Search Results
Found 3 results
510(k) Data Aggregation
(28 days)
| Homogeneous Particle-Enhanced Turbidimetric Immunoassay |
| Device Classification: | 21 CFR 862.3035
Indianapolis, IN 46268-5620
Re: K052815
Trade/Device Name: QMS® Amikacin Regulation Number: 21 CFR 862.3035
The QMS® Amikacin assay is intended for the quantitative determination of amikacin in human serum or plasma on automated clinical chemistry analyzers.
The results obtained are used in the diagnosis and treatment of amikacin overdose and in monitoring levels of amikacin to ensure appropriate therapy.
The QMS® Amikacin assay system is a homogeneous assay utilizing particle agglutination technology and is based on the competitive binding principle.
In particle agglutination assays, the degree of agglutination is inversely proportional to the quantity of free drug in the reaction well. Hence, if no drug is present in the sample, the antibodies in the QMS Amikacin Antibody Reagent (R1) will bind only to the bound drug on the particle which will cause it to agglutinate and will result in higher absorbance. If increased amount of competing drug is present in the sample, this will result in decreased binding of bound drug by the antibody, resulting in a relative decrease in particle agglutination. This in turn results in lower absorbance.
The precise relationship between particle agglutination of the unlabeled drug in the sample is established by measuring the absorbance values of calibrators with known concentration of the drug. The absorbance of unknown samples can be interpolated from the absorbance values of the calibration curve and the concentration of the drug present in the sample can be calculated.
The assay consists of reagents R1: anti-amikacin monoclonal antibody and R2: amikacin-coated microparticles. A six-level set of QMS® Amikacin Calibrators (A through F) is used to calibroothe assay.
Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information for the QMS® Amikacin assay, based on the provided document:
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
| Performance Metric | Acceptance Criteria | Reported Device Performance |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy | % Recovery: 100 ± 10% | Mean Percent Recovery: 94.02% (Specific recoveries: 95.87% for 9.2 µg/mL and 92.17% for 18.4 µg/mL) - Meets criteria |
| Linearity | Correlation coefficient (R2) demonstrating linearity | Correlation Coefficient (R2): 0.9998 (Mean Percent Recovery: 100.41% over a range of 1.5 to 42.5 µg/mL; specific recoveries from 95.71% to 111.33%) - Meets criteria |
| Sensitivity | Claimed LDD: 0.8 µg/mL | Average LDD: 0.54 µg/mL - Exceeds claimed performance (better sensitivity) |
| Assay Range | Not explicitly stated as acceptance criteria, but derived from other data | Reportable Range: 1.5 to 50 µg/mL (Based on Accuracy, Linearity, and Sensitivity data) |
| Method Comparison | Excellent correlation with predicate device | Correlation to Abbott TDx/TDxFLx Amikacin: N = 56, Slope = 1.00, y-intercept = 0.25, R = 0.996, R2 = 0.992. Results show excellent correlation. - Meets criteria |
| Precision | Total CV: < 10% | Total CVs: Low Control: 9.94%, Mid Control: 6.22%, High Control: 6.32% - Meets criteria |
| Interferences (Endogenous Substances) | % Recovery: 100 ± 10% | Bilirubin (15mg/dL): 96.40% Hemoglobin (10g/L): 93.42% Triglyceride (1691 mg/dL): 96.30% Total Protein (12 g/dL): 96.00% - All meet criteria |
| Interferences (HAMA) | % Recovery: 100 ± 10% | HAMA Type-1: 100.5% HAMA Type-2: 98.04% - All meet criteria |
| On-Board Stability (Calibration Curve) | 28 days stability supported by data | Supported: 28 days - Meets criteria |
| On-Board Stability (Reagent) | 40 days stability supported by data | Supported: 40 days - Meets criteria |
2. Sample Sizes Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance
- Accuracy: Samples were spiked human serum. No specific number for "samples analyzed" is given, but it mentions "in duplicate." The specific source/country of the human serum is not mentioned. This appears to be a laboratory-controlled, prospective study.
- Linearity: Not explicitly stated, but based on "a study based on the NCCLS guideline EP6." A set of 5 theoretical concentrations was tested, each in duplicate. USP Amikacin was used, indicating an in vitro, laboratory-controlled prospective study.
- Sensitivity: Not explicitly stated, but related to the lowest detectable dose from laboratory measurements.
- Method Comparison: N = 56 patient samples. The data provenance (country of origin, retrospective/prospective) is not explicitly stated, but the mention of "patient samples" suggests retrospective or prospective clinical samples. It does not state if these were collected specifically for this study or were archived.
- Precision: 80 measurements for each of the three control levels over multiple runs/days. This refers to laboratory-controlled measurements of quality control materials.
- Interferences:
- Endogenous Substances: N=2 or N=3 for each interferent tested. These were likely laboratory-prepared samples with added interferents, a prospective study.
- Human Anti-Mouse Antibodies (HAMA): Not explicitly stated, but given as "Rep 1" and "Rep 2" for HAMA Type-1 and Type-2, suggesting laboratory-spiked samples.
- Cross-reactants: No 'N' is listed, but various cross-reactant drugs were tested at specified concentrations. This would be a laboratory-controlled study.
- Anticoagulants: Not explicitly stated, but likely laboratory-controlled comparison of serum and plasma samples, a prospective study.
3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth and Qualifications
This document describes the performance characteristics of an in-vitro diagnostic (IVD) device for measuring a drug concentration. The "ground truth" in this context is established by:
- Known Reference Values: For accuracy, linearity, and sensitivity, the ground truth is the spectroscopically pure USP traceable amikacin spiked into human serum at known concentrations.
- Reference Method: For method comparison, the ground truth is considered the results obtained from the predicate device, the Abbott TDx/TDxFLx® Amikacin assay.
Therefore, there were no clinical experts (e.g., radiologists) involved in establishing the "ground truth" in the way one would for image interpretation or diagnosis. The ground truth relies on analytical chemistry principles and a comparative reference method for this type of device.
4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set
Not applicable. This is an analytical device for quantitative measurement, not a human-interpreted diagnostic output requiring adjudication. The performance is assessed by comparing the device's output to known input concentrations or to measurements from a predicate device.
5. Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study
Not applicable. This is a standalone analytical device, not a human-in-the-loop system where human reader performance is being evaluated or augmented by AI.
6. Standalone (Algorithm Only) Performance
Yes, the studies presented here are entirely standalone performance evaluations of the QMS® Amikacin assay. The device measures amikacin concentration in a sample without human interpretation or intervention in the measurement process itself. The "algorithm" here refers to the underlying chemical reaction and optical detection described in the "Description of Device," which is inherent to the device's operation.
7. Type of Ground Truth Used
- Known (Spiked) Concentrations: For accuracy, linearity, and sensitivity, the ground truth was established by precisely preparing samples with known concentrations of USP traceable amikacin.
- Reference Standard (Predicate Device): For method comparison, the Abbott TDx/TDxFLx® Amikacin assay served as the reference standard to which the new device's results were compared.
8. Sample Size for the Training Set
No information about a "training set" is provided. This is a traditional IVD device, not a machine learning or AI-driven system that would typically have a distinct "training set" and "test set" in the computational sense. The "development" and "validation" of the assay are implied by the studies conducted, but not in the context of training a machine learning model.
9. How Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established
Not applicable, as no dedicated "training set" is described for this type of device.
Ask a specific question about this device
(177 days)
Antrim United Kingdom BT29 4QY
K033884 Re:
Trade/Device Name: Amikacin Regulation Number: 21 CFR 862.3035
The Randox Laboratories Limited Amikacin Test Kit is an in vitro diagnostic reagent for the quantitative determination of amikacin in serum. Measurements obtained by this device are used in the diagnosis and treatment of patients receiving therapy with amikacin by monitoring levels of amikacin to ensure appropriate therapy.
The method is a latex-enhanced immunoturbidimetric assay based on the principle of measuring changes in scattered light. Latex particles are coated with amikacin, which in the presence of amikacin antibody Solution, agglutinate. When a sample containing amikacin is introduced the agglutination reaction is partially inhibited, slowing down the agglutination process. The rate of agglutination is measured in scattered light as a change in absorbance. By monitoring the change in absorbance the concentration of amikacin in the sample can be determined. The change in absorbance is inversely proportional to the concentration of amikacin in the sample.
The provided text is a 510(k) premarket notification approval letter for the Randox Laboratories Ltd. Amikacin Test Kit. This document does not describe a study involving detailed acceptance criteria, device performance tables, sample sizes for test/training sets, expert qualifications, or adjudication methods in the context of image analysis or diagnostic performance as typically seen for AI/ML devices.
Instead, this document is a regulatory approval for an in vitro diagnostic reagent for quantitative determination of amikacin in serum using a latex-enhanced immunoturbidimetric assay. The "performance" in this context refers to the assay's chemical and analytical characteristics (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, linearity, precision), which are typically established through laboratory validation studies, not clinical studies with human readers or ground truth established by experts in the same way as an AI diagnostic device.
Therefore, I cannot extract the requested information as it is not present in the provided text. The document confirms that the device is "substantially equivalent" to legally marketed predicate devices, implying that its analytical performance has been demonstrated to be comparable to existing tests for the same purpose.
Ask a specific question about this device
(78 days)
Re: K032279
Trade/Device Name: Roche Diagnostics ONLINE TDM Amikacin Regulation Number: 21 CFR 862.3035
The ONLINE TDM Amikacin assay is for the quantitative determination of amikacin in human serum or plasma on automated clinical chemistry analyzers.
The ONLINE TDM Amikacin assay is for the quantitative determination of amikacin in human serum or plasma on automated clinical chemistry analyzers. Determination of serum or plasma drug levels is required to achieve optimum therapeutic efficacy and minimize toxicity. The proposed labeling indicates the Roche Hitachi 911, 912, 917 and Modular P analyzers can be used with the Roche ONLINE TDM Amikacin reagent kits. The ONLINE TDM Amikacin assay is a homogeneous immunoassay based on the principle of measuring changes in scattered light or absorbance which result when activated microparticles aggregate. The microparticles are coated with amikacin and rapidly aggregate in the presence of an amikacin antibody solution. When a sample containing amikacin is introduced, the aggregation reaction is partially inhibited, slowing the rate of the aggregation process. Antibody bound to sample drug is no longer available to promote microparticle aggregation, and subsequent particle lattice formation is inhibited. Thus, a classic inhibition curve with respect to amikacin concentration is obtained, with the maximum rate of aggregation at the lowest amikacin concentration. By monitoring the change in scattered light or absorbance, a concentration-dependent curve is obtained.
The provided document describes the Roche Diagnostics ONLINE TDM Amikacin assay, a device for the quantitative determination of amikacin in human serum or plasma. The primary study presented is a substantial equivalence comparison to a predicate device, the COBAS INTEGRA Amikacin assay (K991597).
Here's a breakdown of the requested information based on the provided text:
1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance
The document does not explicitly state "acceptance criteria" with numerical targets for each performance characteristic. Instead, it states that "All of the evaluation studies gave acceptable results compared to the predicate device." The performance reported is in comparison to the predicate device, implying that achieving comparable performance to the legally marketed predicate was the acceptance criterion.
| Performance Characteristic | Acceptance Criteria (Implied: Comparable to Predicate) | Reported Device Performance (ONLINE TDM Amikacin) | Predicate Device Performance (COBAS INTEGRA Amikacin) |
|---|---|---|---|
| NCCLS Precision, Within run | |||
| Control 1 Mean (µg/ml) | Comparable to 5.3 µg/ml | 5.43 µg/ml | 5.3 µg/ml |
| Control 1 SD (µg/ml) | Comparable to 0.29 µg/ml | 0.10 µg/ml | 0.29 µg/ml |
| Control 1 CV% | Comparable to 5.4% | 1.7% | 5.4% |
| Control 2 Mean (µg/ml) | Comparable to 14.3 µg/ml | 16.88 µg/ml | 14.3 µg/ml |
| Control 2 SD (µg/ml) | Comparable to 0.25 µg/ml | 0.23 µg/ml | 0.25 µg/ml |
| Control 2 CV% | Comparable to 1.8% | 1.4% | 1.8% |
| Control 3 Mean (µg/ml) | Comparable to 27.3 µg/ml | 33.27 µg/ml | 27.3 µg/ml |
| Control 3 SD (µg/ml) | Comparable to 0.58 µg/ml | 0.47 µg/ml | 0.58 µg/ml |
| Control 3 CV% | Comparable to 2.1% | 1.4% | 2.1% |
| NCCLS Precision, Total | |||
| Control 1 Mean (µg/ml) | Comparable to 5.3 µg/ml | 5.43 µg/ml | 5.3 µg/ml |
| Control 1 SD (µg/ml) | Comparable to 0.37 µg/ml | 0.15 µg/ml | 0.37 µg/ml |
| Control 1 CV% | Comparable to 7.0% | 2.8% | 7.0% |
| Control 2 Mean (µg/ml) | Comparable to 14.3 µg/ml | 16.88 µg/ml | 14.3 µg/ml |
| Control 2 SD (µg/ml) | Comparable to 0.36 µg/ml | 0.37 µg/ml | 0.36 µg/ml |
| Control 2 CV% | Comparable to 2.5% | 2.2% | 2.5% |
| Control 3 Mean (µg/ml) | Comparable to 27.3 µg/ml | 33.27 µg/ml | 27.3 µg/ml |
| Control 3 SD (µg/ml) | Comparable to 0.78 µg/ml | 0.68 µg/ml | 0.78 µg/ml |
| Control 3 CV% | Comparable to 2.9% | 2.0% | 2.9% |
| Method Comparison (Linear Regression) | |||
| N | Comparable to N=120 | N=89 | N=120 |
| Range | Comparable to 0.30 - 41.8 µg/ml | 0.4 - 39.9 µg/ml | 0.30 - 41.8 µg/ml |
| Equation | Comparable to y=0.914x + 0.511 | $y=0.869x + 0.159$ | $y=0.914x + 0.511$ |
| Correlation (r) | Comparable to r=0.987 | r=0.976 | r=0.987 |
2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance
- Test Set Sample Size: For the method comparison study directly comparing the ONLINE TDM Amikacin to the COBAS INTEGRA Amikacin, the sample size was N=89. For the predicate device's method comparison (COBAS INTEGRA 700 Amikacin vs. Abbott TDx), the sample size was N=120.
- Data Provenance: The document does not specify the country of origin or whether the data was retrospective or prospective.
3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts
Not applicable. This device is an in-vitro diagnostic assay for quantitative determination of a drug level. Ground truth is established by the reference method's result (predicate device in this case), not by expert interpretation.
4. Adjudication method for the test set
Not applicable. As noted above, this is a quantitative analytical measurement, not a subjective interpretation requiring adjudication among 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
Not applicable. This device is an in-vitro diagnostic instrument measuring drug concentration and does not involve "human readers" or "AI assistance" in the typical sense of image interpretation or clinical decision support systems.
6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done
Yes, the studies reported are for the standalone performance of the ONLINE TDM Amikacin assay. The performance characteristics like precision, lower detection limit, method comparison, specificity, and interfering substances were evaluated for the device itself.
7. The type of ground truth used
The ground truth for the performance evaluation of the ONLINE TDM Amikacin assay was established by comparison to the predicate device, the COBAS INTEGRA Amikacin assay (K991597), which itself has an established analytical performance. For the method comparison, the COBAS INTEGRA Amikacin result was the comparative truth.
8. The sample size for the training set
The document does not specify a separate "training set" with a sample size. This is common for analytical devices where fundamental chemical/biological principles are used, and "training" as in machine learning is not directly applicable. The data presented are from validation/test sets.
9. How the ground truth for the training set was established
Not applicable, as a distinct training set in the machine learning sense is not described.
Ask a specific question about this device
Page 1 of 1