The GlycoMark™ test provides quantitative measurement of 1,5-anhydroglucitol (15AG) in serum or plasma. The test is for professional use, and is indicated for the intermediate term monitoring of glycemic control in people with diabetes.
Device Story
GlycoMark™ is an enzymatic, colorimetric in vitro diagnostic assay for quantitative measurement of 1,5-anhydroglucitol (15AG) in serum or plasma. Used in clinical laboratories on automated chemistry analyzers (e.g., Roche Hitachi 917). The assay uses a two-reagent system: Reagent 1 (pretreatment with glucokinase to convert glucose to non-reactive glucose-6-phosphate) and Reagent 2 (pyranose oxidase and peroxidase to generate a colorimetric signal proportional to 15AG concentration). An ATP-regenerating system (pyruvate kinase and phosphoenol pyruvate) ensures reaction completion. Healthcare providers use the resulting 15AG concentration as a marker for intermediate-term glycemic control, similar to A1C monitoring. The test aids in managing diabetes by providing longitudinal data on glycemic status.
Clinical Evidence
Prospective longitudinal study of 77 patients with diabetes (Type 1 and Type 2) with suboptimal glycemic control (A1C ≥ 7%). Patients monitored over 8 weeks following treatment modification. GlycoMark™ showed high association with A1C and fructosamine (Spearman’s non-parametric analysis). 89.6% concordance observed between changes in 15AG and A1C values over time.
Technological Characteristics
Enzymatic colorimetric assay; two-reagent system. Adapted for high-throughput laboratory analyzers (e.g., Hitachi 917). Measures 1,5-anhydroglucitol in serum or plasma. Analytical sensitivity 0.2 µg/ml. Linear up to 110 µg/ml. Precision (intra-run and between-day) %CVs between 0.79% and 3.83%.
Indications for Use
Indicated for intermediate-term monitoring of glycemic control in people with diabetes (Type 1 and Type 2). For professional use.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
A glycosylated hemoglobin assay is a device used to measure the glycosylated hemoglobins (A1a , A1b , and A1c ) in a patient's blood by a column chromatographic procedure. Measurement of glycosylated hemoglobin is used to assess the level of control of a patient's diabetes and to determine the proper insulin dosage for a patient. Elevated levels of glycosylated hemoglobin indicate uncontrolled diabetes in a patient.
{0}
510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION
DECISION SUMMARY
DEVICE ONLY TEMPLATE
A. 510(k) Number:
K031604
B. Analyte:
1,5-anhydroglucitol
C. Type of Test:
Quantitative
D. Applicant:
Tomen America Inc.
E. Proprietary and Established Names:
GlycoMark™
F. Regulatory Information:
1. Regulation section:
21 CFR 864.7470
2. Classification:
Class II
3. Product Code:
NOZ
4. Panel:
81
G. Intended Use:
1. Intended use(s):
The GlycoMark™ test provides quantitative measurement of 1,5-anhydroglucitol (15AG) in serum or plasma. The test is for professional use, and is indicated for the intermediate term monitoring of glycemic control in people with diabetes.
2. Indication(s) for use:
The GlycoMark™ test provides quantitative measurement of 1,5-anhydroglucitol (15AG) in serum or plasma. The test is for professional use, and is indicated for the intermediate term monitoring of glycemic control in people with diabetes.
3. Special condition for use statement(s):
None
4. Special instrument Requirements:
Roche Hitachi 917 or other appropriate open systems
H. Device Description:
GlycoMark™ is an enzymatic method consisting of a two-reagent test kit (Reagent 1 and Reagent 2) and is to be used with a fully automated chemistry analyzer. The test system also includes a calibration standard and a two-level control set, both of which are purchased separately.
{1}
Page 2 of 5
Reagent 1 is the pretreatment reagent (1 bottle, 20 mL) and contains the following: 4-aminoantipyrine, glucokinase, adenosine triphosphate, phosphoenol pyruvate, sodium azide, various buffers, water, and BSA.
Reagent 2 is the coloring reagent (1 bottle, 10 mL) and contains the following: pyranose oxidase, peroxidase, N-ethyl-N-(2-hydroxy-3-sulfopropyl)-3-methylaniline sodium dehydrate, sodium chloride, sodium azide, various buffers, and water.
The calibration standard contains 15AG, sodium azide, sodium chloride, and water. It is supplied in 3 vials, 5 mL each.
The control set contains a low and high control made up of 15AG and sodium azide. The low control has approximately 4.0-5.5 µg/mL 15AG, and the high control has approximately 13.0-16.0 µg/mL 15AG. Each control level is supplied in 3 vials, 2 mL each.
I. Substantial Equivalence Information:
1. Predicate device name(s): Tina-Quant A1C Assay
2. Predicate K number(s): K934070
3. Comparison with predicate:
| Similarities | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | Predicate |
| Indications for Use | Used in the management and treatment of diabetes, for monitoring glycemic control | Used in the management and treatment of diabetes, for monitoring glycemic control |
| Differences | | |
| Item | Device | Predicate |
| Intended Use | Quantitative measurement of 15AG in serum or plasma | Quantitative measurement of the percent of glycated hemoglobin in whole blood |
| Methodology | Colorimetric assay | Turbidimetric inhibition immunoassay |
J. Standard/Guidance Document Referenced (if applicable): Not applicable
K. Test Principle:
The method uses the enzyme pyranose oxidase (PROD) to oxidize the 2nd position hydroxyl group of 15AG and to detect the generated hydrogen peroxide by colorimetry using peroxidase (POD). As PROD reacts with glucose, the sample is pretreated by enzyme reaction using glucokinase (GK). Glucose is converted into glucose-6-phosphate (G-6-P), a species non-reactive with PROD. To drive the reaction to completion, an adenosine triphosphate (ATP)-regenerating system
{2}
Page 3 of 5
consisting of pyruvate kinase (PK) and phosphoenol pyruvate (PEP) is utilized. As ATP is converted to adenosine diphosphate (ADP), PK, in the presence of PEP, catalyzes the phosphorylation of ADP back to ATP. Following the conversion of glucose to G-6-P, the assay is rendered specific for 15AG.
L. Performance Characteristics (if/when applicable):
1. Analytical performance:
a. Precision/Reproducibility:
Within-assay: Twenty (20) replicates of the GlycoMark™ controls (low and high) were assayed according to standard procedure. Mean, standard deviation, and percent coefficient of variation (%CV) were calculated for each control solution. The within-assay precision ranged from approximately 1.3 to 3.8 %CV.
Between-assay (day-to-day): Two (2) replicates of each of the GlycoMark™ controls and two serum pools were assayed twice daily with one lot of reagents according to standard procedure for a total of 10 days. Mean, standard deviation, and percent coefficient of variation (%CV) for each sample over the entire 10 day set were calculated from their respective daily standard calibrations. The %CVs ranged from approximately 0.8% to 3.8%.
b. Linearity/assay reportable range:
Linearity was evaluated in a series of experiments using spiked samples. The concentrations of 15AG in the samples ranged from 0 μIU/mL to 113 μIU/mL. The samples were tested in quadruplicate with GlycoMark™, and the averaged obtained result was compared to the expected result by linear regression. The data indicated that GlycoMark™ is linear to at least 110 μg/mL 15AG.
c. Traceability (controls, calibrators, or method):
Calibration of the assay was established with a Master Reference preparation. A Working Reference preparation was assigned off of the Master Reference preparation and adjusted, as necessary, to be within 1% of the Master Reference. New batches of the 50 μg/mL calibrator are compared in multiple assays on a Hitachi analyzer to the Working Reference, and must be within 5% of the Working Reference. Similarly, new batches of controls are assigned off of the Working Reference in multiple assays on a Hitachi analyzer. Control ranges are established based on the assay results.
d. Detection limit:
Twenty-one (21) replicates of a saline reagent blank were analyzed as unknowns in one assay run. The analytical sensitivity is estimated to be 0.2 μg/mL, and this is defined as the mean 15AG concentration plus one standard deviation.
e. Analytical specificity:
To evaluate the effect of interfering substances, fresh serum was collected from apparently healthy individuals and pooled. The pool was then aliquoted, spiked with specified concentrations of
{3}
Page 4 of 5
interfering substances, and quantified in triplicate determinations in the GlycoMark™ assay using one lot of kit reagents. Percent recoveries for aliquots containing interferent were calculated by comparison to control samples containing no added interferences.
The data showed that GlycoMark™ is unaffected by hemoglobin up to 125 mg/dL, triglycerides up to 1153 mg/dL, and bilirubin up to 53 mg/dL. GlycoMark™ results were also unaffected by the following substances at their noted concentrations: glucose- 1000 mg/dL; maltose- 500 mg/dL; ascorbic acid- 25 mg/dL; uric acid- 20 mg/dL; creatinine- 10 mg/dL; urea- 20 mg/dL.
f. Assay cut-off:
See Detection limit above.
2. Comparison studies:
a. Method comparison with predicate device:
A prospective, longitudinal study was performed with seventy-seven (77) patients with diabetes (both type 1 and type 2). The patients exhibited suboptimal glycemic control (A1C level greater than or equal to 7%) at study entry, and these patients were monitored for eight weeks following initiation or modification of anti-hyperglycemic treatments. Measurements for GlycoMark™, A1C, fructosamine, and glucose were performed every two weeks for the first four weeks (Visits 1-3) and then at Week 8 (Visit 4). Correlations of the markers were determined by association between variables (Spearman’s non-parametric analysis). GlycoMark™ 15AG showed a high association with A1C and fructosamine.
Additionally, concordance of time-dependent changes of GlycoMark™ 15AG values with A1C was determined. "Concordance" was defined as either increases in 15AG values with corresponding decreases in A1C values, or, conversely, decreases in 15AG values with corresponding increases in A1C values. 89.6% of the patients (69 of 77) displayed concordance in changes of GlycoMark™ and A1C values with time.
b. Matrix comparison:
To assess the potential matrix effect of EDTA plasma on 15AG measurements, blood collections were obtained from 10 healthy volunteers, and then processed to serum and EDTA plasma in parallel. The samples were then randomly tested in the GlycoMark™ assay. The mean serum 15AG was 24.0 µg/mL and the mean plasma 15AG was 23.6 µg/mL, with a percent difference of -1.3%.
3. Clinical studies:
a. Clinical sensitivity:
Not applicable
b. Clinical specificity:
Not applicable
{4}
Page 5 of 5
c. Other clinical supportive data (when a and b are not applicable): Not applicable
4. Clinical cut-off: Not applicable
5. Expected values/Reference range:
A study was done with a presumptively normal population in order to determine GlycoMark™ reference ranges for 15AG. The study included serum samples from 82 males between the ages of 18 and 39, 82 females between the ages of 19 and 39, and 30 males and 30 females of age 40 or greater, for a total of 224 individuals. Ethnic backgrounds included African Americans, Caucasians, Asians, and Hispanics. The data did not demonstrate differences in ages, but there were gender differences. The following table provides the male and female ranges, based on nonparametric 5th-95th percentiles.
| | Mean (SD) μg/mL 15AG | Reference Interval μg/mL 15AG |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Males | 22.5 (5.8) | 10.7-32.0 |
| Females | 17.7 (6.2) | 6.8-29.3 |
M. Conclusion:
GlycoMark™ has the same indication as A1C assay in that they are both used in the management and treatment of diabetes and for monitoring glycemic control. The technological characteristics, on the other hand, differ. (Question 5)
The new method uses the enzyme pyranose oxidase to oxidize the 2nd position hydroxyl group of 15AG and to detect the generated hydrogen peroxide by colorimetry using peroxidase. The predicate is based on turbidimetric inhibition and involves antigen-antibody reactions. However, the characteristics of the new device could not affect safety or effectiveness because colorimetry is a well-established scientific method.
Additionally, the method comparison data provided demonstrated equivalence between the GlycoMark™ and the A1C. Other analytical data and manufacturing information provided were adequate as well. Therefore, I recommend a substantial equivalence determination for the GlycoMark™.
I also recommend a substantial equivalence determination for the calibrators (21 CFR 862.1150, 75JIS, class II) and controls (21 CFR 862.1660, 75JJX, class I), which will be sold separately.
Predicate graph will load when search results are available.
Embedding visualization will load when search results are available.
PDF viewer will load when search results are available.
Loading panels...
Select an item from Submissions
Click any panel, subpart, regulation, product code, or device to see details here.
Section Matches
Results will appear here.
Product Code Matches
Results will appear here.
Special Control Matches
Results will appear here.
Loading collections...
Loading
My Alerts
You will receive email notifications based on the filters and frequency you set for each alert.
Sort by:
Create Alert
Search Filters
Agent Token
Create a read-only bearer token for Claude, ChatGPT, or other agents that can call HTTP APIs.
Copy this now. It will not be shown again.
Connected apps
Apps you authorized through browser sign-in. Disconnecting revokes their access immediately.
Learn the FDA Browser
Two short videos show you everything — or skip straight to the written tutorial if you'd rather read. You can reopen this any time from the Tutorial button in the top bar.
Part 1 — Search, results, and everyday workflows 16 min
Part 2 — Embeddings: the galaxy map 3 min
1. Search: exact and fuzzy
Type a phrase like "coronary artery calcification" into the search box. You get two kinds of results. Exact results match the literal phrase — prefix searches work ("coronary artery calcificati") but suffix searches do not. Fuzzy results match on the meaning and intent of your phrase rather than the exact words, and are sorted by relevance score. Hover over the Exact or Fuzzy badge on any row to see exactly why it matched.
Use the checkboxes above the results to narrow: SaMD keeps only software-only devices, AI / ML keeps only devices with AI.
Exact vs. fuzzy search: what's the difference?
Exact matches on the literal phrase (prefix search works, suffix does not). Fuzzy matches on the meaning and intent of the phrase rather than the exact words. Hover over the badge on any row to see why it matched.
You search "coronary artery calcification" and want only software devices with AI. What two filters do you apply?
Narrow by SaMD (software-only devices), then narrow by AI/ML (devices with AI).
2. The results table
Scroll right in the results table. The intended use is extracted for you — no need to open the PDF. The device story gives a high-level snapshot of what the device does and how it's used. The AI Performance sub-table shows each output name, acceptance criteria, observed values, and development/test dataset descriptions — the same format Innolitics uses for regulatory strategy outputs, and the fastest high-level fingerprint of an AI device. It is AI-generated but has been very reliable in practice.
Where do you find a device's intended use without opening the PDF?
Scroll right in the search results table. The intended use column is extracted for you; no need to dig into the 510(k) summary PDF.
What does the AI Performance sub-table show, and why is it useful?
Output name, acceptance criteria, observed values, development dataset description, and test dataset description. It's the same format we use for regulatory strategy output and Fast 510(k) input, and the fastest high-level fingerprint of an AI device. AI-generated but reliable in practice.
3. Judging fuzzy relevance
Fuzzy results trail off in relevance as you scroll. Use three signals to decide how far down to go: the fuzzy badge explanations, the intended use column, and whether your target output (e.g., Cobb angle) still appears in the AI Performance sub-table. Once it stops appearing, you're past the relevant zone. A top hit with a low score (~0.4) and a stretched explanation is a hint the closest predicates are far away — the project may be headed for De Novo. Note the fuzzy search is a pattern match: it doesn't handle negation ("not") well, and hardware devices can appear — filter by SaMD/AI ML to cut them.
How do you judge how far down fuzzy search results to go?
Use the relevancy signals: the fuzzy badge explanations, the intended use column, and whether the target output (e.g., Cobb angle) still appears in the AI Performance sub-table. Once it stops appearing, results are trailing off in relevancy.
4. Device detail page: chat and citations
Click a device name to open its detail page: device facts on the left, a chat window on the right. Ask something like "Describe the training data". The answer carries little citation bubbles — click one to jump to the highlighted passage in the source PDF, so you can verify every AI answer against the document. There's also a Download PDF button for sharing.
How do you verify an AI chat answer on the device detail page?
Click the citation bubbles to jump to the relevant highlight in the source document.
Reading rule for every project: how many summaries do you read in full?
At least the three most relevant 510(k) or De Novo summaries, in full. After that, use targeted chat questions to confirm your memory quickly. The tool supports this professional habit — it doesn't replace it.
5. Side-by-side comparison
Select multiple rows in the results table (aim for under ~10), then open the PDF Viewer tab. Ask one question — it goes to all selected devices in parallel, each with citations. This is the fastest way to compare and contrast devices: training data, PCCP scope, how they handled adding new scanners, and so on.
What does the side-by-side PDF viewer mode do?
Select multiple devices, open the PDF viewer tab, and ask one question (e.g., "Describe the training data"). It queries all selected devices simultaneously with citations, so you can compare and contrast quickly.
6. Collections
With rows selected, go to the Collections tab and create a labeled collection (e.g., "Cobb Angle Project"). Reload that selection any time — before a client call, pull up the collection and ask questions across all of its devices at once.
How do you save a set of selected devices for later use?
Select the rows, go to the Collections tab, and create a labeled collection (e.g., "Cobb Angle Project"). You can reload the selection anytime and carry it into the PDF viewer and other tabs that support selections.
7. Product codes and the regulations tree
Click a product code in the results to jump to it in the regulations tree — identification text, sibling product codes, and devices you can open in a PDF viewer on the right. Click a regulation number to see its identification, special controls, and related product codes. You can also search by product code or regulation number at the top of the tree. Always read the special controls if any exist for your device — it broadens your search and sharpens pre-kickoff research.
What can you do from the regulations tree view?
Browse product codes and regulation numbers, read the identification text and special controls, browse sibling product codes, open device PDFs on the right, and search by product code or regulation number at the top of the tree.
8. Chart view
Click Show Chart and segment by regulation number (or product code) to see which regulations dominate your result set. Clicking a regulation takes you into the regulations tree. Great for spotting that most matches are, say, hardware laparoscopic devices — a cue to go back and filter.
How do you see which regulations dominate a search result set?
Click "Show Chart" and segment by Regulation Number. Clicking a regulation takes you to the regulations tree.
9. The predicate graph
Open the Predicates tab for a family-tree view of predicate relationships. Click a node to trace its parents and children; selections from search carry over pre-selected. Commonly predicated devices are worth reading — a lot of people predicated them for a reason. The visual lineage is also handy on client calls, e.g. to show how a predicate family evolved and justify why your predicate still holds.
In the predicate graph, why are commonly predicated devices worth reading?
A lot of people predicated them for a reason. Clicking a node traces parents and children, and selections from search carry over pre-selected.
10. Embeddings: the galaxy map
The Embeddings tab plots every matching document in a 2-D "galaxy map" where semantically similar devices cluster together. Hover or click clusters to explore, and let AI label the clusters for you. Embeddings beat product codes for grouping: two devices can carry different product codes (LLZ vs. QIH) yet do the same thing — the embedding captures the meaning of the intended use and device story. This is also exactly how retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) works under the hood, and it makes a great visual on client calls.
Try it yourself
Head to the search page and work through a few of these AI/ML fuzzy searches to build intuition: perivascular fat on CT · aortic valve calcification opportunistic screening on noncontrast CT · breast cancer prediction on digital pathology slides · autism detection · gestational age prediction · a hearing aid that can also detect a pulse · foundation model based analysis of ECG · large language models · penetration test. Watch how the relevance scores, intended use, and AI Performance tables tell you when results stop being meaningful.