Search Results

The Joint Biological Agent Identification and Diagnostic System (JBAIDS) Q Fever Detection Kit is a qualitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test kit intended to identify and detect target DNA sequence from Coxiella burnetii in serum collected from individuals suspected of having acute Q fever, typically 7-10 days after onset of symptoms or before antibody formation. This in vitro diagnostic (IVD) test is intended to aid in the diagnosis of Q fever in individuals presenting with signs and symptoms of acute Q fever when used in conjunction with other clinical and laboratory findings. This kit is only intended to aid in the diagnosis of Q fever of patients presenting in the acute stage of the disease. Negative results do not preclude C. burnetii infection and should not be used as the sole basis for diagnosis, treatment or other management decisions.

The JBAIDS Q Fever assay is run on the JBAIDS instrument using the Diagnostic Wizard. Results are for the presumptive identification of C. burnetii in conjunction with serology and/or other laboratory tests. The following considerations also apply:

• The diagnosis of acute Q fever must be made based on history, signs, symptoms, exposure likelihood, and other laboratory evidence, in addition to the identification of C. burnetii from serum specimens.
• Sensitivity is decreased by ~25-40%, with no change in specificity, if the sample is collected after the patient has formed specific antibodies to C. burnetii, typically 7-10 days after onset of symptoms.
• The definitive identification of C. burnetii from serum specimens requires additional testing and confirmation procedures in consultation with public health or other authorities for whom reports are required.

The Joint Biological Agent Identification and Diagnostic System (JBAIDS) Q Fever Detection Kit is a fully integrated in-vitro diagnostic (IVD) system composed of the JBAIDS instrument with laptop computer, software, a freeze-dried reagent assay for the qualitative detection of pathogenic Coxiella burnetii, and 2 different sample preparation protocols for isolating target DNA from serum. Use of the JBAIDS DNA Extraction Control kit (not included) is also recommended.

The JBAIDS instrument, using Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) technology, is a portable thermocycler and real-time fluorimeter. The JBAIDS Q Fever Detection Kit is specially designed for PCR in glass capillaries using the JBAIDS instrument and hydrolysis probes for sequence-specific detection of the C. burnetii IS1111 DNA target.

The reagent kit contains 3 different types of freeze-dried reagent vials: Positive Controls, Negative Controls, and Unknowns (used for testing the patient sample). Each JBAIDS assay requires a Positive and Negative Control, and each sample is tested using an Unknown reagent vial which contains a multiplexed target and inhibition control (IC) assay.

Prior to testing, serum samples are purified using the Idaho Technology IT 1-2-3™ QFLOW or IT 1-2-3™ Platinum Path Sample Purification Kit. The resulting purified sample is added to an Unknown reagent vial, along with reconstitution buffer. A Positive Control and a Negative Control vial are prepared using reconstitution buffer and reagent grade water. Aliquots from each reagent vial are transferred to 2 reaction capillaries that are tested together in the JBAIDS instrument. The instrument is programmed to perform heating and cooling cycles that drive the PCR process. The heating and cooling cycles are generated using a heating coil and varying fan speeds. Fluorescence emission is monitored over 1 of 3 wavelengths, and the instrument software interprets the change in fluorescence to determine whether the target DNA is present.

When the organism is present, a fragment of C. burnetii DNA is amplified using specific primers. The amplicon is detected by fluorescence using a specific hydrolysis probe. The hydrolysis probe contains a short oligonucleotide that hybridizes to an internal sequence of the amplified fragment during the annealing phase of the PCR cycle. This probe has the 5' and 3' ends labeled with a reporter dye and a quenching dye, respectively. When the probe hybridizes to the specific DNA target, the Taq polymerase enzyme replicating the targetspecific DNA hydrolyzes the probe, which separates the two fluorophores, thus allowing the reporter dye to fluoresce. Fluorescence is monitored at a wavelength of 530 nm. Inhibition is monitored using an internal inhibition control. The inhibition control consists of a linearized plasmid containing an artificial intervening sequence flanked by target assay primer sequences. Similar to the target, the IC probe also has the 5' and 3' ends labeled with a reported and quenching dye, respectively. Hydrolysis of the IC probe during amplification is monitored at a wavelength of 705 nm.

The level of fluorescence from each unknown sample and control is measured by the JBAIDS instrument. JBAIDS Software analyzes fluorescence amplification curves and reports results as Positive, Negative, Inhibited, or Uncertain. A failure of the Positive or Negative Control will result in the entire run being called Invalid. Failure of the Inhibition Control when no target amplification is observed yields an Inhibited result for the associated sample and requires retesting of that sample. A positive result for the target will override an inhibited result.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study details for the JBAIDS Q Fever Detection Kit, based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The document does not explicitly state formal "acceptance criteria" in a quantitative, pre-defined manner for the clinical study. Instead, it presents performance characteristics (sensitivity and specificity) from a clinical trial. The analytical performance (LoD and exclusivity) directly reports observed results without listing specific target criteria.

• 10/10 (100%) of isolates in C. burnetii inclusivity panel correctly identified at determined system LoD. |
  | • Exclusivity (Specificity) | No cross-reactivity with phylogenetically related or commonly found organisms. | - 22 of 22 non-C. burnetii strains tested in exclusivity panel were negative at high concentration.
• In silico evaluation of Ehrlichia and Neorickettsia indicated no cross-reactivity. |
  | • Reproducibility | Highly reproducible test results at or above LoD (Implied: High agreement with expected positive results; low %CV for Cp values). | - Agreement with Expected Positive Results (Detection ≥ LoD): 100% (204/204) across all sites and both purification kits (95% CI: 98.2-100.0%).
• Agreement at LoD/15 (low concentration): 52% (53/102) across all sites and both purification kits (95% CI: 41.8-62.0%).
• Average Cp %CV: Low %CV values for 5X LoD, LoD, and LoD/15, indicating consistent Cycle threshold values. Percent CV for 5X LoD and LoD was generally below 3%. |
  | Clinical Studies | | |
  | • Clinical Sensitivity | Detect C. burnetii in samples from acute Q fever patients (Implied: Reasonable detection rate, especially prior to antibody formation). | For samples prior to seroconversion (Acute Q Fever, Seronegative):
• Site 1: Platinum Path: 47% (9/19; 95% CI=24-71%); QFLOWdna: 29% (5/17; 95% CI=10-56%).
• Site 2: Platinum Path: 77% (20/26; 95% CI=56-91%); QFLOWdna: 81% (22/27; 95% CI=62-94%). (Note: Sensitivity decreased significantly in seropositive samples). |
  | • Clinical Specificity | No false positives in samples without C. burnetii (Implied: High negative predictive value). | For serology negative samples (no antibody to C. burnetii):
• Site 1: Platinum Path: 100% (40/40; 95% CI=91-100%); QFLOWdna: 100% (39/39; 95% CI=91-100%).
• Site 2: Platinum Path: 100% (71/71; 95% CI=95-100%); QFLOWdna: 100% (72/72; 95% CI=95-100%).
• Overall, 306/307 (99.7%) of serology negative samples gave expected negative results. One false positive was observed from a sample that failed to show a four-fold antibody titer rise. |

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

• Test Set Description: Banked, frozen serum specimens.
• Data Provenance: The specimens were sequentially received during a specified time period. The clinical study involved three independent laboratories located in distinct geographical regions: Australia, France, and the Netherlands. This indicates the data is retrospective.
• Total Subjects Evaluated: 749 subjects.
• Subjects Included in Analysis: 465 subjects.
• Exclusions:
  • 86 for inconclusive or incomplete serology.
  • 21 due to environmental contamination.
  • 7 for inconclusive JBAIDS results.
  • All 170 samples tested at Site 3 due to deviations from the study protocol.
• Total Final Test Results (after purification):
  • Platinum Path: 324 results (170 from serology positive, 154 from serology negative).
  • QFLOWdna: 324 results (171 from serology positive, 153 from serology negative).
    (Note: 183 specimens had adequate volume for purification by both methods, contributing to the total results.)
• Breakdown for Sensitivity/Specificity Calculation:
  • Seronegative, No Antibody to C. burnetii (Specificity):
    • Site 1: 40 (Platinum Path) + 39 (QFLOWdna) = 79 samples
    • Site 2: 71 (Platinum Path) + 72 (QFLOWdna) = 143 samples
    • Total: 222 samples
  • Seronegative, Failed 4-fold Antibody Rise (where 1 false positive occurred): 85 samples
  • Seropositive (Sensitivity, where seroconversion occurred):
    • Site 1: 19 (Platinum Path) + 17 (QFLOWdna) = 36 samples
    • Site 2: 26 (Platinum Path) + 27 (QFLOWdna) = 53 samples
    • Total: 89 samples (for samples exhibiting seroconversion)

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

The ground truth for the clinical study was established by standard paired serological testing for Q fever, which had been previously performed on the banked specimens.
The document does not specify the number or qualifications of experts who performed or interpreted this serological testing. It refers to "standard paired serological testing," implying established laboratory procedures.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

The document does not describe an explicit "adjudication method" involving independent review of results for the clinical study. The ground truth was based on the outcome of "standard paired serological testing." The JBAIDS results were compared against this serological ground truth. There is no mention of multiple experts reviewing individual cases or a conciliation process if disagreements arose.

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 done.
The JBAIDS Q Fever Detection Kit is a real-time PCR assay, an in vitro diagnostic (IVD) device, not an AI-powered diagnostic imaging or interpretation system that would typically involve human "readers." The device provides automated test interpretation and report generation.

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

Yes, a standalone performance evaluation was done. The JBAIDS Q Fever Detection Kit is described as a "fully integrated in-vitro diagnostic (IVD) system" with "automated test interpretation and report generation." The clinical and analytical studies measure the performance of this system operating in a standalone capacity, producing "Positive, Negative, Inhibited, or Uncertain" results based on fluorescence amplification curves. While human operators are involved in sample preparation and loading, the interpretation of the PCR data is handled by the instrument's software algorithms, without human interpretative input into individual test results.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

The ground truth used for the clinical study was based on standard paired serological testing for Q fever.
Specifically, for establishing sensitivity, it relied on samples exhibiting a four-fold rise in antibodies (indicating seroconversion, a definitive sign of infection). For establishing specificity, it relied on samples with no antibody to C. burnetii confirmed by serology.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not specify the sample size for a training set. As this is a molecular diagnostic kit (PCR), the "training" would typically involve optimization and validation of primers, probes, and reaction conditions rather than machine learning on a dataset with ground truth. The performance data presented (LoD, exclusivity, reproducibility, clinical studies) are evaluations of the finalized kit.

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

Since no explicit "training set" for an algorithm is mentioned or implied, the question of how its ground truth was established is not applicable in the typical sense of machine learning. The kit's design and analytical performance (e.g., selection of primers and probes for C. burnetii IS1111 DNA sequences) would have been developed against known strains and samples, but these are part of assay development and analytical validation, not a separate "training set" with ground truth in the context of an AI/ML device.

Ask a specific question about this device

The INDX" Dip-S-Ticks scrub typhus test is an enzyme immunoassay for use as an aid in the diagnosis of scrub typhus, and detects total IgG and IgM antibodies to Orientia tsursugamushi. The Dip-S-Ticks test is qualitative when used to test a single specimen; when using paired specimens to detect sero-conversion the test may be semi-quantitative. The test is intended for use in serum as well as heparinized plasma, whole blood and finger-stick capillary blood and is intended to be performed by trained medical personnel only.

The INDX® DIP-S-TICKS® Scrub Typhus Test For the Detection of IgG and IgM Antibodies to Orientia tsutsugamushi (scrub typhus) utilizes an enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA) dotblot technique for the detection of IgM as well as total (IgM and IgG) dengue antibodies. The antigen is dispensed as discrete dots onto a solid membrane. After adding specimen to a reaction vessel, an assay strip is inserted, allowing patient antibodies reactive with the test antigen to bind to the strip's solid support membrane. In the second stage, the reaction is enhanced by removal of non-specifically bound materials. During the third stage, alkaline phosphatase-conjugated anti-human IgG/IgM antibodies are allowed to react with bound patient antibodies. Finally, the strip is transferred to enzyme substrate reagent, which reacts with bound alkaline phosphatase to produce an easily seen, distinct spot.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and the study that proves the device meets them, based on the provided text:

Device: INDX® DIP-S-TICKS® Scrub Typhus Test For the Detection of IgG and IgM Antibodies to Orientia tsutsugamushi (scrub typhus)

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

The acceptance criteria are not explicitly defined as pass/fail thresholds in the document. Instead, the studies aim to demonstrate substantial equivalence to predicate devices (IFA/IIP methods). The "Summary of Comparisons" table found on page 2 provides average performance characteristics across all comparison studies. The individual study results also serve as evidence of performance.

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

The test set consisted of samples from 262 febrile patient sera across four independent studies.

• Study 1: 91 presumptive positive samples (retrospective)
• Study 2: 60 sera from febrile patients (prospective)
• Study 3: 83 sera from febrile patients (prospective)
• Study 4: 28 paired acute and convalescent sera (extension of Study 1, retrospective)

Data Provenance:

• Study 1 & 4: NorthCentral Malaysia (from a U.S. medical reference laboratory for rickettsial diseases)
• Study 2: Northern Thailand (Chiangrai Hospital)
• Study 3: North-East Thailand (Mahara Hospital in Nakhon Ratchasima province)

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

The document does not explicitly state the number of experts or their specific qualifications (e.g., radiologist with 10 years experience). However, the ground truth was established by comparison to legally marketed predicate devices:

• Indirect Immunofluorescence (IFA) Slide Test: Used in Study 1 and Study 4.
• Indirect Immunoperoxidase (IIP) method: Used in Study 2 and Study 3.

The predicate methods are established serological tests for rickettsial species. It is implied that the interpretation of these predicate tests would be performed by trained medical technologists, as mentioned in the "Intended Use" section for the INDX device itself, and as such, these results form the "expert consensus" or established diagnostic standard against which the new device is compared.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

The document does not describe an explicit adjudication method for the test set in terms of multiple expert reviews and conflict resolution. The ground truth was established by the results of the predicate IFA or IIP methods.

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 performed. This device is a semi-quantitative Enzyme Immunoassay (EIA) dot-blot test, not an AI-assisted diagnostic tool.

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

Yes, this study is inherently a standalone performance evaluation of the device. The INDX DIP-S-TICKS test is an in-vitro diagnostic device that is read directly by trained medical technologists. The performance metrics (Sensitivity, Specificity, Agreement) reported are for the device itself against the predicate methods. The "human-in-the-loop" aspect here refers to the medical technologist performing and interpreting the test, but the study design is evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of the device's output.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc)

The ground truth was established based on the results of predicate serological tests (IFA or IIP methods), which are considered the diagnostic standard for scrub typhus. For Study 4, a 4-fold rise in antibody titer in the predicate IFA test was used to indicate active disease.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not specify a separate "training set" in the context of machine learning or algorithm development. This refers to a traditional in-vitro diagnostic device evaluation. The studies presented are primarily for performance evaluation and comparison to predicate devices.

Non-Clinical Tests did include some evaluations that could be considered internal validation or characterization:

• Normal Population: 10 asymptomatic normal donors.
• Negative Patient Control Sera: 51 sera with confirmed non-rickettsial diseases.
• Precision Study: Repeated tests on specific human immune sera (S0023, S0024, S0025, HAS).

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

As there isn't a "training set" in the context of an algorithm seeking ground truth to learn from, this question isn't directly applicable. However, for the internal evaluations mentioned in point 8, the ground truth was established as follows:

• Normal Population: Negative IFA result for scrub typhus.
• Negative Patient Control Sera: Confirmed not to have scrub typhus through various disease diagnoses (Rheumatoid Factor, Antinuclear Antibody, Malaria, Bartonellosis, Leptospirosis, Typhoid, Cholera).
• Precision Study: These were internal characterization studies, not directly reliant on an external "ground truth" but rather testing the consistency of the device's own measurements with known positive or negative control sera. The "gold standard" for these sera would also likely have been established by predicate methods or clinical diagnosis.

Ask a specific question about this device