Search Results

The Platelia™ Lyme IgM Assay is a qualitative test intended for use in the presumptive detection of human IgM antibodies to Borrelia burgdorferi in human serum or plasma (K3 EDTA, sodium heparin, or sodium citrate). The EIA test system should be used to test serum or plasma from patients with a history and symptoms of infection with B. burgdorferi. All positive and equivocal specimens should be re-tested with a specific, second-tier test such as Western blot. Positive second-tier results are supportive evidence of infection with B. burgdorferi. The diagnosis of Lyme disease should be made based on history and symptoms (such as erythema migrans), and other laboratory data, in addition to the presence of antibodies to B. burgdorferi. Negative results (either first or second-tier) should not be used to exclude Lyme disease.

The Platelia™ Lyme IgM Assay is a qualitative assay for the detection of human IgM antibodies to Borrelia burgdorferi in human serum or plasma.

The provided text describes the Bio-Rad Platelia™ Lyme IgM Assay and includes performance data from several studies. However, it does not explicitly define acceptance criteria for all the performance metrics presented, nor does it detail a single comprehensive study proving the device meets all acceptance criteria in the typical sense of a clinical trial for a standalone diagnostic device. Instead, it presents various performance characteristics and compares the device's results to clinical diagnoses or to a predicate device.

Here's an analysis based on the provided text, addressing your specific points:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document provides acceptance criteria specifically for interfering substances. For other performance metrics, it presents observations or comparisons rather than explicitly stated acceptance thresholds.

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

The text describes several test sets:

• Intra-Assay Precision:
  • One study used 3 samples, each tested 20 times (total 60 tests).
  • Another study used "various samples" (number not specified for distinct samples), each tested 30 times.
  • Provenance: Not specified, but generally these are internal lab samples. Retrospective.
• Cross Reactivity:
  • Total N = 126 unique samples across various disease conditions.
  • Provenance: Not specified. Retrospective.
• Interfering Substances:
  • 4 interfering substances (Hemoglobin, Bilirubin, Triolein, Albumin) were tested.
  • Sample size for each test: Not explicitly stated, but typically involves a set of samples with and without the interferent at various concentrations. Retrospective.
• CDC Lyme Disease Serum Panel:
  • Total N = 43 samples for Platelia™ Lyme IgM performance (1 sample not tested due to insufficient volume from a total of 44 for Western Blot).
  • Provenance: Implied to be from the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention), which often collects well-characterized samples. Retrospective.

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

• Intra-Assay Precision, Cross Reactivity, Interfering Substances: Ground truth is established by the known characteristics of the samples (e.g., spiked interferent, known disease status for cross-reactivity). No human experts are typically involved in establishing ground truth for these analytical performance studies.
• CDC Lyme Disease Serum Panel: The ground truth is referred to as "clinical diagnosis." The document does not specify the number or qualifications of experts who established these clinical diagnoses. It is assumed these diagnoses were made by clinicians based on history, symptoms, and other laboratory data, as per standard medical practice.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Intra-Assay Precision, Cross Reactivity, Interfering Substances: No adjudication method is described or typically applicable for these analytical studies. The results are quantitative measurements or direct qualitative classifications based on the assay's cut-offs.
• CDC Lyme Disease Serum Panel: No specific adjudication method is described. The "clinical diagnosis" serves as the reference standard. Equivocal samples were "considered as positive" for the agreement calculation in the table.

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

• This is an immunoassay kit, not an AI/imaging device designed for human reader interpretation. Therefore, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study involving human readers and AI assistance is not applicable and was not performed.

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

• This device is a standalone diagnostic kit. Its performance is evaluated directly based on its ability to detect IgM antibodies, with the results read and interpreted against established cut-offs. The "algorithm" here refers to the biochemical reactions and the interpretation of the optical density (OD) readings according to the kit's instructions. The performance data presented (e.g., precision, cross-reactivity, CDC panel results) are all related to the standalone performance of the assay.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• Intra-Assay Precision: Known sample characteristics (e.g., negative, low positive, medium, high concentrations).
• Cross Reactivity: Known disease conditions of the tested sera.
• Interfering Substances: Known concentrations of spiked interfering substances.
• CDC Lyme Disease Serum Panel: "Clinical diagnosis" of Lyme disease. This represents a form of outcomes data or a robust clinical reference standard, though details on its establishment are limited.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• This document describes performance validation studies for an immunoassay kit. Immunoassay kits are generally developed and optimized through iterative processes. The concept of a distinct "training set" as understood in machine learning (where an algorithm learns from data) does not directly apply in the same way to the development of a biochemical assay like this. The training set would conceptually be the samples used during research and development to optimize reagents, concentrations, reaction times, and cut-off values. This information is typically not detailed in a 510(k) summary for an immunoassay. The text does not provide a sample size for any "training set."

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

• As explained above, a formal "training set" with ground truth in the AI context isn't directly applicable here. For the samples used during the development and optimization of the assay, the ground truth would have been established through a combination of:
  • Reference materials: Known positive and negative control samples.
  • Well-characterized patient samples: Samples from patients with confirmed Lyme disease (e.g., by culture, PCR, or clinical diagnosis with confirmatory Western blot) and healthy controls.
  • Spiked samples: Samples with known concentrations of Borrelia burgdorferi antibodies or interfering substances.

Ask a specific question about this device