Search Results

The KRONUS Aquaporin-4 Autoantibody (AQP4Ab) ELISA Assay is for the semi-quantitative determination of autoantibodies to Aquaporin-4 in human serum. The KRONUS Aquaporin-4 Autoantibody (AQP4Ab) ELISA Assay may be useful as an aid in the diagnosis of Neuromyelitis Optica (NMO) and Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorders (NMOSD). The KRONUS Aquaporin-4 Autoantibody (AQP4Ab) ELISA Assay is not to be used in conjunction with other clinical, laboratory, and radiological (e.g. MRI) findings.

Not Found

This is a 510(k) premarket notification for an in vitro diagnostic (IVD) device, not an AI/ML medical device. Therefore, many of the requested categories for AI/ML device studies are not applicable.

Here's an attempt to answer the questions based on the provided text, primarily focusing on the device itself and applicable sections:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance
   The provided text is a letter from the FDA acknowledging the substantial equivalence of the device and contains the Indications for Use. It does not include specific acceptance criteria or performance data tables. For IVD devices, such data would typically be found in the 510(k) summary or the full submission, which is not part of this document.

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance (e.g., country of origin of the data, retrospective or prospective)
   This information is not provided in the supplied FDA letter or Indications for Use statement.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts (e.g., radiologist with 10 years of experience)
   This information is not applicable and not provided. The device is an ELISA assay for autoantibodies, and ground truth for such assays would typically be established by clinical diagnosis and/or correlation with other lab tests, not by expert interpretation of images/data in the same way as an imaging AI device.

4. Adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set
   This information is not applicable and not provided.

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 information is not applicable. The device is an IVD ELISA assay, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool that humans would use to interpret cases.

6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done
   This information is not applicable. The device is a laboratory assay. Its performance is evaluated intrinsically through analytical and clinical studies, not typically as an "algorithm only" or "human-in-the-loop" system in the context of AI.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc.)
   The device is an assay for autoantibodies to Aquaporin-4 (AQP4Ab) to aid in the diagnosis of Neuromyelitis Optica (NMO) and Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorders (NMOSD). The "ground truth" for evaluating such a diagnostic aid would typically be the definitive clinical diagnosis of NMO/NMOSD based on established diagnostic criteria, which may involve a combination of clinical presentation, neurological examination, imaging (e.g., MRI findings), and other laboratory tests. The device itself is designed to contribute to this diagnosis.

8. The sample size for the training set
   This information is not provided in the supplied FDA letter or Indications for Use statement. For an IVD assay development, a "training set" might refer to samples used for assay optimization and cutoff determination, but specific details are not given here.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established
   This information is not provided. Similar to the test set, any "training set" for an IVD assay would likely use confirmed clinical diagnoses for NMO/NMOSD as the ground truth.

Ask a specific question about this device

The KRONUS Aquaporin-4 Autoantibody (AQP4Ab) ELISA Assay is for the semiquantitative determination of autoantibodies to Aquaporin-4 in human serum. The KRONUS Aquaporin-4 Autoantibody (AQP4Ab) ELISA Assay may be useful as an aid in the diagnosis of Neuromyelitis Optica (NMO) and Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorders (NMOSD). The KRONUS Aquaporin-4 Autoantibody (AQP4Ab) ELISA Assay is not to be used alone and is to be used in conjunction with other clinical, laboratory, and radiological (e.g., MRI) findings.

The KRONUS Aquaporin-4 Autoantibody (AQP4Ab) ELISA Assay consists of ELISA strip wells coated with human recombinant AQP4 protein (amino acid position: 23-323) (96 wells in total) and supplied as 12 strips of 8 wells in a frame and sealed in a foil pouch with desiccant; ready-to-use 5 levels of calibrators (1.5, 5, 20, 40, and 80 U/mL), 5 x 0.7 mL; a ready-to-use positive (2 x . 7 mL) and a negative control serum (1 x 0.7 mL); AQP4-Biotin (lyophilized), 3 x 1.5 mL (reconstituted); ready-to-use reconstitution buffer for AQP4-Biotin, 1 x 10 mL; Streptavidin Peroxidase (SA-POD dilute before use) 1 x 0.8 mL; ready-to-use diluent for SA-POD, 1 x 15 mL; ready-to-use peroxidase substrate (TMB), 1 x 15 mL; concentrated wash solution (dilute 1:10 with deionized water before use), 1 x 120 mL and ready-to-use stop solution, 1 x 14 mL.

KRONUS Aquaporin-4 Autoantibody (AQP4Ab) ELISA Assay: Acceptance Criteria and Performance Study

This document summarizes the acceptance criteria and the study demonstrating the KRONUS Aquaporin-4 Autoantibody (AQP4Ab) ELISA Assay meets these criteria, based on the provided text.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The provided text focuses on the performance characteristics of the KRONUS Aquaporin-4 Autoantibody (AQP4Ab) ELISA Assay. While explicit "acceptance criteria" are not always presented as a direct numerical threshold in this document, the studies demonstrate that the device's performance metrics were "within the manufacturer's pre-determined acceptance limit" or "deemed appropriate" based on the established cut-off. The table below compiles the reported performance metrics.

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

• Test Set Sample Size:
  • Clinical Validation: A total of 620 serum samples were included. This broke down into:
    • 85 patients diagnosed with NMO
    • 52 patients diagnosed with NMOSD
    • 483 samples from patients with multiple sclerosis and other non-target diseases (detailed list provided in Section 7b).
  • Assay Cut-off Determination: 509 healthy blood donors in the U.S.
  • Reproducibility (Site-to-site): 50 serum samples.
  • Lot-to-lot Reproducibility: 15 samples.
  • Precision: 10 human sera samples.
  • Detection Limit: "b(4) Trade Secret" (number not explicitly stated for publication).
  • Interference: 5-11 samples.
• Data Provenance:
  • The document implies the samples were collected from patients diagnosed with NMO, NMOSD, MS, and various other infectious and autoimmune diseases, as well as healthy blood donors.
  • For reproducibility, three different laboratories were used (two in the U.K. and one in the U.S.).
  • For assay cut-off, 509 healthy blood donors in the U.S. were used.
  • The other studies do not explicitly state the country of origin but refer to "human sera samples" or "patient sera".
  • The study appears to be retrospective in nature, utilizing pre-existing serum samples from diagnosed patients or healthy individuals.

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

The document does not explicitly state the number of experts or their specific qualifications (e.g., "radiologist with 10 years of experience") used to establish the ground truth for the test set. However, it does outline how diagnoses were made:

• NMO and NMOSD diagnoses: "...must be based on clinical findings, laboratory tests (e.g., serological tests), and radiological tests (e.g., Magnetic Resonance Imaging)." Specific criteria for NMO were referenced (Wingerchuk DM et al., 2006).
• Non-Target Disease Group diagnoses: "...must be based on established diagnostic criteria and clinical evaluation." For Multiple Sclerosis, "McDonald Criteria" (Polman CH et al., 2005) were referenced.

This implies that the ground truth for patient diagnosis was established through standard clinical practice by medical professionals, likely involving neurologists, radiologists, and laboratory specialists, following recognized diagnostic criteria.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

The document does not explicitly describe an adjudication method (like 2+1, 3+1) for establishing the ground truth of the test set samples. The diagnoses for NMO, NMOSD, and non-target diseases were stated to be based on established diagnostic criteria and clinical evaluation, which suggests a standard clinical diagnostic process rather than a specific study-defined adjudication panel.

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

No Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was mentioned. This device is an immunoassay (ELISA) for the semi-quantitative determination of autoantibodies, not an imaging device that would typically involve multiple human readers interpreting results with or without AI assistance. Therefore, the concept of human readers improving with AI vs. without AI assistance is not applicable here.

6. Standalone Performance Study

Yes, a standalone performance study was conducted. The entire clinical validation and analytical performance sections describe the performance of the KRONUS Aquaporin-4 Autoantibody (AQP4Ab) ELISA Assay as an algorithm/device only, without human-in-the-loop performance modifications during the testing itself. The results presented (sensitivity, specificity, precision, linearity, etc.) are a direct measure of the device's performance.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

The ground truth used was primarily expert clinical diagnosis based on established diagnostic criteria, combining clinical findings, laboratory tests (other than the device under evaluation), and radiological tests. This is further elaborated:

• For NMO: Wingerchuk DM, Lennon VA, Pittock SJ, Lucchinetti CF, Weinshenker BG. 2006. Revised diagnostic criteria for neuromyelitis optica. Neurology 66:1485-1489.
• For MS: Polman CH, Reingold SC, Edan G, Filippi M, Hartung HP, Kappos L, Lublin FD, Metz LM, McFarland HF, O'Connor PW, Sandberg-Wollheim M, Thompson AJ, Weinshenker BG, Wolinsky JS, 2005. Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2005 revisions to the "McDonald Criteria". Ann Neurol. 58:840-846.
• For other differential diagnoses: "Diagnosis of diseases or conditions for the differential or nontarget disease groups must be based on established diagnostic criteria and clinical evaluation."

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

The document explicitly states that the KRONUS Aquaporin-4 Autoantibody (AQP4Ab) ELISA Assay is a manual enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, semi-quantitative. It does not describe an AI or machine learning component that requires a "training set" in the conventional sense (i.e., data used to train a predictive model). The assay's "training" in this context would refer to the development and optimization of the assay itself and its calibrators/controls.

The calibrator and control values are traceable to "a panel of Master Control samples prepared from AQP4Ab positive patient sera that are used to create the linear calibration curves". The size of this "panel of Master Control samples" is not specified but serves a function analogous to a training or reference set for the assay's internal calibration.

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

As noted above, a "training set" for an AI algorithm is not applicable here. However, for the assay's internal calibration via "Master Control samples" and calibrators, the ground truth was established by:

• "Master Control samples prepared from AQP4Ab positive patient sera". This implies that these were clinically confirmed positive patients.
• "Newly manufactured AQP4Ab calibrators are checked against a previous lot of calibrators (as a reference) and a panel of Master Control samples. Each calibrator and positive control level must fall within their previously established OD range."

This indicates that the ground truth for these internal controls and calibrators is based on a well-characterized set of patient sera with known AQP4Ab positivity and concentration values, likely determined through rigorous analytical methods to ensure consistency and accuracy across different lots and during development. The document does not provide details on how the initial master control samples were specifically characterized (e.g., by an independent gold-standard method), but implies a traceable and established process within the manufacturer's quality system.

Ask a specific question about this device