Search Results

The GEN-PROBE AMPLIFIED Chlamydia Trachomatis Assay (AMP CT) Kit is a target-amplified nucleic acid probe test used for the in vitro diagnostic qualitative detection of rRNA from Chlamydia trachomatis in endocervical and male urethral swab specimens and in female and male urine specimens.

The AMP CT assay kit incorporates the technologies of in vitro nucleic acid amplification and target amplicon hybridization with an acridinium ester-labeled DNA probe to specifically detect C. trachomatis ribonucleic acid (rRNA) in clinical specimens. Gen-Probe's proprietary technologies are combined in this product to allow qualitative detection of C. trachomatis rRNA in quantities as minute as those contained in a single organism. The presence of C. trachomatis rRNA provides evidence of the organisms's presence in a clinical specimen in the same way as does the observation of C. trachomatis on a coverslip from tissue culture. The AMP CT assay utilizes Transcription Mediated Amplification (TMA) and the Hybridization Protection Assay (HPA) to qualitatively detect C. trachomatis (rRNA).

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study details for the GEN-PROBE AMPLIFIED Chlamydia Trachomatis Assay Kit, based on the provided text:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance Study

The GEN-PROBE AMPLIFIED Chlamydia Trachomatis Assay Kit was evaluated against "tissue culture media and components using standard laboratory culture methods for detection of C. trachomatis" as the predicate device. The primary performance metrics were sensitivity and specificity.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The acceptance criteria are implied by the comparison to the "gold standard" (tissue culture) and the reported performance. The "performance goals" are not explicitly stated as numerical targets in the provided text but are demonstrated by the device's high sensitivity and specificity relative to the predicate.

Detailed Performance by Sample Type and Population (from provided table):

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

• Test Set Sample Size: 4,036 total specimens (1,897 swab and 2,139 urine) from 2,295 patients (1,510 females, 785 males).
• Data Provenance:
  • Country of Origin: Not explicitly stated, but the study was conducted at "5 geographically distributed sites" which typically implies multiple sites within the United States for FDA submissions unless otherwise specified.
  • Retrospective or Prospective: Prospective. The study enrolled "patients evaluated for C. trachomatis... during the study period."

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

• The document does not specify the number of experts or their qualifications for establishing the initial ground truth (tissue culture and DFA interpretation).
• It mentions "standard laboratory culture methods" for detection and "DFA-staining the monolayers" for culture IFU counts, implying trained laboratory personnel.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

The adjudication method for discrepant results (AMP CT positive/culture negative) was a multi-method resolution algorithm:

• Reculture: The original specimen was re-cultured.
• DFA of the culture transport medium: Direct immunofluorescence staining of the culture transport medium was performed.
• Urine DFA (urine discrepants only): For urine samples, DFA was specifically performed on the urine.

This process aimed to resolve "AMP CT apparent false positive results" by looking for additional evidence of C. trachomatis infection that might have been missed by the initial culture.

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

• No, a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study comparing human readers with and without AI assistance was not explicitly described or performed. This device is a diagnostic assay (algorithm only), not an AI-assisted interpretation tool for human readers.

6. Standalone Performance Study

• Yes, a standalone (algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) study was done. The entire clinical study described assesses the performance of the "AMP CT Assay Kit" as a direct diagnostic tool without human interpretation of the algorithm's output. The sensitivity and specificity figures represent the standalone performance of the assay compared to the cultural gold standard.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

• The primary ground truth for the clinical study was expert consensus / predicate device (tissue culture).
• For discrepant results (AMP CT positive/culture negative), a multi-modal ground truth enhancement was employed involving:
  • Reculture
  • Direct Immunofluorescence Staining (DFA) of the culture transport medium
  • DFA of urine (for urine specimens)

This indicates that while tissue culture was the initial "gold standard," supplementary diagnostic methods were used to refine the ground truth for cases where the new assay disagreed with the initial gold standard. This is a common method in diagnostic test validation to ensure that the "gold standard" itself isn't missing true positives that a more sensitive new test might detect.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

• The provided document does not explicitly describe a separate "training set" for the clinical algorithm per se, as this is a biochemical assay and not a machine learning model that undergoes a distinct training phase on clinical data in the same way.
• However, an analytical performance study to establish the assay's cut-off involved:
  • 1,112 clinical samples (130 C. trachomatis positive and 982 negative).
  • Specifically, 431 swabs (45 positive and 386 negative) and 681 urine samples (85 positive and 596 negative) were used for cut-off determination.

These samples, distinct from the larger clinical validation set, serve a similar function as a "development set" or "calibration set" for determining optimal assay parameters like the RLU cut-off.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set (Cut-off Determination) Was Established

• The ground truth for the samples used to establish the cut-off was based on "culture and DFA".
• The data was analyzed using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) and Decision Level (DL) curves to select an appropriate RLU cut-off value (>50,000 RLU) to minimize false positives and false negatives. This cut-off was then "validated through the clinical trial" (the larger study).

Ask a specific question about this device