Search Filters

Search Results

Found 2 results

510(k) Data Aggregation

    K Number
    K100433
    Date Cleared
    2010-05-13

    (86 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    866.3175
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    Predicate For
    N/A
    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    IMMULITE® 2000 CMV IgM is for in vitro diagnostic use with IMMULITE® 2000 Systems analyzers for the qualitative detection of IgM antibodies to cytomegalovirus (CMV) in human serum or plasma (EDTA or heparinized), as an aid in the diagnosis of current and recent CMV infection in individuals with signs and symptoms of CMV infection or clinical suspicion of CMV infection. This assay is not FDA cleared or approved for use in testing (screening) blood or plasma donors, neonatal screening, or for use at point-of-care facilities.

    Performance characteristics for this assay have not been established in immunocompromised, immunosuppressed or organ transplant individuals.

    CMV IgM Controls are assayed, bi-level controls intended for use with the IMMULITE 2000 CMV IgM assay. They are intended as an aid in monitoring day-today assay performance.

    Device Description

    IMMULITE 2000 CMV IgM is a solid-phase, enzyme labeled chemiluminescent three-step immunoassay. The solid phase (bead) is coated with inactivated, purified CMV antigen (strain AD-169 from infected cell lysates). The liquid phase consists of two reagents: 1) polyclonal goat anti-human IgG antibody in buffer, and 2) alkaline phosphatase (bovine calf intestine) conjugated to polyclonal goat anti-human IgM antibody in buffer.

    In the first cycle, the patient sample and polyclonal goat anti-human IgG antibody are incubated together without the bead for 30 minutes. During this time, anti-IgG antibodies block IgG present in the patient's sample.

    In the second cycle, the pretreated sample and polyclonal goat anti-human IgG antibody are transferred to the second reaction tube. Anti-IgG antibodies block the remaining IgG from the patient's sample from binding to the CMV antigen on the bead. During this time, CMV IgM in the patient sample binds to CMV antigen on the bead. Unbound sample and reagent are then removed by centrifugal washes.

    In the third cycle, the enzyme conjugated polyclonal goat anti-human IgM antibody is added to the second reaction tube. The enzyme conjugate binds to immobilized IgM to form the antibody sandwich complex. The unbound enzyme conjugate is removed by centrifugal washes. Finally, chemiluminescent substrate is added to the reaction tube and the signal is generated in proportion to the bound enzyme.

    AI/ML Overview

    Here's an analysis of the provided text, focusing on the acceptance criteria and study details for the IMMULITE® 2000 CMV IgM device:

    Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

    The document does not explicitly state pre-defined acceptance criteria in terms of specific percentages for "Positive Agreement" and "Negative Agreement." Instead, it presents the results of a comparison study against a predicate device (Kit A, which is the bioMerieux Vitek VIDAS CMV IgM assay). The "acceptance criteria" are implied by the demonstration of substantial equivalence to the predicate device. The performance is reported as "Positive Agreement" and "Negative Agreement" with the predicate device.

    Table 1: Acceptance Criteria (Implied) and Reported Device Performance

    Performance MetricImplied Acceptance Criteria (Substantial Equivalence)Reported Device Performance (IMMULITE® 2000 CMV IgM vs. Kit A)
    Prospective SubjectsAchieve substantial equivalence to predicate devicePositive Agreement: 47.1% (95% CI: 23.0% - 72.2%)
    Negative Agreement: 97.2% (95% CI: 95.4% - 98.5%)
    Retrospective SubjectsAchieve substantial equivalence to predicate devicePositive Agreement: 97.8% (95% CI: 92.4% - 99.7%)
    Negative Agreement: 56.3% (95% CI: 29.9% - 80.2%)
    PrecisionComparable to predicate device (4.0% to 6.5% CV)Total CV ranged from 5.1% to 21.4%

    Note on "Acceptance Criteria": The document's primary goal is to demonstrate "substantial equivalence" to a legally marketed predicate device (VIDAS® CMV IgM). This regulatory pathway often relies on showing comparable performance rather than meeting strict pre-defined numerical thresholds for a new device's absolute performance. The provided "Positive Agreement" and "Negative Agreement" with the predicate device are key metrics used to support this claim of equivalence.


    Study Details

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

      • Total Samples: 636 serum samples.
      • Prospective Samples: 527 samples from "target enrollment groups" collected prospectively.
      • Retrospective Samples: 109 samples where the CMV IgM+ status was known.
      • Data Provenance: Samples were collected at four U.S. sites and three commercial suppliers. The testing was performed at three U.S. sites. It is a multi-site, mixed retrospective and prospective study conducted within the U.S.
    2. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts:
      The document does not specify the number of experts or their qualifications for establishing ground truth. The "ground truth" for comparison is primarily defined by the results of a "commercially available CMV IgM assay (Kit A)" which is identified as the VIDAS® CMV IgM assay. For the 109 retrospective samples, it states "where the CMV IgM + status was known," implying a prior determination, but details on how that status was established are not provided.

    3. Adjudication method for the test set:
      The document does not describe any adjudication method. The results are directly compared between the IMMULITE® 2000 CMV IgM assay and the predicate device (Kit A).

    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, this is not an MRMC comparative effectiveness study involving human readers and AI. This is a study comparing the performance of two in vitro diagnostic assays (IMMULITE® 2000 CMV IgM vs. VIDAS® CMV IgM). AI assistance for human readers is not relevant to this type of device and study.

    5. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the loop performance) was done:
      Yes, this is a standalone performance study of an in vitro diagnostic assay. There is no human-in-the-loop component described for the interpretation or operation of the device during the performance evaluation, beyond routine laboratory procedures. The output of the device is a qualitative result (Reactive, Indeterminate, Nonreactive).

    6. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.):
      The primary "ground truth" or reference standard used for comparison is the result obtained from a commercially available, legally marketed predicate device (VIDAS® CMV IgM assay). For the retrospective samples, "CMV IgM + status was known," implying prior clinical or laboratory determination. It is not expert consensus, pathology, or outcomes data, but rather a comparison to an established diagnostic test.

    7. The sample size for the training set:
      The document does not provide information on a specific "training set" sample size. This is likely because the document describes a regulatory submission for device performance evaluation and equivalence demonstration, not the development process of a novel algorithm that typically involves distinct training, validation, and test sets. For an immunoassay like this, the 'training' would typically refer to the assay's development and optimization process, not a dedicated data set in the same way as machine learning models.

    8. How the ground truth for the training set was established:
      As no explicit "training set" is mentioned in the context of ground truth establishment for an algorithm, this information is not applicable/not provided in the document. The focus is on the performance evaluation against a predicate device.

    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    K Number
    K972884
    Date Cleared
    1997-08-22

    (17 days)

    Product Code
    Regulation Number
    866.3175
    Reference & Predicate Devices
    N/A
    Predicate For
    N/A
    AI/MLSaMDIVD (In Vitro Diagnostic)TherapeuticDiagnosticis PCCP AuthorizedThirdpartyExpeditedreview
    Intended Use

    ACCURUN™ 146 CMV IgM Positive Control is a human blood based single analyte run control designed to be used as an independent run control with tests for the detection of IgM antibodies to Cytomegalovirus (CMV). This control is not intended as a substitute for controls provided with test kits. ACCURUN™ 146 control is intended to estimate laboratory testing precision and can be used to detect errors in laboratory testing procedures. This product will be made available to clinical laboratory professionals in public health laboratories and clinical laboratories for use with in vitro diagnostic tests for the detection of IgM antibodies to CMV in human serum and plasma.

    Device Description

    ACCURUN™ 146 CMV IgM Positive Control is manufactured from human serum or plasma containing IgM antibodies to CMV, but is nonreactive for Hepatitis B Surface Antigen (HBsAg) and antibodies to Human Immunodeficiency Virus Types 1 and 2 (HIV 1 and 2), antibodies to Human T-Lymphotropic Virus Type I (HTLV I) and antibodies to Hepatitis C (HCV). This control contains stabilizers (EDTA, buffering agents), and 0.1% ProClin™ as preservative. This control is supplied as 1 x 1 ml or 1 x 5 ml vial. ACCURUN™ 146 should be stored frozen at -10°C or colder. Once opened, ACCURUN™ 146 should be stored at 2-8°C and discarded after 60 days.

    AI/ML Overview

    The provided document describes the ACCURUN™ 146 CMV IgM Positive Control, a human blood-based single analyte run control for detecting IgM antibodies to Cytomegalovirus (CMV). However, it does not explicitly state acceptance criteria in a quantitative manner or provide a detailed study report with performance metrics against pre-defined criteria.

    Based on the available text, here's a breakdown of the information and what cannot be extracted:

    1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

    Acceptance Criteria (Inferred)Reported Device Performance
    Stability:
    - Real-time stabilityStable when stored frozen (-10°C or colder).
    - Ambient temperature stabilityStable for a short period of time.
    - Heat stress stabilityStable for a short period of time with no adverse effects.
    - Freeze-thaw stabilityNot affected by multiple freeze-thaw cycles.
    - Open vial stabilityStable for at least 60 days when stored at 2-8°C after opening.
    Safety and Effectiveness:Safe and effective as an independent run control.
    Batch Consistency:Demonstrated consistency across three manufactured lots.
    Performance in varied lab conditions:Effective in three different laboratories under various conditions of stress.

    Important Note: The document describes the types of stability studies performed and the conclusions drawn, but lacks specific quantitative acceptance criteria (e.g., "signal not to drop by more than X% after Y days at Z temperature"). The "reported device performance" is a summary of the conclusions rather than hard data points.

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

    • Sample Size for Test Set: Not explicitly stated. The document mentions "clinical laboratory evaluations were performed at BBI and two external sites, including one blood bank and a clinical laboratory" and "three manufactured ACCURUN™ 146 lots." However, the number of individual control vials or test events in these evaluations is not provided.
    • Data Provenance: The studies were conducted at "BBI and two external sites, including one blood bank and a clinical laboratory." The countries of origin for these labs are not specified. The studies appear to be prospective evaluations of the device's stability and performance in a usability context.

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

    • Not applicable. This device is a positive control, meaning its purpose is to provide a known positive signal for CMV IgM. It does not output a diagnostic result that requires expert interpretation or ground truth establishment in the traditional sense of a diagnostic test. The "ground truth" for the control itself is its known composition (human serum/plasma containing IgM antibodies to CMV). The evaluations focused on the control's stability and consistency in producing an expected signal, not on its diagnostic accuracy against patient samples.

    4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

    • Not applicable. There was no "test set" in terms of patient samples requiring diagnostic interpretation and adjudication. The studies evaluated the stability and performance of the control itself.

    5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study:

    • No. This type of study is not applicable to a positive control device. MRMC studies are typically performed for diagnostic devices where human readers interpret medical images or data, and the comparison is between human performance with and without AI assistance. The ACCURUN™ 146 is a control material, not an AI-powered diagnostic tool.

    6. Standalone (Algorithm Only Without Human-in-the-Loop Performance) Study:

    • Not applicable. This device is a biological control material, not an algorithm.

    7. Type of Ground Truth Used:

    • For the composition of the control itself, the ground truth is the known presence of IgM antibodies to Cytomegalovirus (CMV) in the human serum or plasma used to manufacture it, along with confirmed non-reactivity for other specified viruses (HBsAg, HIV 1/2, HTLV I, HCV). The studies assessed the control's ability to maintain its intended characteristics (stability, consistent signal) over time and under various conditions.

    8. Sample Size for the Training Set:

    • Not applicable. This device is a biochemical control, not an AI model that requires a training set.

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

    • Not applicable. As above, no training set is relevant for this product.
    Ask a Question

    Ask a specific question about this device

    Page 1 of 1