The Actim PROM test is a visually interpreted, qualitative immunochromatographic rapid test for the detection of amniotic fluid in cervicovaginal secretions during pregnancy. Actim PROM test detects IGFBP-1, which is a major protein in amniotic fluid and a marker of the presence of amniotic fluid in a cervicovaginal sample. The test is intended for professional use to help diagnose the rupture of fetal membranes (ROM) in pregnant women at >34 weeks gestation when patients report signs, symptoms or complaints suggestive of ROM or if such signs are otherwise observed. The Actim PROM Controls are intended for use as external controls with the Actim PROM test. The controls may also be used to demonstrate negative results and weak and strong positive results.
Device Story
Actim PROM is a rapid, qualitative, lateral flow immunochromatographic test for detecting IGFBP-1, a marker for amniotic fluid, in cervicovaginal secretions. The device consists of a sterile polyester swab, specimen extraction solution, and a dipstick. Used in point-of-care and clinical laboratory settings by healthcare professionals. The clinician collects a cervicovaginal sample using the swab, extracts it, and applies it to the dipstick. Results are determined by visual inspection of the dipstick. The test aids in the clinical diagnosis of premature rupture of fetal membranes (ROM) in pregnant women. External controls are provided to verify test performance, including negative, low positive, and high positive results.
Clinical Evidence
Clinical performance supported by two published studies (Ragosch et al. 1996; Jain and Morris 1998) totaling 175 patients. Combined results: 100% sensitivity (95% CI: 94-100%) and 87% specificity (95% CI: 79.4-92.5%). PPV was 80% and NPV was 100%. Analytical performance included precision/reproducibility testing, analytical sensitivity (detection limit ~25 µg/L), and specificity testing showing no cross-reactivity with IGFBP-2 through -6 or interference from common vaginal products, semen, blood, or urine.
Technological Characteristics
Lateral flow immunochromatographic assay. Components: sterile polyester swab, phosphate buffer extraction solution (with BSA, protease inhibitor, preservative), and dipstick with two mouse monoclonal antibodies to human IGFBP-1. Qualitative visual readout. Point-of-care/lab use. No instrumentation required. Controls are lyophilized human IGFBP-1 in buffered protein matrix.
Indications for Use
Indicated for professional use in pregnant women >34 weeks gestation presenting with signs or symptoms of rupture of fetal membranes (ROM) to detect IGFBP-1 in cervicovaginal secretions.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
A urinary pH (nonquantitative) test system is a device intended to estimate the pH of urine. Estimations of pH are used to evaluate the acidity or alkalinity of urine as it relates to numerous renal and metabolic disorders and in the monitoring of patients with certain diets.
Predicate Devices
AmniSure ROM (Rupture Of [fetal] Membranes) Test N-Dia, Inc. (K030849)
Submission Summary (Full Text)
{0}
1
# 510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION DECISION SUMMARY ASSAY ONLY TEMPLATE
A. 510(k) Number:
k061886
B. Purpose for Submission:
New device
C. Measurand:
Insulin-like growth factor binding protein-1 (IGFBP-1)
D. Type of Test:
Qualitative
E. Applicant:
Medix Biochemica
F. Proprietary and Established Names:
Actim PROM and Actim PROM Controls
G. Regulatory Information:
1. Regulation section:
21 CFR 862.1550
21 CFR 862.1660
21 CFR 862.9 (c)(9) Limitations of exemptions (For near patient testing (point of care))
2. Classification:
Class I
3. Product code:
{1}
OAM and JJX
4. Panel:
Chemistry (75)
H. Intended Use:
1. Intended use(s):
See indications for use below.
2. Indication(s) for use:
The Actim PROM test is a visually interpreted, qualitative immunochromatographic rapid test for the detection of amniotic fluid in cervicovaginal secretions during pregnancy. Actim PROM test detects IGFBP-1, which is a major protein in amniotic fluid and a marker of the presence of amniotic fluid in a cervicovaginal sample. The test is intended for professional use to help diagnose the rupture of fetal membranes (ROM) in pregnant women at >34 weeks gestation when patients report signs, symptoms or complaints suggestive of ROM or if such signs are otherwise observed.
The Actim PROM Controls are intended for use as external controls with the Actim PROM test. The controls may also be used to demonstrate negative results and weak and strong positive results.
3. Special conditions for use statement(s):
The device is intended for use in point-of-care and clinical laboratory settings.
4. Special instrument requirements:
None are required.
I. Device Description:
Actim PROM is available in packages of 3, 10 and 20 tests. Each individual test pack contains a sterile polyester swab, specimen extraction solution (0.5 mL), and a dipstick in a sealed aluminum pouch. The extraction solution is phosphate buffer containing BSA, protease inhibitor and preservative. The dipstick contains two mouse monoclonal antibodies to human IGFBP-1 and BSA.
The Actim PROM Controls Kit contains the following items: 1 vial each of Actim PROM Negative Control, Actim PROM Positive Control (low), and Actim PROM Positive Control (high); Actim Reconstitution Solution (2 mL); and instructions for
{2}
use. The positive controls consist of human IGFBP-1 in a buffered protein solution with preservative. The negative control consists of the same matrix without added antigen. All controls are supplied lyophilized and are reconstituted with the Reconstitution Solution.
## J. Substantial Equivalence Information:
1. Predicate device name(s):
AmniSure ROM (Rupture Of [fetal] Membranes) Test
2. Predicate 510(k) number(s):
k030849
3. Comparison with predicate:
| Similarities | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | Predicate |
| Indications for Use | Aid in detecting rupture of fetal membranes in pregnant women at >34 weeks gestation when patients report signs, symptoms or complaints suggestive of ROM or if such signs are otherwise observed. | Same |
| Specimen collection | Vaginal swab | Same |
| Principle | Immunochromatographic assay | Same |
| Differences | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | Predicate |
| Analyte | Insulin-like growth factor binding protein-1 (IGFBP-1) | Placental alpha-1 microglobulin (PAMG-1) |
| External QC Materials | Negative, low positive, and high positive controls | Positive control |
## K. Standard/Guidance Document Referenced (if applicable):
None were referenced.
## L. Test Principle:
The test principle is lateral flow immunochromatography.
{3}
M. Performance Characteristics (if/when applicable):
1. Analytical performance:
a. Precision/Reproducibility:
Samples (control solutions in specimen extraction solution) containing six different IGFBP-1 concentration levels were evaluated for repeatability / intra-assay precision. The levels represented negative, weakly positive and strongly positive samples. The samples were tested with 10 replicates each during the same day using 3 different lots of the Actim PROM test. Repeatable results were obtained. These test results were consistent with the detection limit of the assay.
Samples (control solutions in specimen extraction solution) containing ten different IGFBP-1 concentration levels were evaluated for reproducibility / inter-assay precision. The levels represented negative, weakly positive and strongly positive samples. The samples were tested with 3 replicates each on 7 days using 3 different lots of the Actim PROM test. Reproducible results were obtained. These test results were consistent with the detection limit of the assay.
b. Linearity/assay reportable range:
The measuring range of the Actim PROM test is approximately 25 µg/L – 500,000 µg/L in an extracted sample.
c. Traceability, Stability, Expected values (controls, calibrators, or methods):
The positive controls consist of purified human insulin-like growth factor binding protein-1 (IGFBP-1) with bovine serum albumin and preservative. The positive controls are prepared by adding hIGFBP-1 antigen to the negative control solution. The solutions are then adjusted to the following concentration ranges using IGFBP-1 quantitative ELISA: 40 µg/L (34-46 µg/L) for the low positive control and 250 µg/L (212-287 µg/L) for the high positive control.
The IGFBP-1 antigen in the Positive Controls has been shown to be negative for HBsAG, HIV type 1 and 2 antibodies, HCV and syphilis. However, such tests are unable to prove the complete absence of viruses, and therefore the controls should be treated as potentially infectious.
To test closed stability, controls are tested at the time of manufacture and after the designated storage times at the specified temperatures. For each time point, testing is performed with one lot of Actim PROM test using three
4
{4}
replicate dipsticks. The expected positive and negative results were obtained in all cases.
To test open stability, studies of the reconstituted controls were performed after 25 hours storage at three different temperatures (2-8°C, 25°C, and 30°C) and also after 4, 7, and 8 days storage at 2-8°C. For both studies, testing was performed with three lots of Actim PROM Controls and with three lots of Actim PROM tests. The expected positive and negative results were obtained in all cases and support the stated open stability of Actim PROM Controls.
d. Detection limit:
The analytical sensitivity was evaluated using specimens with 13 different concentrations of IGFBP-1 ranging from 0 µg/L – 500,000 µg/L. The samples were control solutions in Specimen Extraction Solution and were tested with 3 different lots of the Actim PROM test. With each lot, 10 replicates were tested at concentrations around the detection limit and 3 replicates were tested at higher concentrations. The analytical sensitivity or detection limit is approximately 25 µg/L of IGFBP-1 in extracted sample, which corresponds to approximately 400 µg/L in the unextracted sample.
e. Analytical specificity:
The analytical specificity (cross-reactivity) was tested with human IGFBP proteins at concentrations ranging from 10 - 5,000 µg/L of each protein in extracted sample. Additionally, control solutions containing 0 - 1,000 µg/L of human IGFBP-1 were tested. The samples were tested with 3 different lots using 3 replicates from each test. The results showed that the Actim PROM test is specific for IGFBP-1. No cross-reactivity was observed using human IGFBP-2, -3, -4, -5 and -6 proteins.
The effect of drugs, semen, whole blood, urine from pregnant women, shower and bath products, and other vaginal products were assessed for potential interference. Samples with and without drug preparations were collected and extracted into Specimen Extraction Solution containing 0 - 1,000 µg/L of IGFBP-1. Semen samples were collected and extracted into Specimen Extraction Solution containing 0 - 100 µg/L of IGFBP-1. Blood samples were spiked with 0 - 500 µg/L of IGFBP-1, corresponding to the concentration of blood in pregnant women, then extracted into Specimen Extraction Solution containing 0 and 50 µg/L of IGFBP-1. Urine samples (10) from pregnant women were collected and extracted into Specimen Extraction Solution containing 0 - 100 µg/L of IGFBP-1. Solutions (0.1%) of common shower and bath products were collected and extracted into Specimen Extraction Solution containing 0 and 50 µg/L of IGFBP-1. Five different concentrations each of other substances used in the vaginal area were
5
{5}
extracted into the Specimen Extraction Solution containing 0 and 100 µg/L of IGFBP-1.
Three different lots of Actim PROM were used for testing. The results were interpreted after 5 minutes. No interference of vaginal formulations, semen, whole blood, urine from pregnant women, and shower, bath, and other vaginal products with the performance of Actim PROM was observed.
f. Assay cut-off:
See detection limit above.
2. Comparison studies:
a. Method comparison with predicate device:
The performance of the Actim PROM test was evaluated in comparison with the predicate device. Vaginal secretions samples were collected from non-pregnant women and spiked with different concentrations of amniotic fluid. One hundred samples (100) were tested with both devices.
Test results for the subject device were reported as positive, negative, or indeterminate for very weak (trace) test lines. Test results for the predicate device were reported as positive or negative.
The samples contained various IGFBP-1 concentrations ranging from approximately 4 µg/L to approximately 6,000 µg/L. The percent agreement between the devices for the positive results was 80%. The percent agreement for the negative results was 100%. Overall agreement was 86%.
b. Matrix comparison:
Not applicable
3. Clinical studies:
a. Clinical Sensitivity:
Not applicable
b. Clinical specificity:
Not applicable
c. Other clinical supportive data (when a. and b. are not applicable):
6
{6}
The sponsor provided published studies to support clinical performance of the Actim PROM in the hands of intended end users under the intended conditions of use.
In one study by Ragosch et al (1996), samples were collected from forty-four (44) cases of suspected rupture and thirty-one (31) with intact membranes for testing on the Actim PROM device. The gestational age of the patients was up to 41 weeks. Women with over 8 hours between the examination and membrane rupture, strong bleeding, or cerclage were excluded. Upon further examination, forty (40) were diagnosed as having intact membranes and thirty-five (35) as having ruptured membranes.
In another study by Jain and Morris (1998), samples were collected from patients with admission history of premature rupture of membranes (i.e., suspected rupture). One hundred (100) patients up to 42 weeks gestation were included. Women presenting with obvious flooding of amniotic fluid were excluded from the study. The final diagnosis of membrane status indicated that seventy-five (75) were intact and twenty-five (25) were ruptured.
The results from the two studies are as follows:
| | N | Sensitivity Estimate | Specificity Estimate |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Ragosch et al | 75 | 35/35 = 100% | 33/40 = 82.5% |
| Jain and Morris | 100 | 25/25 = 100% | 67/75 = 89% |
| Combined | 175 | 60/60 = 100% | 100/115 = 87% |
| 95% CI | | 94% to 100% | 79.4% to 92.5% |
| | | PPV | NPV |
| Combined | 175 | 60/75 = 80% | 100/100 = 100% |
| 95% CI | | 69% to 88% | 96.4% to 100% |
4. Clinical cut-off:
Not applicable
5. Expected values/Reference range:
The expected values were determined in literature studies. The IGFBP-1 concentration in amniotic fluid is between 10,500 and 350,000 µg/L (Rutanen et al. 1993).
N. Proposed Labeling:
The labeling is sufficient and it satisfies the requirements of 21 CFR Part 809.10.
{7}
O. Conclusion:
The submitted information in this premarket notification is complete and supports a substantial equivalence decision.
8
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.