Search Results

The Abbott RealTime CT/NG (List No. 8L07-91) assay is an in vitro polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay for the direct, qualitative detection of the plasmid DNA of Chlamydia trachomatis and the genomic DNA of Neisseria gonorrhoeae. The assay may be used to test the following specimens from symptomatic individuals: female endocervical swab, clinician-collected vaginal swab, and patient-collected vaginal swab specimens; male urethral swab specimens; and female and male urine specimens. The assay may be used to test the following specimens from asymptomatic individuals: clinician-collected vaginal swab and patient-collected vaginal swab specimens; female and male urine specimens.

Abbott RealTime CT/NG consists of two reagent kits:

• · Abbott RealTime CT/NG Amplification Reagent Kit (List No. 8L07-91)
• · Abbott RealTime CT/NG Control Kit (List No. 8L07-80)
  The Abbott RealTime CT/NG assay uses PCR technology with homogenous real-time fluorescence detection on the m2000 System. The Abbott m2000 System consists of the Abbott m2000sp and Abbott m2000rt instruments. The Abbott m2000 System integrates sample preparation with nucleic acid amplification and detection to generate assay results. The Abbott m2000sp is used for processing samples and the Abbott m2000rt is used for amplification and detection.

Abbott RealTime CT/NG Assay: Acceptance Criteria and Supporting Study

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The acceptance criteria for the Abbott RealTime CT/NG assay are implied by the reported clinical sensitivity and specificity for various specimen types and Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) detection. While explicit numerical acceptance criteria are not stated in the provided text, the reported performance values demonstrate the device's efficacy.

Table 1: Clinical Performance of Abbott RealTime CT/NG Assay

2. Sample Size and Data Provenance (Clinical Study)

• Sample Size for Test Set: A total of 3,832 male and female subjects were enrolled in the multi-center clinical study. For the analysis of the Abbott RealTime CT/NG assay, 6,555 CT results and 6,569 NG results were used.
• Data Provenance: The study was conducted in the United States across 16 geographically diverse sites, including physician private practices, public and private STD clinics, and a hospital emergency room. The study design implies a prospective collection of specimens from enrolled subjects, although it's not explicitly stated as retrospective or prospective in every detail of the summary. The phrase "Specimens were collected from subjects at...sites" supports a prospective approach for the clinical data.

3. Number of Experts and Qualifications (Ground Truth)

The document does not explicitly state the "number of experts" or their specific "qualifications" used to establish the ground truth in the clinical study. Instead, the ground truth was established by comparing the Abbott RealTime CT/NG assay to reference assays.

4. Adjudication Method (Test Set)

The adjudication method for determining the "patient infected status" (ground truth) was based on a combination of reference assay results:

• For CT or NG (Female Subjects): A female was categorized as infected if a minimum of two positive results were reported (at least one from each reference NAAT). A specific condition was also applied for CT: if reference urine specimens were positive and all three reference swab specimens were negative, the subject was considered infected for urine but not swab specimens.
• For CT or NG (Male Subjects): A male was categorized as infected if a minimum of two positive results were reported.
• For NG (All Subjects): If the reference NG culture assay result was positive, the subject was categorized as infected regardless of NAAT results.
• Non-Infected Status: For females, non-infected status was assigned if at least one reference NAAT reported negative results for all sample types AND the NG culture was negative. For males, at least two negative results from reference NAATs AND a negative NG culture result were required for non-infected status.
• Subjects with missing and/or indeterminate results from reference assays were excluded from the analysis (4 subjects for CT and 7 subjects for NG).

This multi-assay, rule-based approach serves as the adjudication method for establishing the ground truth.

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

No Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was mentioned in the provided document. The study is focused on the standalone performance of the Abbott RealTime CT/NG assay against established reference methods, not on comparing human reader performance with and without AI assistance.

6. Standalone Performance (Algorithm Only)

Yes, a standalone performance study was done. The entire clinical study described, measuring the sensitivity and specificity of the Abbott RealTime CT/NG assay against reference methods, represents the standalone performance of the algorithm. The results are summarized in Table 1 above, as well as Tables 3.10-3.13 in the original document.

7. Type of Ground Truth Used

The ground truth used for the clinical study was established by expert consensus using a combination of reference assays:

• Two commercially available Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests (NAATs) for CT and NG.
• Culture for NG.

This is a composite reference standard or adjudicated clinical truth based on multiple established diagnostic methods.

8. Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not explicitly mention a "training set" or "training data" in the context of the Abbott RealTime CT/NG assay development or validation. This is expected given that the device is an in-vitro diagnostic (IVD) PCR assay, which typically relies on analytical validation and clinical performance studies described here, rather than machine learning models that require distinct training and test sets. The presented clinical study serves as the primary validation of the device's performance.

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

As noted above, the document does not refer to a distinct "training set." The Limit of Detection (LOD) and analytical sensitivity studies (Sections 3.14.1), which involve testing known concentrations of CT and NG target DNA and isolates, can be considered part of the analytical validation that informs the assay's performance characteristics. For these analytical studies:

• Known concentrations of CT and NG target DNA were used.
• Dilutions of various CT serovars and NG isolates were tested.

This is a form of defined analytical ground truth based on controlled laboratory preparations of the target organisms. For the clinical performance, the ground truth was established by the composite reference standard from the clinical study as detailed in point 7.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Abbott m2000 system is intended for in vitro diagnostic use in performing FDA cleared and approved nucleic acid testing in clinical laboratories. It comprises the Abbott m2000sp and the Abbott m2000rt instruments. The Abbott m2000sp is an automated system for performing sample preparation for nucleic acid testing. The Abbott m2000rt is an automated system for performing fluorescence-based PCR to provide quantitative and qualitative detection of nucleic acid sequences.

The Abbott m2000 System is an instrument platform that automates steps to perform nucleic acid amplification assays from sample processing through amplification, detection, and data reduction. The Abbott m2000 System comprises the m2000sp and m2000rt instruments, which are operated with separate System Control Center (SCC) workstations. Each instrument contains an independent software application; one for the m2000sp and a second for the m2000rt. The m2000sp instrument is a floor standing, automated sample preparation system. The three main components of the m2000sp are the: Instrument, Cabinet, System Control Center (SCC). The m2000rt instrument is a real-time PCR thermal cycler/reader instrument system. The two main components of the m2000rt are the: Instrument, System Control Center (SCC). The Abbott m2000 System software processes sample preparation and amplification/detection protocols based on pre-determined, assay-specific parameters that are contained in individual assay application specification files that are installed on the SCC. The Abbott m2000sp reads and processes bar coded primary sample tubes and processes up to 96 specimens, controls, and calibrators in batch mode. The m2000 System is capable of processing samples from various matrices, depending on the specific assay application, including plasma, serum, endocervical swabs, urethral swabs, vaginal swabs, and urine. At the completion of the automated sample preparation protocol, the operator seals and manually transfers the PCR plate to the Abbott m2000rt for nucleic acid detection. Bar code and m2000sp data is transferred to the m2000rt electronically.

The Abbott m2000 System is an automated instrument platform intended for in vitro diagnostic use in performing FDA-cleared and approved nucleic acid testing in clinical laboratories. This includes the Abbott m2000sp (automated sample preparation) and m2000rt (automated fluorescence-based PCR for quantitative and qualitative detection of nucleic acid sequences). The system was evaluated in conjunction with the Abbott RealTime CT/NG assay.

Here's an analysis of the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets them:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

While explicit "acceptance criteria" are not presented as a direct table in the provided document, the study aims to demonstrate substantial equivalence to predicate devices and establish performance characteristics. The key performance metrics reported are sensitivity and specificity for Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG).

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

• Test Set (Clinical Study):
  • 3,832 male and female, asymptomatic and symptomatic subjects.
  • 3,832 subjects provided urine, endocervical swabs, self-collected vaginal swabs, and clinician-collected vaginal swabs (females) or urine and urethral swabs (males).
  • A total of 6,555 CT results and 6,569 NG results were used in the analysis after excluding subjects for whom patient infected status could not be determined (4 for CT, 7 for NG).
• Data Provenance: Prospective, multi-center clinical study conducted in the United States. Specimens were collected from 16 geographically diverse sites, including physician private practices, public and private STD clinics, and a hospital emergency room.

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

The document does not explicitly state the number or qualifications of experts who established the ground truth in the traditional sense (e.g., radiologists interpreting images). Instead, the ground truth was established through a reference standard composed of multiple commercially available nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) and culture for NG.

• For CT or NG infection in females: A minimum of two positive results (at least one from each reference NAAT).
• For CT in females (urine/swab discrepancy): Positive urine and negative endocervical swab from both reference assays resulted in categorization as infected for urine but not for swab specimens.
• For CT or NG infection in males: A minimum of two positive results were reported.
• For NG infection (regardless of NAAT) if NG culture positive: If the reference NG culture assay result was positive, the subject was categorized as infected regardless of NAAT results.
• For non-infection in females: At least one of the reference NAATs reported negative results for all sample types AND if the NG culture assay result was negative.
• For non-infection in males: A total of at least two negative results reported by the reference NAATs AND if the NG culture assay result was negative.

Therefore, the "ground truth" was established by a consensus of FDA-cleared diagnostic assays rather than individual expert interpretation.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

The adjudication method for determining "patient infected status" (ground truth) was a composite reference standard based on the results of two commercially available NAATs and culture for NG. It essentially used a "2 out of 2" or "2 out of 3" (for NG cases with culture) positive rule for infection, and a "negative across multiple tests" rule for non-infection. In cases of internal discrepancy, specific rules were applied (e.g., for female CT urine vs. swab).

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, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study involving human readers and AI assistance was not mentioned. This device is an automated in vitro diagnostic system, not an AI-powered diagnostic imaging or interpretation tool designed to assist human readers. Its performance is evaluated as a standalone diagnostic.

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

Yes, the clinical study primarily evaluated the standalone performance of the Abbott RealTime CT/NG assay on the Abbott m2000 System. The reported sensitivity and specificity values are for the assay and system independent of human interpretation beyond typical lab procedures and result reporting.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

The ground truth used was a composite reference standard based on the results of:

• Two commercially available nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for CT and NG.
• Culture for NG.

This is a frequently used method for establishing ground truth for infectious disease diagnostics when a single "gold standard" may not always be definitive. It combines multiple reliable diagnostic methods to increase confidence in the true infection status.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not explicitly specify a "training set" size for the Abbott RealTime CT/NG assay and m2000 system. For in vitro diagnostic devices like this, the development process (which would involve data akin to training) is typically extensive and proprietary, focusing on analytical performance and robustness. The clinical study described would be analogous to an independent validation or test set.

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

Since a dedicated "training set" with ground truth establishment in the AI/machine learning sense is not detailed, this question applies less directly. However, the development of the assay would inherently involve:

• Analytical studies: Determining Limit of Detection (LOD), analytical sensitivity (serovars, isolates), cross-reactivity, and interference using well-characterized samples (e.g., quantified pure cultures, spiked samples). The ground truth for these analytical studies is based on known concentrations of targets and the presence/absence of interfering substances or cross-reactants. These studies are detailed in Section 9.0 "Summary of Non-Clinical Testing."

Ask a specific question about this device