Search Results

IMMULITE® Myoglobin is a solid-phase, two-site chemiluminescent enzyme immunometric assay for use with the IMMULITE Automated Analyzer and designed for the quantitative measurement of myoglobin in serum and heparinized plasma. It is intended strictly for in vitro use as an aid in the diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

IMMULITE® Myoglobin is a clinical device for use with the IMMULITE® Automated Immunoassay Analyzer. IMMULITE® Myoglobin is a solid-phase, two-site chemiluminescent immunometric assay. The solid phase, a polystyrene bead enclosed within an IMMULITE Test Unit, is coated with a monoclonal antibody specific for myoglobin. While the patient sample and alkaline phosphatase-conjugated polyclonal antibody are incubated for approximately 30 minutes at 37 ℃ in the Test Unit with intermittent agitation, myoglobin in the sample is bound to form an antibody sandwich complex. Unbound conjugate is then removed by a centrifugal wash, after which substrate is added and the Test Unit is incubated for a further 10 minutes. The chemiluminescent substrate, a phosphate ester of adamantyl dioxetane, undergoes hydrolysis in the presence of alkaline phosphatase to yield an unstable intermediate. The continuous production of this intermediate results in the sustained emission of light, thus improving precision by providing a window for multiple readings. The bound complex and thus also the photon output, as measured by the luminometer - is proportional to the concentration of myoglobin in the sample.

The provided document describes the IMMULITE® Myoglobin device and a study demonstrating its substantial equivalence to a predicate device. Here's an analysis of the requested information based on the provided text:

Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The core of the "acceptance criteria" here is that the IMMULITE® Myoglobin device's performance should be "substantially equivalent" to the predicate device, the ACS:180 Myoglobin. The study aims to show a strong correlation and agreement between the measurements from both devices.

Study Details

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

   • Sample Size: 172 patient samples.
   • Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated whether the samples were retrospective or prospective, nor the country of origin. It only mentions "patient samples."

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

   • This information is not provided in the document. The study compares the new device to an existing commercially available immunoassay (ACS:180), not directly to a ground truth established by experts.

3. Adjudication method for the test set:

   • None explicitly mentioned. The comparison is a direct reading of values from two automated systems.

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. This study is for a diagnostic assay, an automated immunoassay for myoglobin, not an AI-assisted diagnostic imaging system that would involve human readers.

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

   • Yes. The study describes the performance of the IMMULITE® Myoglobin assay itself, which is an automated system without human-in-the-loop performance in terms of result generation. It compares the results of this automated system to another automated system.

6. The type of ground truth used:

   • The "ground truth" for this study is implicitly the measurements from the predicate device (ACS:180 Myoglobin). The study aimed to show substantial equivalence to this already marketed device, rather than an independent gold standard like pathology or clinical outcomes for myoglobin itself.

7. The sample size for the training set:

   • Not applicable / not provided. As an immunoassay, the device itself doesn't typically have a "training set" in the machine learning sense. The development of the assay (e.g., antibody selection, chemiluminescent reaction parameters) would involve internal R&D and validation, but not a distinct "training set" as understood in AI/ML validation.

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

   • Not applicable / not provided for the reasons stated above.

Ask a specific question about this device