Search Results

The T2Biothreat Panel is a qualitative, multiplexed, nucleic acid-based in vitro diagnostic test intended for use with the T2Dx Instrument. The T2Biothreat Panel detects nucleic acids from the following organisms directly from K2EDTA whole blood samples:

1. Bacillus anthracis (plasmids pXO1 and pXO2)
2. Francisella tularensis
3. Burkholderia spp. (B. mallei/B. pseudomallei)
4. Yersinia pestis
5. Rickettsia prowazekii

The T2Biothreat Panel will not distinguish between detection of Burkholderia mallei and Burkholderia pseudomallei but will present valid detections as a positive detection of Burkholderia species.

The T2Biothreat Panel is intended to test individuals with signs and symptoms of infection from biothreat agents and/or individuals who are at risk for exposure or may have been exposed to these agents. The T2Biothreat Panel is indicated as an aid in the diagnosis of anthrax, tularemia, melioidosis, glanders, typhus fever and plague in response to suspected or confirmed bioterrorism events or outbreaks. Diagnosis of infection must be made in conjunction with clinical, epidemiologic and other laboratory data. Results are for the presumptive identification of Bacillus anthracis, Francisella tularensis, Burkholderia spp. (B. mallei), Yersinia pestis and Rickettsia prowazekii. Results are meant to be used in conjunction with other clinical, epidemiologic, and laboratory data, in accordance with the guidel by the relevant public health authorities. The definitive identification of Bacillus anthracis, Francisella tularensis, Burkholderia mallei, Burkholderia pseudomallei, Yersinia pestis or Rickettsia prowazekii requires additional testing and confirmation procedures in consultation with the appropriate public health authorities for whom reports may be required. Positive results do not rule out co-infections with pathogens not included on the T2Biothreat Panel. Negative results do not preclude infection with the biothreat microbial agents targeted by the device and should not be used as the sole basis for diagnosis, treatment, or other patient management decisions.

The T2Biothreat Panel is indicated for use in laboratories that have the appropriate biosafety equipment, personal protective equipment (PPE), containment facilities, and personnel trained in the safe handling of clinical specimens potentially containing biothreat organisms.

The T2Biothreat Panel is indicated for use in laboratories that follow public health guidelines that address appropriate biosafety conditions, interpretation of test results, and coordination of findings with public health authorities.

This assay is not FDA-cleared or approved for testing blood or plasma donors.

The T2Biothreat Panel is a qualitative, multiplexed, nucleic acid-based in vitro diagnostic test intended for use with the T2Dx Instrument. The T2Biothreat Panel detects nucleic acids from the following organisms directly from K2EDTA whole blood samples: Bacillus anthracis (plasmids pXO1 and pXO2), Francisella tularensis, Burkholderia spp. (B. mallei/B. pseudomallei), Yersinia pestis, and Rickettsia prowazekii. The T2Biothreat Panel is run on the T2Dx, a fully automated, benchtop instrument. During processing on the T2Dx, intact pathogen cells are concentrated directly in whole blood, then lysed to release the target DNA. After amplification, target amplicon is hybridized with superparamagnetic particles and then detected by T2MR. The Internal Control on the T2Biothreat Panel monitors performance for each sample. The T2Biothreat Panel is a qualitative molecular diagnostic assay that employs whole blood compatible PCR amplification followed by T2 Magnetic Resonance (T2MR) detection. The T2Biothreat Panel is performed on the T2Dx Instrument, which executes all steps after specimen loading, with the capability of loading up to seven blood specimens at the same time. Individually, a KeEDTA whole blood specimen containing a minimum of 3 mL is loaded directly onto the T2Biothreat Sample Inlet, which is then placed on the T2Biothreat Cartridge along with the T2Biothreat Reagent Tray. The Cartidge and Reagent Tray contain the lysis reagent, internal control, primers, enzyme, buffer and probe-coupled superparamagnetic particles for each detected tarqet. After loading into the T2Dx. the blood specimen is mixed with the red blood cell lysing reagent and the bacterial cells and human cellular debris are concentrated by centrifygation. The internal control is added to the concentrated pellet and a bead-beating process lyses the bacterial cells. The supernatant containing the DNA from the lysed bacterial cells and the internal control is amplified using the target and internal control-specific primers. The generated amplified product is aliquoted into individual tubes containing target-specific probe conjugated particles for each detected target and the internal control. The amplified to target-specific probes attached to superparamagnetic particles causing clustering of the particles. The hybridization occurring in individual tubes is analyzed in the T2MR reader and a signal for each target is generated, which indicates the presence of the target organism(s). This automated process is the same process followed by the FDA cleared T2Candida and T2Bacteria Panels performed on the T2Dx Instrument system. When running a single specimens simultaneously, the first specimen will be reported in approximately 4 hours from the specimen is loaded onto the instrument. The results are interpreted by the device software as valid or invalid (based on the result of the internal control or target detections), and if valid, results are reported as "Positive" or "Target not Detected" for each specific target.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information for the T2Biothreat Panel, based on the provided text:

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance

Study Information

The provided document describes standalone performance studies for the T2Biothreat Panel. It does not mention any multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study.

2. Sample Sizes and Data Provenance

• Test Set (Clinical Performance):
  • Negative Arm: Undisclosed number of K2EDTA whole blood samples from healthy donors (no signs/symptoms of infection) and febrile donors (fever ≥ 100.4 °F).
  • Positive Arm: Sequence-verified clinical bacterial strains spiked into whole blood collected from febrile donors. The sample sizes for the positive arm are listed as:
    • B. anthracis (pXO1 & pXO2): 6 (

Ask a specific question about this device

The BioFire® Global Fever Special Pathogens Panel is a qualitative, mucleic acid-based test intended for use with BioFire® FilmArray® 2.0 and BioFire® FilmArray® Torch Systems. The BioFire Global Fever Special Pathogens Panel is for the simultaneous qualitative detection and identification of multiple bacterial, viral, and protozoan nucleic acids directly from EDTA whole collected from individuals with signs and or symptoms of acute febrile illness and known or suspected exposure to the target pathogens described below.

Pathogens identified:
Chikungunya virus Dengue virus (serotypes 1, 2, 3 and 4) Leishmania spp. that cause visceral leishmaniasis (e.g., L. donovani and L. infantum) Leptospira spp. Plasmodium spp. (including species differentiation of Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax/ovale) West Nile virus

Pathogens presumptively identified:
Bacillus anthracis Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus Ebolavirus spp. Francisella tularensis Lassa virus Marburgvirus Yellow fever virus Yersinia pestis

Pathogens for which the panel provides presumptive identification results resting and confirmation procedures in consultation with the appropriate public health authorities for whom reports may be necessary.

Positive results do not rule out co-infections with pathogens not included on the BioFire Global Fever Special Pathogens Panel. Not all pathogens that cause acute febrile illness are detected by this test, and nectude infection with the pathogens targeted by the device and should not be used as the sole basis for diagnosis, treatment, or other patient management decisions.

Evaluation for more common causes of acute illness (e.g., infections of the upper and lower respiratory tract or gastroenteritis, as well as non-infectious causes) should be considered prith this panel. In the United States, patient travel history, exposure risk, and consultation of the CDC Yellow Book should be considered prior to use of the BioFire Global Fever Special Pathogens Panel as some pathogens are more common in certain geographical locations. Results are meant to be used in conjunction with other clinical, epidemiologic, and laboratory data, in accordance with the guided by the relevant public health authorities.

The BioFire Global Fever Special Pathogens Panel is indicatories having appropriate biosafety equipment, personal protective equipment (PPE), contamment facilities and persomel trained in the safe handling of diagnostic clinical specimens potentially containing any of the pathogens detected by this panel.

The BioFire Global Fever Special Pathogens Panel is indicated for use in laboratories that follow public health guidelines that address appropriate biosafety conditions, interpretation of test results, and coordination of findings with public health authorities.

For In Vitro Diagnostic Use.

The BioFire® Global Fever Special Pathogens Panel is a multiplexed nucleic acid-based test designed to be used with BioFire® FilmArray® Systems (BioFire® FilmArray® 2.0 or BioFire® FilmArray® Torch). The BioFire Global Fever Special Pathogens Panel pouch contains freezedried reagents to perform nucleic acid purification and nested, multiplexed polymerase chain reaction (PCR) with DNA melt analysis. The BioFire Global Fever Special Pathogens Panel conducts tests for the identification of bacterial, viral, and protozoan pathogens from whole blood specimens collected in EDTA tubes (Table 1). Results from the BioFire Global Fever Special Pathogens Panel are available in about 1 hour.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information for the BioFire Global Fever Special Pathogens Panel:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The application does not explicitly state "acceptance criteria" for PPA and NPA. However, it presents the clinical performance results in a way that suggests these are the key metrics for evaluating agreement with comparator methods. The "Expected percent agreement was >95%" in the reproducibility study might be inferred as a general target for performance. For this table, I'll use the Reported Clinical Performance Summary (Tables 4, 5, 6) as the "Reported Device Performance" against an implied high standard of agreement.

Note on "Acceptance Criteria": The document provides performance results but doesn't explicitly state quantitative acceptance criteria (e.g., "PPA must be >95%"). However, the high percentages and confidence intervals presented imply that high sensitivity and specificity are expected for proper function. The "Reproducibility" section mentions ">95%", which can serve as a proxy for the general expectation of performance accuracy.

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance

• Prospective Clinical Study Test Set:
  • Sample Size: 2139 prospectively collected whole blood specimens.
  • Data Provenance: The specimens were collected between March 2018 and March 2021 from 11 undisclosed sites. The country of origin is not explicitly stated, but the mention of "CDC Yellow Book" in the "Indications for Use" suggests a relevance to North American (US) context, although the pathogens detected indicate global relevance. The data is prospective.
• Archived Specimen Study Test Set:
  • Sample Size: 416 archived specimens.
  • Data Provenance: The specimens were collected from undisclosed sites (Site 01: 199, Site 02: 82, Site 03: 135). The country of origin is not explicitly stated. The data is retrospective.
• Contrived Specimen Study Test Set:
  • Sample Size: 50 replicates for each analyte for which archived specimens were unavailable or insufficient. This resulted in varying total number of specimens tested per analyte (e.g., CCHF virus and Marburgvirus sp. had 100 replicates, others had 50).
  • Data Provenance: Contrived specimens were prepared using residual human whole blood. This is a laboratory-based study.

3. 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 or qualifications of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set. Ground truth was established using "plate-based PCR comparator methods" and "additional PCR" for discrepant results. For archived specimens, they had "known analyte content" or "high likelihood of containing a given analyte." For contrived specimens, the "known composition of the contrived specimen" was the ground truth.

4. Adjudication method for the test set

The document describes "discrepancy testing" for samples where the BioFire Global Fever Special Pathogens Panel results differed from the initial comparator method results. For example:

• For Chikungunya virus, "Evidence of Chikungunya virus was found in 2/2 FP specimens by additional PCR."
• For Dengue virus, "15/17 FN specimens were positive upon BioFire Global Fever Special Pathogens Panel retest and by additional PCR, two were positive Global Fever Special Pathogens Panel retest, and eight were detected only by additional PCR."
• For Leptospira spp., "Evidence of Leptospira spp. was found in 1/1 FN specimens by BioFire Global Fever Special Pathogens Panel retest and by additional PCR, and in 3/4 FP specimens by additional PCR."
• For Plasmodium spp., similar retesting by the BioFire panel and "additional PCR" or "species-level comparator assay" was used.

This indicates an adjudication method that involves retesting with the device and/or additional PCR/comparator methods for discrepant results, rather than explicitly stating an "X+Y" consensus model among human experts.

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

No, a multi-reader multi-case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was not done. This device is a diagnostic assay (nucleic acid-based test), not an AI-assisted interpretation tool for human readers. Therefore, the concept of "human readers improve with AI vs without AI assistance" does not apply to this submission.

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

Yes, the performance studies (clinical, archived, contrived) evaluate the BioFire Global Fever Special Pathogens Panel as a standalone device (algorithm only). The device provides automated test interpretation and report generation, and the "user cannot access raw data" (Table 2). This means the performance metrics (PPA, NPA) reflect the algorithm's detection capabilities without human intervention in the interpretation process.

7. The type of ground truth used

The ground truth for the test sets was primarily established by:

• Comparator methods (e.g., plate-based PCR/additional PCR): For both prospective clinical and archived specimens.
• Known composition: For contrived specimens, where the analytes were intentionally spiked into the samples.
• Discrepancy testing: For cases where the device result and initial comparator result differed, further testing (usually additional PCR) was performed to resolve the discrepancy and establish the final ground truth.

8. The sample size for the training set

The document does not specify the sample size for a training set. The BioFire Global Fever Special Pathogens Panel is a diagnostic assay, and while its development would involve internal validation and optimization, the provided performance data relates to its analytical and clinical performance after development, rather than the data used for machine learning model training.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established

Since a "training set" in the context of the requested information (e.g., for an AI model) is not explicitly mentioned or relevant to this type of device submission, the document does not describe how ground truth for a training set was established. The performance studies presented are for the finished device's evaluation against established laboratory methods.

Ask a specific question about this device