Search Results

The IDI-VanR® Assay is a qualitative in vitro test for the rapid detection of vancomycinresistance (vanA and vanB) genes directly from rectal swabs. The IDI-vanR® Assay detects the presence of the vanA and vanB genes that can be associated with vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE). The assay is performed on an automated realtime PCR instrument with rectal swabs from patients at risk for VRE colonization. The IDI-VanR® Assay can be used as an aid to identify, prevent and control vancomycinresistant colonization in healthcare settings. Concomitant cultures are necessary to recover organisms for epidemiological typing, susceptibility testing and for further confirmatory identification. The IDI-VanR® Assay is not intended to diagnose VRE infections nor to guide or monitor treatment for VRE infections.

Following specimen lysis, amplification of the vanA and vanB targets occurs. Amplification of the IC, a DNA fragment of 294-bp including a 254-bp sequence not found in VRE, will also take place unless there are PCR inhibitory substances. The amplified DNA targets are detected with molecular beacons, a hairpin-forming single-stranded oligonucleotides labelled at one end with a quencher and at the other end with a fluorescent reporter dye (fluorophore). In the absence of target, the fluorescence is quenched. In the presence of target, the hairpin structure opens upon beacon/target hybridization, resulting in emission of fluorescence. For the detection of vanA amplicons, the molecular beacon contains the fluorophore FAM at the 5' end and the non-fluorescent quencher moiety DABCYL at the opposite end of the oligonucleotide. For the detection of the vanB amplicons, the molecular beacon contains the fluorophore Texas Red at the 5' end and the quencher DABCYL at the 3' end. For the detection of the Internal Control (IC) amplicons, the molecular beacon contains the fluorophore TET at the 5' end and the quencher DABCYL at the 3' end. Each beacon-target hybrid fluoresces at a wavelength characteristic of the fluorophore used in the particular molecular beacon. The amount of fluorescence at any given cycle, or following cycling, depends on the amount of specific amplicons present at that time. The SmartCycler® software simultaneously monitors the fluorescence emitted by each beacon, interprets all data, and provides a final result at the end of the cycling program.

The GeneOhm Sciences Canada, Inc. IDI-VanR™ Assay is a qualitative in vitro test for the rapid detection of vancomycin-resistance (vanA and vanB) genes directly from rectal swabs, used as an aid to identify, prevent and control vancomycinresistant colonization in healthcare settings.

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

Acceptance Criteria and Device Performance

The document does not explicitly state pre-defined acceptance criteria in terms of specific sensitivity and specificity thresholds that the device must meet. Instead, it presents the device's performance in comparison to a predicate device and culture technique, implying that substantial equivalence to the predicate (Remel Bile Esculin Azide agar with 6 ug/mL vancomycin (BEAV)) serves as the primary "acceptance criterion" for market clearance.

However, based on the presented clinical performance data, we can infer the reported performance of the IDI-VanR™ Assay.

• Overall Sensitivity: 97.3% (95% CI: 92.2%-99.4%)
• Overall Specificity: 91.4% (95% CI: 89.3%-93.2%)
• Negative Predictive Value (NPV): 99.6% (95% CI: 98.9%-99.9%)
• Positive Predictive Value (PPV): 59.1% (95% CI: 51.6%-66.4%)

Detailed breakdown by gene (Table 1):

• Sensitivity VanA': 97.1% (95% CI: 91.6-99.4%) (Note: VanA' includes vanA alone and vanA+B PCR results considered true positive where culture was vanA positive.)
• Sensitivity VanB: 57.1% (95% CI: 1.8-90.1%) (Acknowledged as low due to low number of vanB positive specimens).
• Specificity (combined for vanA, vanB, vanA+B, negative): 91.4% (This specificity seems to be derived from the overall calculation in Table 2, not solely from Table 1's detailed breakdown, as a direct calculation from Table 1's "Negative" row would be different if only negative cultures were considered.)

Unresolved Rate:

• Initial: 0.2% (2/968)
• After repeat testing: 0.1% (1/968) |

Note on "Acceptance Criteria": In 510(k) submissions, the primary "acceptance criterion" is often substantial equivalence to a predicate device. The performance metrics presented are to demonstrate that the new device is as safe and effective as the predicate. While specific numerical targets might not be explicitly stated as "acceptance criteria," regulatory bodies assess if the presented performance is acceptable for the intended use and comparable to established methods.

Study Details:

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

   • Total Sample Size: 968 rectal swab specimens.
   • Data Provenance: Clinical trials were performed at four investigational sites. The country of origin is not explicitly stated for all sites, but the submitter is GeneOhm Sciences Canada, Inc., suggesting at least some Canadian sites. The study appears to be prospective as it evaluates the performance of the IDI-VanR™ Assay against culture technique in a clinical trial setting.

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 the ground truth. The ground truth (comparator method) was the "Remel Bile Esculin Azide agar with 6 ug/mL vancomycin (BEAV) with phenotypic identification of presumptive Enterococcus colonies and determination of vancomycin and teicoplanin resistance (CLSI, M7-A6 and M100-S15)." This implies that laboratory personnel trained in microbiology and following established clinical guidelines (MMWR, CDC, CLSI) performed the ground truth testing.

3. Adjudication method for the test set:

   • The document does not describe a formal adjudication method (e.g., 2+1, 3+1). The ground truth was established by the predicate culture method, and the device's results were compared against this. Any discrepancies would typically be resolved by retesting or further investigation according to the study protocol, though this specific detail is not provided.

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:

   • This is not an AI/CAD device. The IDI-VanR™ Assay is a nucleic acid amplification test (real-time PCR) for detecting specific genes. Therefore, an MRMC study with human readers and AI assistance is not applicable to this device.

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

   • Yes, the performance presented is for the device operating stand-alone. The IDI-VanR™ Assay is an in vitro diagnostic test, and its results (positive/negative for vanA/vanB) are generated by an automated real-time PCR instrument and software. The reported sensitivity and specificity refer to the device's performance as a primary diagnostic tool against the reference method.

6. The type of ground truth used:

   • The ground truth used was culture technique (Remel Bile Esculin Azide agar with vancomycin) combined with phenotypic identification of Enterococcus colonies and determination of vancomycin and teicoplanin resistance according to established clinical and laboratory standards (MMWR, CDC, CLSI M7-A6 and M100-S15). This is a well-accepted and standard method for identifying VRE.

7. The sample size for the training set:

   • The document does not mention a training set. This is typical for in vitro diagnostic tests like PCR assays. These types of assays are based on established molecular biology principles and validated against known controls and clinical samples without a "training set" in the machine learning sense. The assay's parameters (e.g., primer and probe design, cycling conditions) would be developed and optimized in a lab setting, not through machine learning training on a large dataset.

8. How the ground truth for the training set was established:

   • As there is no mention of a training set, this question is not applicable. The assay's fundamental design is based on known genetic sequences (vanA and vanB) and molecular detection methods, not on data-driven training. Development would involve extensive analytical validation using characterized bacterial strains and clinical samples to optimize performance characteristics.

Ask a specific question about this device