Search Results

This kit is intended for the quantitative determination of immunoreactive trypsin (IRT) in blood specimens dried on filter paper as an aid in screening newborns for cystic fibrosis.

The DELFIA® Neonatal immunoreactive trypsin (IRT) assay is a solid phase, two-site fluoro-immunometric assay based on the direct sandwich technique in which two monoclonal antibodies (derived from mice) are directed against two separate antigenic determinants on the IRT molecule. Standards, controls and test specimens containing IRT are reacted simultaneously with immobilised monoclonal antibodies directed against a specific antigenic site on the IRT molecule and europium-labelled monoclonal antibodies (directed against a different antigenic site) in assay buffer. The assay buffer elutes IRT from the dried blood spots on the filter paper discs. The complete assay requires only one incubation step. Enhancement Solution dissociates europium ions from the labelled antibody into solution where they form highly fluorescent chelates with components of the Enhancement Solution. The fluorescence in each well is then measured. The fluorescence of each sample is proportional to the concentration of IRT in the sample.

This describes the acceptance criteria and study information for the DELFIA® Neonatal IRT kit. It focuses on the comparison between the DELFIA® Neonatal IRT kit and the predicate device, Trypsik 125I RIA kit, and mentions a comparison with the sweat chloride test for cystic fibrosis diagnosis.

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance:

The document describes performance characteristics rather than explicit "acceptance criteria" for a study validating its ability to screen for cystic fibrosis against a gold standard. However, it does provide performance metrics in comparison to a predicate device.

The document states that the "performance of the kits is equivalent" and "the correlation between the two kits is good," suggesting these were the implicit acceptance criteria for substantial equivalence to the predicate.

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

The document does not explicitly state the sample size used for the test set or the data provenance for the comparison with the Trypsik 125I RIA kit. It mentions a comparison "with the sweat chloride test which is considered the standard for diagnosis of cystic fibrosis," but details on the sample size and data provenance for this comparison are not provided.

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

This information is not provided in the document. The substantial equivalence argument relies on comparison to a legally marketed predicate device and a "standard" diagnostic test (sweat chloride test). There's no mention of experts establishing a ground truth for a test set.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set:

This information is not provided in the document.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study Was Done, and the Effect Size of How Much Human Readers Improve with AI vs. Without AI Assistance:

This document describes an in vitro diagnostic kit, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool for human readers. Therefore, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study regarding human readers with or without AI assistance is not applicable and was not performed.

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

The DELFIA® Neonatal IRT kit is a diagnostic assay itself, performed in a lab setting. Its performance is inherent to the kit, and the provided performance metrics (precision, detection limit) are standalone performance measures of the kit.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used:

For the primary comparison (substantial equivalence to the predicate device), the "ground truth" seems to be the performance and correlation with the legally marketed predicate device (Trypsik 125I RIA kit).

For the secondary comparison (aid in screening for cystic fibrosis), the sweat chloride test is stated as "considered the standard for diagnosis of cystic fibrosis." This implies that sweat chloride test results would serve as the ground truth for evaluating the DELFIA® Neonatal IRT kit's utility as a screening aid for cystic fibrosis.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set:

The concept of a "training set" in the context of machine learning or AI is not applicable to this in vitro diagnostic kit. The document does not describe a training set.

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

As there is no training set in the context of this document, this information is not applicable.

Ask a specific question about this device