Search Results

The VIDAS C. difficile Toxin A II assay detects the presence of C. difficile toxin A. It is substantially equivalent to the Meridian Premier C. difficile Toxin A test as an aid in the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile associated disease (CDAD).

The VIDAS C. difficile Toxin A II assay detects the presence of C. difficile toxin A.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information for the VIDAS C. difficile Toxin A II assay, based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

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

• Positive Specimens: 136
• Negative Specimens: 1,407
• Total Test Set Size: 1,543 specimens (136 + 1,407)
• Data Provenance: Not specified in the provided text (e.g., country of origin, retrospective or prospective).

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

• The ground truth was established by comparing the VIDAS assay to a commercially available EIA with discrepants resolved by cytotoxicity.
• The text does not specify the number of experts involved in resolving discrepancies or their qualifications.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

• Discrepancy resolution by cytotoxicity. This implies that for cases where the VIDAS assay and the reference EIA disagreed, an additional, more definitive test (cytotoxicity) was used as the tie-breaker to establish the true positive or negative status. It does not mention whether multiple human readers were involved in interpreting the cytotoxicity results or if an adjudication rule (e.g., 2+1) was used for these.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done, and the Effect Size of How Much Human Readers Improve with AI vs. Without AI Assistance

• No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. This study is for an in-vitro diagnostic (IVD) assay, not an AI-powered image analysis tool that assists human readers. Therefore, the concept of human reader improvement with/without AI assistance does not apply.

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

• Yes, this entire study represents a standalone performance evaluation of the VIDAS C. difficile Toxin A II assay. It measures the performance of the assay itself without human interpretation as part of its primary function (beyond potentially interpreting the reference EIA or cytotoxicity results, which are part of the ground truth establishment, not the device's operational performance).

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

• The primary ground truth for establishing sensitivity and specificity was a commercially available EIA with discrepants resolved by cytotoxicity. Cytotoxicity is a functional assay that directly assesses the biological activity of the C. difficile toxin, making it a strong indicator of true positivity for toxin-associated disease.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

• The document does not specify a training set size. Immunoassays like the VIDAS C. difficile Toxin A II assay typically do not have "training sets" in the same way machine learning algorithms do. Their performance is inherent in their chemical and biological design. Development and optimization might involve various samples, but these are not usually referred to as a "training set" in the context of regulatory submissions for such devices.

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

• As a training set is not explicitly mentioned or applicable in the machine learning sense, this question is not relevant to the provided text. The "training" of such an assay involves laboratory development, reagent optimization, and calibration, for which ground truth would be established through established laboratory methods and reference materials.

Ask a specific question about this device