Search Results

The Nichols Advantage® Chemiluminescence Thyroglobulin Autoantibodies Immunoassay is designed for use with the Nichols Advantage® Specialty System for the quantitative determination of thyroglobulin autoantibodies (TgAb) in human serum. This assay is intended to aid in the diagnosis and assessment of patients with autoimmune thyroid disease.

TgAb chemiluminescence immunoassay is a two-site The Nichols Advantage® immunometric method based on binding anti-thyroglobulin antibodies in human serum to human thyroglobulin (Tg). Total duration of assay is 31.5 minutes at 37°C.

Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding the acceptance criteria and study details for the Nichols Advantage® Chemiluminescence Thyroglobulin Autoantibodies Immunoassay:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document doesn't explicitly state "acceptance criteria" for each performance characteristic in a separate, defined section. However, by comparing the new device's performance to the predicate device, especially in areas like precision and recovery, we can infer the predicate's performance acts as an implicit benchmark for acceptability, striving for comparable or improved results.

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

The document provides some sample sizes for specific tests but not a single, overarching "test set" sample size for comparison studies.

• Precision (Intra-Assay/Inter-Assay):
  • For each mean level, N=20 was used for both intra-assay and inter-assay precision measurements for the Nichols Advantage TgAb.
  • For the predicate device, N=20 (intra-assay) and N=15-22 (inter-assay) were used.
• Method Comparison: The "Range of results" states "Undetectable to 2,089 IU/mL" for the Nichols Advantage and "Undetectable to 2,190 IU/mL" for the predicate. This suggests a range of patient samples were used, but the number of samples is not explicitly stated. The Binomial Test Statistic P(X) = 0.25 is mentioned, which implies statistical analysis was performed on a set of comparative data, but the exact N is missing.
• Data Provenance: Not specified. It's unclear if the data is prospective or retrospective, or the country of origin of the samples.

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

• This information is not provided in the document. For an immunoassay, "ground truth" is typically established by the result of a reference method or clinical diagnosis, not by experts reviewing images.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

• This information is not provided. Given that this is an immunoassay, adjudication methods like those used for image interpretation (e.g., 2+1, 3+1) are not typically applicable. The "ground truth" would be the result from a reference standard or predicate device.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done, and the Effect Size:

• No, an MRMC study was not done. This type of study (evaluating multiple human readers with and without AI assistance on multiple cases) is relevant to diagnostic imaging devices with human interpretation components. The Nichols Advantage® device is an automated immunoassay, which does not involve human readers interpreting "cases" in that sense.

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

• Yes, implicitly. The entire study described for the Nichols Advantage® device represents its standalone performance. As an automated immunoassay, it produces quantitative results without direct human interpretive intervention beyond running the assay according to instructions. The performance characteristics (precision, recovery, specificity, method comparison) are all measures of the algorithm/device itself. There is no "human-in-the-loop" component in the assay's operation or result generation.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used:

• For precision, the ground truth is the measured concentration of TgAb in spiked or control samples.
• For recovery, it's the expected concentration after spiking.
• For specificity/cross-reactivity, it's the known absence/presence of interferents.
• For the method comparison, the "ground truth" is established by the results of the predicate device. The study aims to show substantial equivalence between the new device and the predicate.
• The "Intended Use" states it is "to aid in the diagnosis and assessment of patients with autoimmune thyroid disease." This suggests that ultimately, the assay results are correlated with clinical diagnoses or patient outcomes related to autoimmune thyroid disease, though the study presented is focused on analytical performance and comparison to a predicate, not clinical outcome validation.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set:

• This information is not applicable or not provided. This device is a traditional immunoassay, not an AI/machine learning model that typically undergoes a "training" phase with a large dataset. Its performance is based on its chemical and optical detection mechanisms, which are inherently "trained" or designed through biochemical engineering, not data-driven machine learning.

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

• This information is not applicable or not provided for the same reasons as point 8.

Ask a specific question about this device