Search Results

The IDS-iSYS Aldosterone assay (IS-3300) is a device intended for use in clinical laboratories for the quantitative determination of Aldosterone in human EDTA plasma on the IDS-iSYS Multi-Discipline Automated System. Aldosterone measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of primary aldosteronism (a disorder caused by excessive secretion of Aldosterone by the adrenal gland), hypertension caused by primary aldosteronism, selective hyperaldosteronism, edematous states and other conditions of electrolyte balance.

The IDS-iSYS Aldosterone Control Set (IS-3330) is intended for use as assaved quality control samples to monitor the accuracy of the IDS-iSYS Aldosterone assay on the IDS-iSYS Multi-Discipline Automated System.

The IDS-iSYS Aldosterone Calibration Verifiers (IS-3335) are intended for medical purposes for use in the quantitative verification of calibration of the IDS-iSYS Aldosterone assay on the IDS-iSYS Multi-Discipline Automated System.

The IDS-iSYS Aldosterone assay is based on chemiluminescence technology. A biotinylated monoclonal anti-Aldosterone antibody is incubated with the sample, after an incubation step an Aldosterone acridinium conjugate is added and after a further incubation step streptavidin coated magnetic particles are added. Following a third incubation step the particles are "captured" using a magnet. After a washing step and addition of trigger reagents, the light emitted by the acridinium label is inversely proportional to the concentration of Aldosterone in the original sample.

Here's an analysis of the provided text to extract the requested information about acceptance criteria and the supporting study:

The provided document is a 510(k) Summary for the IDS-iSYS Aldosterone assay, control set, and calibration verifiers. It focuses on demonstrating substantial equivalence to a predicate device, as required for FDA clearance. The document details performance characteristics but does not explicitly state acceptance criteria in a pass/fail format typical of formal acceptance criteria documents. Instead, it reports performance values found during validation studies.

Here's the breakdown of the information you requested, based on what's available in the document:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

As mentioned, explicit "acceptance criteria" are not listed in a single table. However, the performance characteristics are reported, and implicitly, these values are considered acceptable for demonstrating substantial equivalence. The table below compiles the reported performance data from the document.

Note: The document does not provide a column for "Acceptance Criteria" as a separate, pre-defined target. The "Reported Device Performance" is the outcome of the studies aiming to demonstrate acceptable performance.

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

• Precision/Reproducibility:

  • Sample Size: Six EDTA plasma samples (9 "samples" were run over 20 days, generating 80 replicates per sample concentration).
  • Data Provenance: Not explicitly stated, but clinical laboratory setting is implied. The phrase "two sites using three analyzers" could suggest multi-center testing, potentially from different locations/countries, but this is not specified. The studies were performed for the manufacturer for regulatory submission.

• Linearity/Assay Reportable Range:

  • Sample Size: One high plasma sample diluted with a low sample to create 11 dilution samples. Run in quadruplicate.
  • Data Provenance: Not specified, likely internal laboratory data for the manufacturer.

• Detection Limit (LoB, LoD, LoQ):

  • Sample Size:
    • LoB (Lot 1): One zero-aldosterone plasma sample, 10 replicates for 5 days (total 50 replicates).
    • LoD/LoQ (Lot 1): 7 samples, 2 replicates per sample, once per day for 8 days.
    • LoB (Lot 2): One zero-aldosterone plasma sample, 6 replicates for 5 days (total 30 replicates).
    • LoD (Lot 2): 8 samples, 2 replicates per sample, once per day for 5 days.
    • LoQ (Lot 2): 7 samples, 2 replicates per sample, once per day for 5 days.
  • Data Provenance: Not specified, likely internal laboratory data for the manufacturer. Two different sites and two different analyzers were used.

• Analytical Specificity (Interference and Cross-Reactivity):

  • Sample Size:
    • Interference: Two base plasma samples ("Low" and "High" Aldosterone concentrations), spiked with various potential interferents. For each interferent, 26 replicates for blank and spiked samples were compared.
    • Cross-reactivity: Stock solutions of various compounds diluted serially to create 7-point standard curves for each substance.
  • Data Provenance: Not specified, likely internal laboratory data for the manufacturer.

• Method Comparison:

  • Sample Size: 161 samples (including 12 altered samples).
  • Data Provenance: Not specified, implied to be clinical or patient samples. Whether these were retrospective or prospective, or their country of origin, is not mentioned.

• Reference Range Study (Expected Values):

  • Sample Size: 228 Caucasian adult samples.
  • Data Provenance: Collected in the US, prospective (samples collected under specific conditions: 7-10 am after overnight fasting, upright/supine positions).

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

This type of information is generally NOT applicable to in vitro diagnostic (IVD) devices like the Aldosterone assay described. For IVD assays, "ground truth" is typically established by:

• Reference methods/predicate devices (e.g., Diasorin Liaison Aldosterone assay for method comparison).
• Gravimetric preparation of standards and calibrators for traceability.
• Defined sample characteristics (e.g., "zero aldosterone plasma," "high plasma sample").

There were no human experts assessing images or making diagnoses that would require adjudication.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Not applicable, as this is an IVD assay, not a device requiring human interpretation of results in a diagnostic context that would call for adjudication of different interpretations.

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 is an IVD assay for quantitative determination of a biomarker; there are no "human readers" interpreting results in the way an MRMC study would be designed for an imaging AI device.

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

Yes, the studies conducted (Precision, Linearity, LoD/LoQ, Analytical Specificity, Method Comparison) represent the standalone performance of the IDS-iSYS Aldosterone assay system. The device quantifies aldosterone in plasma samples directly, without human interpretation of results being a variable in its core analytical performance.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

The ground truth used for various studies includes:

• Reference materials: Aldosterone (≥95% HPLC; A9477Sigma-Aldrich) dissolved in Dioxane, with concentration calculated by UV quantitation using molar extinction coefficient (for calibrators and traceability).
• Predicate device results: The Diasorin Liaison Aldosterone assay (K130321) for method comparison.
• Spiked samples: For linearity, interference, and cross-reactivity studies, known concentrations of analyte or interferents were added to base samples to create "true" concentrations.
• Patient samples: For method comparison and reference range studies, patient samples were used. Their "truth" for method comparison was established by the predicate device. For reference ranges, the "truth" was the measured value distributed among a healthy population.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

The document describes performance studies (validation) but does not explicitly mention a "training set" in the context of machine learning. For an IVD assay, the development process involves reagent optimization, calibration curve fitting, etc., which conceptually use data, but this is not typically termed a "training set" like in AI/ML.

However, the "Master curve" and "two-point calibration" system is mentioned. The "logistic parameters of the Master calibration curve" are generated using "data of 20 runs Internal Reference Calibrators" (p.9). This could be considered analogous to a training process for establishing the core measurement algorithm, but it's not a training set for an AI inference model.

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

If we consider the generation of the "Master calibration curve" as a "training" process:

• Ground Truth: The "Internal Reference Calibrators" referenced (p.9) would serve as the ground truth. These calibrators are traceable to gravimetrically prepared Aldosterone standards using high-purity Aldosterone and UV quantitation (p.9).
• Establishment Method: The "new kit calibrator sets are run as 'unknowns' in duplicate in at least 20 assays on one analyser" (p.9). "The data of 20 runs Internal Reference Calibrators are used to generate the logistic parameters of the Master calibration curve by using Prism software package" (p.9).

Ask a specific question about this device

The LIAISON® Aldosterone assay uses chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) technology and is intended for the quantitative determination of Aldosterone in human serum. EDTA plasma and treated urine samples. Aldosterone measurements are intended for use in the diagnosis and treatment of primary aldosteronism (a disorder caused by excessive secretion of aldosterone by the adrenal gland), hypertension caused by primary aldosteronism, selective hypoaldosteronism, edematous states and other conditions of electrolyte imbalance. The test has to be performed on the LIAISON® Analyzer.

The DiaSorin LIAISON® Aldosterone Control Set is intended for use as assayed quality control samples to monitor the accuracy of the DiaSorin LIAISON® Aldosterone assay on the LIAISON® Analyzer.

The DiaSorin LIAISON® Aldosterone Calibration Verifiers are assayed quality control materials intended for the quantitative verification of calibration and reportable range of the LIAISON® Aldosterone assay when performed on the LIAISON® Analyzer.

The LIAISON® Aldosterone assay is a competitive modified 2 step chemiluminescent assay that uses sheep monoclonal antibody for capture of the Aldosterone molecule. Results are determined by a 2 point calibration conversion of the master curve to a working curve. The light signal is measured by a photomultiplier as relative light units (RLU) and is inversely proportional to the concentration of aldosterone present in the calibrators, controls or samples.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study details for the LIAISON® Aldosterone assay, based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not explicitly present a table of "acceptance criteria" with specific pass/fail thresholds for the LIAISON® Aldosterone assay. However, it provides performance data that would implicitly be compared against desired clinical or analytical requirements. Below is a table summarizing the reported performance, which serves as evidence of the device meeting its intended analytical characteristics.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Nichols Advantage Aldosterone Assay is intended for in vitro diagnostic laboratory use with the Nichols Advantage® Specialty System for quantitative measurement of aldosterone in human serum, EDTA plasma, and extracted urine. Aldosterone measurements are intended for use in the diagnosis and treatment of primary aldosteronism (a disorder caused by excessive secretion of aldosterone by the adrenal gland), hypertension caused by primary aldosteronism, selective hypoaldosteronism, edematous states, and other conditions of electrolyte imbalance.

The Nichols Advantage® Aldosterone Assay is a competitive immunochemiluminometric in vitro diagnostic laboratory immunoassay (IVD device) that utilizes a biotinylated mouse monoclonal anti-aldosterone antibody as the capture reagent and an acridinium ester labeled aldosterone as a tracer reagent. This Aldosterone IVD device immunoassay is intended for use for the measurement of aldosterone in human serum, EDTA plasma, and extracted urine, as an extended diagnostic method utilized within the Nichols Advantage® Specialty System.

Here's an analysis of the provided text regarding the Nichols Advantage® Aldosterone Assay, focusing on acceptance criteria and study details:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance

The submission doesn't explicitly state quantitative acceptance criteria in a dedicated section. Instead, the performance characteristics are presented as evidence of the device's capabilities and are implicitly compared to the predicate device or general laboratory expectations. The method comparison to a predicate device serves as the primary "acceptance criterion" for demonstrating substantial equivalence.

Implicit Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

Ask a specific question about this device

The Nichols Advantage® Aldosterone assay is intended for use with the Nichols Advantage® Specialty System to quantitatively measure aldosterone in human serum and EDTA plasma. Aldosterone measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of primary aldosteronism (a disorder caused by excessive secretion of aldosterone by the adrenal gland), hypertension caused by primary aldosteronism, selective hypoaldosteronism, edematous states, and other conditions of electrolyte imbalance.

The Nichols Advantage® Aldosterone assay contains sufficient reagents for 100 tests. The assay is a competitive binding assay for aldosterone in human serum or plasma.

The Nichols Advantage® Aldosterone assay is a competitive binding immunoassay intended for quantitative measurement of aldosterone in human serum and EDTA plasma using the Nichols Advantage Specialty System. Aldosterone measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of conditions such as primary aldosteronism, hypertension caused by primary aldosteronism, selective hypoaldosteronism, edematous states, and other electrolyte imbalances.

The device's performance was compared to a predicate device, the DPC Coat-A-Count Aldosterone RIA (K831178), to establish substantial equivalence.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study details:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document doesn't explicitly state "acceptance criteria" in a quantitative sense for all features. However, it provides comparative performance characteristics between the Nichols Advantage Aldosterone and the predicate device. The implied acceptance is that the Nichols Aldosterone performs comparably to the predicate.

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

• Sample Size: One hundred three (103) remnant serum samples.
• Data Provenance: The clinical diagnosis for these samples was unknown. The document does not specify the country of origin, but given the manufacturer's location (San Clemente, CA) and the FDA submission, it's highly likely to be U.S.-based. The samples were "remnant," suggesting a retrospective collection.

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

Not applicable. This device is an in vitro diagnostic immunoassay measuring an analyte concentration. The "ground truth" for the test set was the measurement result obtained by the predicate device (DPC Coat-A-Count Aldosterone RIA), not expert consensus on an image or clinical observation.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

Not applicable. The study involved a direct comparison of quantitative measurements from two immunoassay methods on the same samples. There was no need for expert adjudication.

5. If a Multi Reader Multi Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done:

No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not conducted as this is an in vitro diagnostic device for quantitative measurement, not an imaging device requiring human reader interpretation.

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

Yes, the core of the submission is a standalone performance evaluation of the Nichols Advantage Aldosterone assay, comparing its quantitative results to a legally marketed predicate device without human-in-the-loop interaction for result interpretation beyond running the assay.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used:

The ground truth for comparison was the quantitative measurement obtained from the predicate device (DPC Coat-A-Count Aldosterone RIA) on the same serum samples. This is a common approach for demonstrating substantial equivalence for new IVD devices by comparing them to an established, legally marketed assay.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set:

Not applicable. This document describes the validation of an immunoassay kit, not a machine learning algorithm that requires a "training set" in the conventional sense. The development of the assay would have involved internal optimization and validation, but this specific submission focuses on the performance comparison to the predicate.

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

Not applicable, as there is no mention of a "training set" in the context of an AI/ML algorithm.

Ask a specific question about this device