Search Results

ONCOZENE Microspheres are intended for embolization of arteriovenous malformations and hypervascular tumors including hepatoma.

ONCOZENE Microspheres (hereafter may be referenced as ONCOZENE Microspheres or ONCOZENE) are spherical, tightly calibrated, biocompatible, non-resorbable, hydrogel microspheres coated with an inorganic perfluorinated polymer shell (Polyzene-F). The microspheres are suspended in liquid and then injected into the bloodstream to permanently occlude blood vessels. They are used to stop bleeding when the underlying lesion is not likely to heal or block arteries supplying a tumor to cause tumor necrosis and/or shrinkage.

ONCOZENE Microspheres are sterile, single use devices and are supplied in pre-filled 20 ml syringes containing 2ml or 3 ml of microspheres in approximately 7 ml of transport solution. The ONCOZENE Microspheres are available in 40, 75 and 100 um sizes.

The provided text is a 510(k) Premarket Notification from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regarding a medical device called "ONCOZENE Microspheres." The document primarily addresses the substantial equivalence of a modified device (new syringe) to a previously cleared predicate device.

Based on the provided text, the device in question is a medical device (microspheres for embolization), not an AI/software-based medical device that would require the types of studies and acceptance criteria typically associated with AI performance.

Therefore, I cannot extract information related to:

• A table of acceptance criteria and reported device performance (in the context of AI performance metrics like sensitivity, specificity, AUC). The document speaks of "acceptance criteria" but in the context of physical device testing such as mechanical performance, sterilization, biocompatibility, packaging integrity, and shelf-life.
• Sample size used for the test set and data provenance (for AI model evaluation).
• Number of experts used to establish ground truth or their qualifications.
• Adjudication method for the test set.
• Multi reader multi case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study or human reader improvement with AI assistance.
• Standalone (algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) study.
• Type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.) for AI evaluation.
• Sample size for the training set (for AI models).
• How the ground truth for the training set was established (for AI models).

The document outlines the following types of performance data and their "acceptance criteria" in a general sense:

1. Non-clinical Testing: To demonstrate the design and performance met established design criteria and is substantially equivalent to the predicate device. Specifically, mechanical testing was performed to verify the Syringe Volume Identification, and results "met all related specifications."
2. Sterilization: To ensure a minimum sterility assurance level of 10⁻⁶ in accordance with ISO standards. Half and full cycles were used, and results "met all acceptance criteria."
3. Biocompatibility: In accordance with ISO 10993-1, demonstrating that patient-contacting components are biocompatible. Testing was performed for genotoxicity, hemocompatibility, cytotoxicity, implantation effects, irritation and sensitization, pyrogenicity, subacute/subchronic systemic toxicity, toxicological risk assessment of chemistry results, chemical characterization, and irritation. The text states testing "demonstrated compliance."
4. Packaging Integrity and Shelf Life: Performed in accordance with ISO 11607-1 and ISO 11607-2, supporting a three-year shelf-life. Testing included label adhesion, legibility, packaging seal integrity, bubble leak test, peel strength test, and dye penetration.

In summary of what is available in the provided text:

• Device Type: Vascular embolization device (ONCOZENE Microspheres). This is a physical medical device, not an AI/software device.
• Study Purpose: To demonstrate substantial equivalence of a device with an updated syringe to a predicate device.
• Methods: Non-clinical testing, sterilization testing, biocompatibility testing, packaging integrity, and shelf-life testing.
• Acceptance: For all listed performance data, the results "met all acceptance criteria" or "demonstrated compliance/substantial equivalence."
• Ground Truth: For these types of physical device tests, "ground truth" is typically defined by adherence to established engineering specifications, ISO standards, and regulatory requirements (e.g., a specific sterility assurance level, a certain peel strength, or passing toxicology tests).

Since the nature of the device and the provided documentation does not pertain to AI/software performance evaluation, the requested details regarding AI model acceptance criteria, test sets, expert involvement, and ground truth for AI are not applicable and thus not present in the provided text.

Ask a specific question about this device

ONCOZENE™ Microspheres are intended for embolization of hypervascular tumors and arteriovenous malformations.
ONCOZENE™ Microspheres are indicated for the embolization of hypervascular tumors and arteriovenous malformations.

ONCOZENE™ Microspheres are precise dimensioned, soft, deformable microspheres intended to occlude vasculature for the purpose of blocking blood flow to a target tissue such as hypervascular tumor (HVT) or arteriovenous malformation (AVM). ONCOZENE™ Microspheres are manufactured from sodium polymethacrylate and coated with proprietary Polyzene®-F. The fully polymerized microspheres are compressible to enable smooth delivery through the indicated delivery catheter. ONCOZENE™ Microspheres contain no added dyes and are visually opaque. ONCOZENE™ Microspheres are supplied sterile and packaged in 20ml polycycloolefin syringes with a standard 7ml fill volume across the range. Available as 40μm, 75μm and 100μm microsphere diameter sizes, the ONCOZENE™ syringes are available with 2ml or 3ml microsphere volume per syringe.

The provided text describes a 510(k) premarket notification for a medical device called ONCOZENE™ Microspheres. This submission is for demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device, rather than proving performance against specific acceptance criteria in a clinical study with an aim to assess algorithm performance. Therefore, many of the requested categories, such as "reported device performance," "sample size for the test set," "number of experts," "adjudication method," "MRMC study," "standalone algorithm performance," "type of ground truth," "sample size for training set," and "how ground truth for training set was established," are not directly applicable or available in this type of submission.

Instead, the submission focuses on demonstrating equivalence based on similar design, specifications, fundamental scientific technology, and performance established through in-vitro testing, literature review, and post-market surveillance of the predicate device.

Here's the information that can be extracted or inferred based on the nature of a 510(k) submission for this type of device:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance (Based on Substantial Equivalence to Predicate)

Since this is a 510(k) submission establishing substantial equivalence for a medical device that physically occludes vasculature, the "acceptance criteria" are not performance metrics of an AI algorithm, but rather a demonstration that the new device (ONCOZENE™ Microspheres) is as safe and effective as the predicate device (Embozene Microspheres). The "reported device performance" is essentially showing that ONCOZENE™ Microspheres meet or fall within the established specifications and safety profile demonstrated by the predicate.

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance:
See table above. The "acceptance criteria" here refers to the parameters for demonstrating substantial equivalence. The "reported device performance" refers to how ONCOZENE™ Microspheres compare to these parameters and to the predicate device.

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

• Sample Size: Not applicable in the context of a traditional "test set" for an AI algorithm. The evaluation relies on in-vitro testing of the ONCOZENE™ Microspheres and a broad review of clinical experience with the predicate device and similar embolic agents.
• Data Provenance: The "clinical experience" review involved:
  • 1029 abstracts from a PubMed search.
  • CeloNova's adverse event data resulting from over 70,000 units of the predicate device distributed worldwide.
  • This data is retrospective, covering experience over the last ten years with Transarterial Embolization (TAE) using various embolic agents. The countries of origin for the PubMed abstracts and worldwide distribution would be global.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts:
Not applicable. This is a medical device submission based on substantial equivalence, not an AI algorithm performance study requiring expert ground truthing. The "ground truth" concerning the safety and effectiveness of embolization with these types of microspheres is established through decades of medical practice, clinical trials (for the predicate and similar devices), and post-market surveillance summarized in the literature review.

4. Adjudication method for the test set:
Not applicable. No "test set" in the sense of a set of cases requiring adjudication for ground truth.

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 device is a physical embolization microsphere, not an AI diagnostic or assistive tool.

6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the loop performance) was done:
Not applicable. This is not an AI algorithm. The device itself is "standalone" in that it performs its physical function (occlusion) without human-in-the-loop interaction during its mechanism of action, but its performance evaluation in this submission is not in the context of an algorithm.

7. The type of ground truth used:
For the conclusion of safety and effectiveness, the "ground truth" is based on:

• Expert Consensus/Clinical Evidence: Derived from a comprehensive literature review of Transarterial Embolization (TAE) using various embolic agents, including the predicate device, performed over the last ten years.
• Outcomes Data/Post-Market Surveillance: Adverse event data from over 70,000 units of the predicate device distributed worldwide.
• In-vitro Testing: Summary of in-vitro data for ONCOZENE™ Microspheres showing that minor manufacturing changes (for tighter pH control) did not necessitate additional testing.

8. The sample size for the training set:
Not applicable. There is no AI training set involved in this submission.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established:
Not applicable. There is no AI training set involved in this submission.

Ask a specific question about this device