.0 mg/dL) creatinine serum pools; Low (~40 mg/dL) and High (~175 mg/dL) creatinine urine pools. Number of individual samples/tests per interferent is not explicitly stated but implied to be sufficient for creating means and controls.
   • Expected Values:
     • Serum and Plasma: 53 male donors, 40 female donors (all normal healthy adults).
     • Urine: 22 male donors, 20 female donors (all normal healthy adults).
   • Reportable Range Dilution: N=5 replicates for each dilution study (serum and urine).

   Data Provenance: The studies were conducted internally by Siemens Healthcare Diagnostic Inc. R&D organization personnel. Remnant de-identified samples were used for method comparison studies, implying retrospective or archived samples. Patient history was not obtained. The origin of the patient samples (e.g., country) is not specified, but the internal R&D location would presumably be Newark, DE, USA based on the applicant's address.

2. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts:
   The document does not mention the use of experts to establish ground truth for the test set in the context of clinical interpretation. For method comparison, the "ground truth" for the new device was established by comparison to a legally marketed predicate device (Dimension Vista® Creatinine (CREA) Flex® reagent cartridge) and the IDMS reference method. These are analytical "gold standards" rather than expert interpretation.

3. Adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:
   Not applicable. The reported studies are analytical performance evaluations of a quantitative laboratory test, not diagnostic interpretations requiring adjudication.

4. 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 a quantitative in vitro diagnostic test for creatinine, not an imaging or interpretive device that would typically involve human readers or AI assistance in the way an MRMC study would assess.

5. If a standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done:
   Yes, these are all standalone (algorithm only) performance studies. The device itself performs the quantitative measurement of creatinine from samples without human interpretation in the loop of the measurement.

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

   • For Method Comparison studies: The ground truth was established by two primary methods:
     • Comparison to a predicate device (Dimension Vista® Creatinine (CREA) Flex® reagent cartridge).
     • Comparison to the IDMS reference method (Isotope Dilution Mass Spectrometry), which is a highly accurate and precise analytical method often considered a "gold standard" for creatinine measurements.
   • For Expected Values studies: Published reference ranges in scientific literature (e.g., Tietz 1999, Clin Chem 54:3 (2008), Clin Chem Acta 344 (2004) 137-148) served as the basis for validating the established ranges for the new device.
   • For LoQ validation: Allowable total error limits published by regulatory and accreditation bodies (CLIA, CAP, AAB, NYS, WSLH) were used. The reference values are traceable to IDMS.

7. The sample size for the training set:
   Not applicable in the context of typical AI/machine learning studies. This device is a reagent cartridge for an automated clinical chemistry system, not an AI or machine learning algorithm that undergoes 'training' in the conventional sense with labeled data. The development and internal refinement of the reagent formulation and measurement parameters would be analogous to "training" but is not quantified in terms of a discrete sample set size like this.

8. How the ground truth for the training set was established:
   Not applicable for the same reasons as above. The "ground truth" for developing such a system would involve rigorous analytical chemistry principles, extensive experimentation, and calibration using traceable standards (e.g., NIST SRM 914a (IDMS assigned crystalline creatinine standard)).

Ask a specific question about this device

The PROG CAL is an in vitro diagnostic product for the calibration of the Progesterone (PROG) assay on the Dimension Vista® System.

PROG CAL is a single analyte, liquid, frozen, product containing progesterone and preservatives in a human serum base, for in vitro diagnostic use. Contains human source material. Each donor unit used in the preparation of this product was tested by FDA-approved methods for the presence of antibodies to Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 (HIV-1) and Type 2 (HIV-2), as well as for Hepatitis B surface Antigen and antibody to Hepatitis C Virus (HCV), and found to be negative (not repeatedly reactive). Because no testing can offer complete assurance that these or other infectious agents are absent, this material should be handled using good laboratory practice to avoid skin contact and ingestion. The kit consists of ten vials, two each of five levels containing 1 mL per vial.

The provided text describes a 510(k) submission for a medical device (Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Dimension Vista® Progesterone Calibrator) and focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device. It does not contain information about the acceptance criteria or a study proving the device meets those criteria, as typically found in clinical performance studies. The document primarily details the device's technical specifications, intended use, and a comparison to a similar, already-marketed device for the purpose of regulatory clearance.

Therefore, many of the requested details, such as sample size, data provenance, expert qualifications, adjudication methods, MRMC studies, standalone performance, and ground truth for training sets, are not applicable or not mentioned in this regulatory submission for a calibrator.

However, I can extract the information that is present:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document doesn't explicitly state quantitative acceptance criteria in a table format for device performance in the way a clinical study would. The primary "performance" discussed relates to stability and value assignment, which are confirmed to meet "defined acceptance criteria" without specifying the exact criteria or the numerical results of those criteria in detail.

2. Sample Size for Test Set and Data Provenance:

• Sample Size for Test Set: Not explicitly stated as a separate "test set" in the context of clinical performance. For value assignment, "45 replicates" were used for each calibrator level to determine the mean bottle value. For stability, multiple calibrator levels were tested over time.
• Data Provenance: Not specified. Likely internal laboratory data from Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics. Given it's a calibrator, the "data" would be analytical measurements rather than patient data.
• Retrospective/Prospective: Not explicitly stated. Stability studies generally imply a prospective monitoring over time.

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

• Not applicable in the context of calibrator performance. Ground truth for progesterone concentration is established through a reference method (ID/GC/MS), not expert consensus.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

• Not applicable. The ground truth is based on an analytical reference method (ID/GC/MS) rather than subjective interpretation requiring adjudication.

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

• No. This is a calibrator, not an AI-assisted diagnostic device that would involve human readers interpreting images or results. Therefore, an MRMC study is not relevant.

6. Standalone Performance Study:

• Yes, indirectly. The stability testing and value assignment studies describe the performance of the calibrator itself (algorithm/device only in this context) to ensure it performs as expected over time and accurately assigns progesterone values. These studies confirm its analytical performance in a standalone capacity.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used:

• Reference Method Traceability: The "ground truth" for the progesterone concentrations in the calibrator levels is established through traceability to the Isotope Dilution Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry (ID/GC/MS) reference measurement procedure.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set:

• Not applicable. This is a calibrator, not a machine learning algorithm that requires a "training set" in the conventional sense. Its values are assigned based on measurements, not learning from data.

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

• Not applicable, as there is no "training set" for a calibrator. The accuracy of the calibrator's assigned values is rooted in its traceability to the ID/GC/MS reference method.

Ask a specific question about this device

The AMM method is an in vitro diagnostic test for the quantitative measurement of ammonia in human plasma on the Dimension Vista® System. Ammonia measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of severe liver disorders such as cirrhosis, hepatitis and Reye's syndrome.

The CHEM 3 CAL is an in vitro diagnostic product for the calibration of Ammonia (AMM), Carbon Dioxide (CO2) and Ethyl Alcohol (ETOH) methods on the Dimension Vista" System.

The Dimension Vista® Ammonia assay (AMM) is an enzymatic method that uses glutamate dehydrogenase (GLDH) and a stabilized NADPH analog. Ammonia reacts with a-ketoglutarate and reduced cofactor to form L-glutamate and the cofactor. The reaction is catalyzed by glutamate dehydrogenase. The decrease in absorbance due to the oxidation of the reduced cofactor is monitored at 340/700 nm and is proportional to the ammonia concentration.

The Dimension Vista® Ammonia (AMM) Flex® reagent cartridge is an in vitro diagnostic device that consists of prepackaged reagents in a plastic cartridge for use on the Dimension Vista® System.

The Dimension Vista® Chemistry 3 Calibrator (CHEM 3 CAL) is a two level, liquid calibrator. It is packaged as a kit of six vials with 2.5 mL per vial. The product is a multi-analyte, aqueous product containing ammonium bicarbonate, sodium carbonate and ethyl alcohol.

The provided document describes the Siemens Dimension Vista® Ammonia Flex® reagent cartridge (AMM) and Dimension Vista® Chemistry 3 Calibrator (CHEM 3 CAL) and their performance characteristics. As a laboratory assay and calibrator, the concept of "acceptance criteria" and "device performance" relates to analytical performance metrics rather than diagnostic accuracy as would be the case for an AI medical device. Similarly, concepts like "sample size used for the test set," "data provenance," "number of experts," "adjudication method," "MRMC comparative effectiveness study," "standalone performance," and "ground truth" are not directly applicable in the context of validating an in vitro diagnostic reagent and calibrator kit.

However, I can extract the relevant analytical performance characteristics and compare them to accepted standards (often implied by the CLSI guidelines referenced).

Here's an interpretation of the requested information, adapted to the context of an in vitro diagnostic (IVD) reagent and calibrator:

Acceptance Criteria and Study to Prove Device Meets Criteria

The studies conducted for the Siemens Dimension Vista® Ammonia Flex® reagent cartridge (AMM) and Dimension Vista® Chemistry 3 Calibrator (CHEM 3 CAL) evaluate their analytical performance against established guidelines (primarily CLSI standards). The 'acceptance criteria' are generally understood to be meeting these established analytical performance benchmarks to demonstrate substantial equivalence to predicate devices and ensure reliable test results.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

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

• Method Comparison: 100 patient samples. Provenance is not explicitly stated (e.g., country of origin) but inferred to be clinical laboratory samples. Data type is prospective, as fresh samples were tested.
• Plasma Equivalency: 49 fresh matched lithium heparin and EDTA plasma samples. Provenance is not explicitly stated. Data type is prospective.
• Precision: Not explicitly stated as "sample size" in the context of unique patient samples, but testing involved "three levels of Liquicheck™ Ethanol/Ammonia control" tested over 20 days, two separate runs with two test samples for each test material (effectively 3 levels * 20 days * 2 runs * 2 replicates = 240 measurements for each level during repeatability and within-lab assessment).
• Linearity, LoB, LoD, LoQ: The number of unique patient samples is not specified. Studies utilized specific control materials and diluted samples tested across multiple days, runs, and replicates (e.g., for LoB, 4 blank samples tested for 3 days, 1 run/day, 2 replicates/run).
• Interference: Tested with specific concentrations of interfering substances (e.g., 75 mg/dL Hemoglobin) and tested at two analyte concentrations (85 µg/dL and 426 µg/dL). The number of unique patient samples for interference testing is not explicitly stated for all tests, but for certain endogenous interferents which exceeded 10% bias, an aliquot of a patient sample containing the potential interferent was mixed with a plasma pool.

Data provenance is from laboratory studies performed at Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Inc. on Dimension Vista® 1500 System, implying a retrospective analysis of collected lab data or controlled prospective lab studies.

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

This concept is not applicable to the validation of an IVD reagent and calibrator. The "ground truth" for analytical performance studies is typically established by:

• The results from a legally marketed predicate device (for method comparison).
• Defined reference materials (e.g., control solutions, calibrators).
• Known concentrations in spiked samples.
• Established clinical laboratory reference intervals.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Not applicable. This concept relates to expert consensus in interpreting complex data (e.g., images) to establish a "ground truth" for a diagnostic model, which is not relevant for analytical performance studies of a laboratory reagent.

5. If a Multi Reader Multi Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study was Done

Not applicable. MRMC studies are used for diagnostic devices that involve human interpretation of results (e.g., radiology images). This document describes an automated laboratory assay. The closest equivalent is the "Method Comparison" study, which compares the new device's analytical results to those of an established predicate device.

• Effect size of human readers improvement with AI vs. without AI assistance: Not applicable, as no human-in-the-loop AI component is demonstrated.

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

Yes, the studies presented are all "standalone" in the sense that they evaluate the analytical performance of the assay and calibrator on the Dimension Vista® System without direct human judgment influencing the output of the measurement. The results reported (e.g., correlation, precision, linearity) represent the performance of the device itself.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• Method Comparison: The predicate device, Dimension® Ammonia (AMON) assay (K863840), served as the reference or "ground truth" for comparison.
• Plasma Equivalency: Matched samples of different plasma types were compared, with one type serving as a reference point.
• Precision: Standardized control materials (Liquicheck™ Ethanol/Ammonia control) with known or expected ranges.
• Linearity, LoB, LoD, LoQ: Serial dilutions of samples with known concentrations or blank samples, evaluated against expected analytical behavior.
• Interference: Control samples without interferent compared to test samples with known concentrations of potential interferents.
• Reference Interval: Transference of reference interval from widely accepted literature (Textbook of Clinical Chemistry by NW Tietz) and validated through CLSI C28-A3 guidelines.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

Not applicable. This device is an IVD reagent and calibrator, not an AI/ML algorithm that requires a "training set" in the computational sense. The development of such reagents involves chemical and enzymatic research, formulation, and optimization rather than data-driven machine learning training.

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

Not applicable, as there is no "training set" in the context of an AI/ML algorithm. The "ground truth" for performance evaluations (as described in point 7) is based on established analytical chemistry principles, predicate device performance, and reference materials.

Ask a specific question about this device

The VB12 method is an in vitro diagnostic test for the quantitative measurement of vitamin B12 in human serum and plasma on the Dimension Vista® System. Measurements of vitamin B12 are used in the diagnosis and treatment of anemias of gastrointestinal malabsorption.

The LOCI 4 CAL is an in vitro diagnostic product for the calibration of LOCI Ferritin (FERR), LOCI Folate (FOL), and LOCI Vitamin B12 (VB12) methods on the Dimension Vista® System.

The LOCI vitamin B12 method is a homogeneous, competitive chemiluminescent immunoassay based on LOCI® technology. LOCI® reagents include two synthetic bead reagents and biotinylated intrinsic factor (IF). The first bead reagent (Chemibead) is coated with a B12 derivative and contains a chemiluminescent dye. The second bead reagent (Sensibead) is coated with streptavidin and contains photosensitive dye. The patient sample is pretreated with sodium hydroxide (NaOH) and dithioerythritol (DTE) to release the serum B12 from its carrier proteins. Potassium cyanide (KCN) is added to convert all the forms of B12 into a single, cyanocobalamin form, and dicyanocobinamide is added to keep the B12 from rebinding with the carrier proteins. After the sample pretreatment, the biotinylated IF and chemibead reagents are added sequentially to the reaction vessel. Vitamin B12 from the sample competes with the B12-chemibead for a limited amount of biotinylated IF. Sensibead reagent is then added and binds to the biotin to form bead pair immunocomplexes. Illumination of the complex at 680 nm generates singlet oxygen from the Sensibeads which diffuses to the Chemibeads triggering a chemiluminescent reaction. The resulting signal is measured at 612 nm and is an inverse function of the concentration of vitamin B12 in the sample.

LOCI 4 CAL is a multi-analyte liquid, frozen, product containing Ferritin from human liver, Folate, and Vitamin B12. CAL A is a HEPES buffer solution whereas CAL B - E are prepared in a bovine serum albumin base.

The kit consists of ten vials, two each of five levels containing 2 mL per vial. Description of the manufacturing, value assignment and stability testing processes are provided.

The provided text describes the Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Dimension Vista® LOCI Vitamin B12 Flex reagent cartridge and Dimension Vista® LOCI 4 CAL and their performance in a study to establish substantial equivalence to predicate devices.

Here's the breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document describes performance for the Vitamin B12 method. While explicit acceptance criteria values (e.g., "r > 0.95" as a specific target) are not definitively stated, the study's aim is to demonstrate "substantial equivalence" to a predicate device. The reported performance for precision and method comparison serves to support this claim, aligning with typical performance expectations for such diagnostic assays.

Vitamin B12 Assay Performance

Note: The acceptance criteria are implicitly met by demonstrating "substantial equivalence" based on these performance characteristics, which show good agreement and precision comparable to typical diagnostic assays.

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

• Reproducibility (Precision) Test: A "single test from two independent cups was analyzed twice per day for 20 days" for each of the 7 materials (3 QC levels, 4 serum/plasma pools). This totals 2 (cups) * 2 (tests/day) * 20 (days) = 80 measurements per material. The exact number of unique patient samples for the serum/plasma pools is not specified, but they are described as "Serum Pool" or "Plasma Pool," implying pooled samples.
• Sample Type Equivalence Test: Seventy-one (71) matched serum, lithium heparin plasma, sodium heparin, and EDTA plasma samples.
• Method Comparison Test: One hundred sixty-two (162) native serum samples.
• Data Provenance: The document does not explicitly state the country of origin or if the data was retrospective or prospective. Given the nature of a 510(k) submission for an in vitro diagnostic device by a major diagnostics company, it's highly probable the studies were conducted prospectively with samples collected for research purposes, likely within a regulated environment (e.g., US or EU).

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

The device is a quantitative immunoassay for Vitamin B12. The ground truth for such assays is typically established by the analytical method itself or by comparison to an established, validated method (the predicate device in this case) and traceable calibrators.

• Number of Experts: Not applicable in the traditional sense of expert consensus on qualitative data. The "ground truth" for the method comparison is the measurement obtained from the predicate device (Roche Elecsys Vitamin B12 Test System). For precision studies, the 'truth' is inherent to the statistical analysis of repetitive measurements.
• Qualifications of Experts: Not relevant for this type of analytical assay validation.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Not applicable. As a quantitative assay, the results are numerical measurements from the instruments. Adjudication methods (like 2+1 or 3+1 consensus) are typically used for qualitative or subjective assessments (e.g., image interpretation).

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

No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. This type of study is typically performed for diagnostic devices where human interpretation (e.g., by radiologists, pathologists) is involved, and the AI's role is to assist human readers. This device is an automated, quantitative immunoassay.

• Effect Size of Human Readers with vs. Without AI: Not applicable.

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

Yes, the studies presented are all standalone (algorithm only) performance assessments. The device is an automated immunoassay system that provides quantitative results without human interpretation in the loop for the measurement itself. The "method comparison" directly compares the new device's standalone performance to a predicate device's standalone performance.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• For Method Comparison: The ground truth was the measurements obtained from the predicate device, the Roche Elecsys® Vitamin B12 System. This represents a comparative "ground truth" for demonstrating equivalence.
• For Traceability: The calibrators are traceable to United States Pharmacopeia (USP) Grade vitamin B12, which is a form of recognized reference standard. This establishes the metrological ground truth for the measurements.
• For Precision: The ground truth is statistical, derived from repeated measurements of the same sample, indicating the variability of the device itself.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not explicitly mention a "training set" in the context of machine learning or AI algorithms. This device is a traditional immunoassay, not an AI/ML-based diagnostic. Its performance characteristics are established through analytical validation studies rather than learning from a training dataset. The development of the assay itself would involve optimization and characterization using various analytical samples, but this is not referred to as a "training set" in the sense of AI/ML.

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

Not applicable, as there is no "training set" in the AI/ML context for this traditional immunoassay device. The assay design and calibration are based on chemical and biological principles, validated against reference materials and predicate devices.

Ask a specific question about this device

The ALPI method is an in vitro diagnostic test for the quantitative measurement of alkaline phosphatase in human serum and plasma on the Dimension Vista® System. Measurements of alkaline phosphatase or its isoenzymes are used in the diagnosis and treatment of liver, bone, parathyroid, and intestinal diseases.

ALPI CAL is an in vitro diagnostic product for the calibration of alkaline phosphatase (ALPI) method on the Dimension Vista® System.

The ALPI method employs alkaline phosphatase that catalyzes the transphosphorylation of pnitrophenylphosphate (p-NPP) to p-nitrophenol (p-NP) in the presence of the transphosphorylating buffer, 2 amino-2-methyl-1-propanol (AMP). The reaction is enhanced through the use of magnesium and zinc ions. The change in absorbance at 405 nm due to the formation of p-NP is directly proportional to the ALP activity, since other reactants are present in non-rate limiting quantities and is measured using a bichromatic (405, 510 nm) rate technique.

p-NPP + AMP -> p-NP + AMP + PO4 (reaction conditions: pH 10.25, Mg/Zn)

The ALPI CAL is a one (1) level, liquid calibrator. It is packaged as a kit of three vials of Calibrator A (Level 2) with 1.0 mL per vial. The product matrix is a human serum albumin based product containing alkaline phosphatase from porcine kidney. Level 1 is a zero level (system water). Level 2 contains alkaline phosphatase at 1000 U/L.

This product is sold separately from the Flex® reagent cartridge. Values are assigned to new lots from a Masterpool that is from an International Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC) reference.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information for the Dimension Vista® Alkaline Phosphatase Flex® reagent cartridge (ALPI) and Calibrator (ALPI CAL), based on the provided 510(k) summary:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Study Information:

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

• Method Comparison: 116 patient samples. Data provenance is not explicitly stated (e.g., country of origin, retrospective/prospective), but it is implied to be clinical patient samples.
• Serum/Plasma Comparison: 50 matched serum and lithium heparin plasma samples. Data provenance is not explicitly stated.
• Reference Interval: 133 healthy adults. Data provenance is not explicitly stated.
• Precision:
  • 3 levels of Bio-Rad® Multiqual Assayed Quality Controls
  • 2 serum pools
• Linearity: Not explicitly stated, but likely used serially diluted samples or spiked samples.
• Analytical Specificity/Interferences: Not explicitly stated for each interferent, but the study used control samples and test samples for ALPI concentrations of either 278/787, 269/804, 268/799, or 298/849 U/L depending on the interferent.
• LoB, LoD, LoQ:
  • LoB: 5 samples of Enzyme Diluent (zero level)
  • LoD: 5 low-level samples
  • LoQ: 3 low-level samples diluted with enzyme diluent

All studies are typical for in vitro diagnostic (IVD) device validation and would generally be considered prospective studies on the new device, comparing it to an established predicate or against defined analytical targets. The summary does not specify the country of origin of the samples.

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

This 510(k) summary describes an in vitro diagnostic assay for measuring alkaline phosphatase. The "ground truth" for such assays typically refers to the true concentration or activity of the analyte in a sample.

• No human experts were used to establish "ground truth" for individual test samples in the typical sense of a diagnostic interpretation. Instead, the existing, previously cleared predicate device (ADVIA® Chemistry Alkaline Phosphatase AMP assay) served as the reference for method comparison studies (i.e., its results were considered the "truth" against which the new device was compared).
• For the Calibrator ALPI CAL, the summary states that "Calibrator value assignments for anchor pools were assigned by a reference laboratory using the IFCC reference method." The IFCC (International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine) reference method is a highly standardized, internationally recognized method considered a "gold standard" for accuracy. This implies the expertise lies in the adherence to this reference method rather than individual expert readers.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

Not applicable. This is not a study requiring adjudication of expert interpretations (e.g., medical imaging reviews). The performance is evaluated based on quantitative analytical results measured by the device and compared to reference methods or statistical targets.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done, and the Effect Size of How Much Human Readers Improve with AI vs. Without AI Assistance:

Not applicable. This is an in vitro diagnostic device for quantitative measurement, not an AI-assisted diagnostic imaging or interpretive aid that would involve human readers.

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

Yes. All performance characteristics described (Method Comparison, Precision, Linearity, Interference, LoB/LoD/LoQ) represent the standalone performance of the Dimension Vista® ALPI assay (the algorithm/reagent system) without human interpretive input. The human involvement is limited to operating the instrument, loading samples, and interpreting the numerical output.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used:

• For Method Comparison: The results from the predicate device (ADVIA® Chemistry Alkaline Phosphatase AMP assay) served as the comparative "ground truth" to demonstrate substantial equivalence.
• For Calibrator Value Assignment: The IFCC reference method (International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine) was used for assigning values to anchor pools, which then propagated to masterpools and commercial lots. This is a highly standardized, traceable method considered a gold standard for analytical accuracy.
• For other analytical studies (Precision, Linearity, LoD/LoQ): The "ground truth" is typically established by carefully prepared samples with known concentrations or by statistical methods inherent to the CLSI guidelines followed.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set:

This summary does not explicitly mention a "training set" in the context of machine learning. For IVD devices, validation studies (like those listed) are used to characterize performance. The "training" of an IVD assay refers to the development and optimization of the reagent formulation, instrument parameters, and calibration curve, which is an internal process for the manufacturer. The summarized studies are performance validation studies used to demonstrate the device meets its intended use and is safe and effective.

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

Not applicable as there is no mention of a distinct "training set" in a machine learning sense for this IVD assay. The development process for the reagent and assay involves various internal studies and optimizations by the manufacturer to achieve the desired analytical performance. The most relevant form of "ground truth" in the development context would be highly characterized reference materials and reference methods (like the IFCC method for calibration) used to optimize the assay's accuracy and precision.

Ask a specific question about this device