Search Results

Remel's ProSpecT® Clostridium difficile Toxin A/B Microplate Assay is a qualitative enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for the detection of C. difficile Toxin A and B in human fecal specimens from patients suspected of having Clostridium difficile disease. The test is intended for use as an aid in diagnosis of Clostridium difficile-associated disease (CDAD). For In vitro Diagnostic Use. Prescription Use.

The ProSpecT® Clostridium difficile Toxin A/B test detects the presence of Toxin A and Toxin B in clinical stool specimens through the use of specific antibodies. Microwell strips are coated with mouse monoclonal anti-Toxin A and rabbit anti-Toxin B antibodies. A stool specimen is diluted in Sample Diluent or used directly if pre-diluted in modified Cary-Blair medium. The sample is added to a microwell allowing the toxins, if present, to bind to the immobilized antibodies. After washing to remove unbound components, a conjugate reagent containing goat anti-Toxin A-HRP and rabbit anti-Toxin B-HRP is added to each well. Unbound conjugate is removed by washing and a chromagenic substrate solution is added to detect the presence of bound toxin. A stop reagent is added and the test results are read visually or spectrophotometrically. The presence of a yellow color indicates the presence of toxin.

Here's a summary of the acceptance criteria and study details for the ProSpecT® Clostridium difficile Toxin A/B Microplate Assay:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance

Note: The document does not explicitly state numerical acceptance criteria for sensitivity and specificity. However, the performance data presented, particularly the comparison to predicate devices, suggests that the device's performance met the FDA's requirements for substantial equivalence.

Study Details

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

   • Dual Wavelength Test Set: 764 samples (165 positive, 599 negative based on CTA).
   • Visual Interpretation Test Set: 586 samples (100 positive, 486 negative based on CTA).
   • Data Provenance: Retrospective (clinical trial at three sites in the USA).

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

   • The ground truth was established using the cellular cytotoxicity assay (CTA), which is a laboratory-based method. No human experts were involved in establishing the primary ground truth for the clinical samples.

3. Adjudication method for the test set:

   • Not applicable as the ground truth was established by the cellular cytotoxicity assay (CTA), not human reviewers requiring adjudication.

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 MRMC comparative effectiveness study was performed. This device is a qualitative enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for detecting C. difficile toxins, not an AI-powered diagnostic imaging or interpretation tool for human readers.

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

   • Yes, the performance data provided (sensitivity and specificity for both dual wavelength and visual interpretation) represents the standalone performance of the ProSpecT® Clostridium difficile Toxin A/B Microplate Assay. The "visual interpretation" involves a human reading the color change, but it's the direct output of the assay itself, not an AI interpreting human input.

6. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.):

   • The ground truth used was the cellular cytotoxicity assay (CTA), which is considered a gold standard for detecting C. difficile toxins.

7. The sample size for the training set:

   • The document does not explicitly state a separate "training set" size. The reported performance is based on the clinical validation study. For an IVD like this, the development and optimization (which could be analogous to "training") would typically happen internally during the assay development phase, using characterized control samples and potentially a smaller set of clinical samples, but these are not typically referred to as a "training set" in the same way as for AI/ML models.

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

   • Not explicitly described. For the general development of such assays, ground truth for sample characterization would be established using established laboratory methods, including the CTA for C. difficile toxins, and potentially molecular methods or culture.

Ask a specific question about this device