Search Results

The Dimension® Hemoglobin A1c assay is an in vitro diagnostic assay for the quantitative determination of %HbA 1c (DCCT/NGSP) and mmol/mol HbA1c (IFCC) in human anticoagulated venous whole blood for use on the Dimension® clinical chemistry system. Measurement of Hemoglobin A1c is used as an aid in diagnosis and monitoring of long-term blood glucose control in patients with diabetes mellitus and as an aid in the identification of patients at risk for developing diabetes mellitus.

The Dimension® Hemoglobin A1C assay is an in vitro diagnostic device intended to measure the concentration of hemoglobin A1c in venous human anticoagulated whole blood. The assay consists of three reagents packaged in Dimension® Flex® cartridges. The reagents are liquid and ready to use.

The provided text describes the Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Inc.'s Dimension® Hemoglobin A1c Assay, a Class II medical device for quantitative determination of %HbA1c and mmol/mol HbA1c in human anticoagulated venous whole blood. The document details studies undertaken to demonstrate the device's performance, primarily for a 510(k) premarket notification to show substantial equivalence to a predicate device.

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

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not explicitly state "acceptance criteria" with numerical targets for each performance characteristic. Instead, it presents study results and, for some criteria, qualitative conclusions (e.g., "No significant interference," "No deviations from linearity"). The assessment of "substantial equivalence" to the predicate device implies that the reported performance meets acceptable clinical standards for HbA1c measurement.

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

• Method Comparison: 147 human whole blood samples. The document does not specify the country of origin or if the data was retrospective or prospective.
• Precision: Two (2) commercial quality controls and four (4) whole blood patient pools (with specific target values). The number of individual patient samples in these pools is not specified, but the testing was performed over 20 days by 2 operators on 3 instruments.
• Endogenous & Exogenous Interference: Not explicitly stated as a "test set" of patient samples, but each interferent was evaluated using samples at two HbA1c levels (6.5% ± 1.0% and 8.0% ± 1.0%).
• Hemoglobin Variant Interference:
  • HbC: 37 samples
  • HbD: 20 samples
  • HbE: 22 samples
  • HbS: 22 samples
  • HbA2: 23 samples
  • HbF: 20 samples
  • These were "anticoagulated human blood samples with known concentrations of hemoglobin variant and HbA1c." The document does not specify the country of origin or if the data was retrospective or prospective.
• Linearity: Nine (9) samples with HbA1c levels across the assay range.
• Limit of Blank (LoB) and Limit of Detection (LoD):
  • LoB: 60 determinations with 5 blank samples each for tHb, and 75 determinations with 5 blank samples each for % HbA1c/HbA1c.
  • LoD: 60 determinations with 5 low-level samples each for tHb, and 75 determinations with 5 low samples each for % HbA1c/HbA1c.
• Anticoagulant Comparison: 79 samples. The document does not specify the country of origin or if the data was retrospective or prospective.

Data Provenance: For all studies, the document does not explicitly state the country of origin of the data or whether the studies were retrospective or prospective. However, based on the nature of lab-based validation studies for a diagnostic assay, they are typically prospective, controlled experimental setups.

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

For the method comparison study, the ground truth was established by "NGSP reference method results from testing performed at an NGSP reference laboratory." The document does not specify the number or qualifications of experts at this reference laboratory, but an NGSP (National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program) reference laboratory adheres to strict standardization protocols.

For other studies (e.g., interference, linearity), the ground truth was based on preparing samples with known concentrations or characteristics, rather than expert consensus on diagnostic images or conditions.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

Not applicable in the context of this device. The studies directly measure quantitative values and compare them against reference methods or known concentrations, rather than relying on multiple expert interpretations that would require an adjudication process.

5. If a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, If so, what was the effect size of how much human readers improve with AI vs without AI assistance

Not applicable. This is an in vitro diagnostic assay for quantitative laboratory measurement, not an AI-assisted diagnostic imaging or interpretation device. There are no "human readers" in the traditional sense involved in interpreting results that would be improved with AI assistance.

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

Yes, the studies described are for the standalone performance of the Dimension® Hemoglobin A1c Assay. The device is a clinical chemistry system designed for automated quantitative determination, implying an "algorithm only" or automated performance. The studies evaluate the accuracy, precision, and interference characteristics of this automated system.

7. The type of ground truth used

• Method Comparison: NGSP reference method results. This is a standardized, high-accuracy laboratory method.
• Interference (Endogenous, Exogenous, Hemoglobin Variant, Derivatives): Samples with known concentrations of interferents or variants, and known HbA1c values.
• Precision: Commercial quality controls and meticulously prepared patient pools with target values.
• Linearity: Prepared samples with a range of known HbA1c levels.
• LoB/LoD: Blank samples and low-level samples with known very low concentrations.
• Anticoagulant Comparison: K2-EDTA samples served as the comparator (reference) for other anticoagulants.

In essence, the ground truth is established through highly controlled laboratory preparations and comparisons to recognized reference methods or established comparator methods, rather than expert consensus or pathology in the context of imaging.

8. The sample size for the training set

Not applicable. This is an in vitro diagnostic assay, not a machine learning or AI-based device that typically requires a separate training set. The performance evaluation is based on standard analytical validation studies.

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

Not applicable, as there is no training set in the context of this traditional in vitro diagnostic assay.

Ask a specific question about this device