The Abbott Carbamazepine assay is used for the in vitro quantitative measurement of carbamazepine in human serum or plasma on the ARCHITECT cSystems. The measurements obtained are used in monitoring levels of carbamazepine to help ensure appropriate therapy.
Device Story
The Abbott Carbamazepine Assay is an in vitro diagnostic reagent kit used on ARCHITECT cSystems to measure carbamazepine levels in human serum or plasma. It utilizes a homogeneous particle-enhanced turbidimetric inhibition immunoassay (PETINIA) principle. The assay relies on competition between carbamazepine in the patient sample and drug coated onto microparticles for binding sites on an anti-carbamazepine antibody. In the absence of patient drug, microparticles agglutinate; presence of patient drug inhibits this agglutination. The system measures the rate of absorbance change photometrically, which is inversely proportional to the carbamazepine concentration. The assay is intended for use by clinical laboratory professionals to monitor therapeutic drug levels, aiding clinicians in adjusting patient therapy. Results are provided as quantitative values.
Clinical Evidence
Bench testing only. Precision evaluated per CLSI EP5-A2 (n=80 per sample). Linearity confirmed across 1.9–20.0 μg/mL range (R² > 0.998). Method comparison against predicate (n=103 and n=105) showed strong correlation (R=0.9675–0.9827). Interference testing confirmed minimal impact from endogenous substances and common drugs. No clinical patient outcome data provided.
Technological Characteristics
PETINIA assay. Reagents: anti-carbamazepine monoclonal antibody (mouse) and carbamazepine-coated microparticles in buffer with NaN₃ preservative. Analyzed on ARCHITECT c8000. Liquid ready-to-use format. Standards: CLSI EP5-A2, EP9-A2, EP17-A2.
Indications for Use
Indicated for in vitro quantitative measurement of carbamazepine in human serum or plasma to monitor drug levels for therapeutic management. Prescription use only.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
A neuroleptic drugs radioceptor assay test system is a device intended to measure in serum or plasma the dopamine receptor blocking activity of neuroleptic drugs and their active metabolites. A neuroleptic drug has anti-psychotic action affecting principally psychomotor activity, is generally without hypnotic effects, and is a tranquilizer. Measurements obtained by this device are used to aid in determining whether a patient is taking the prescribed dosage level of such drugs.
Predicate Devices
Abbott Aeroset® Carbamazepine Assay (k993028)
Submission Summary (Full Text)
{0}
1
510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION
DECISION SUMMARY
ASSAY ONLY TEMPLATE
A. 510(k) Number:
k123518
B. Purpose for Submission:
New device
C. Measurand:
Carbamazepine
D. Type of Test:
Quantitative immunoassay
E. Applicant:
Microgenics Corporation
F. Proprietary and Established Names:
Abbott Carbamazepine Assay
G. Regulatory Information:
1. Regulation section:
21 CFR 862.3645, Neuroleptic drugs radioreceptor assay test system
2. Classification:
Class II
3. Product code:
KLT, Enzyme Immunoassay, Carbamazepine
4. Panel:
Toxicology (91)
H. Intended Use:
1. Intended use(s):
See indication(s) for use below
{1}
2. Indication(s) for use:
The Abbott Carbamazepine Assay is used for the in vitro quantitative measurement of carbamazepine in human serum or plasma on the ARCHITECT cSystems. The measurements obtained are used in monitoring levels of carbamazepine to help ensure appropriate therapy.
3. Special conditions for use statement(s):
For prescription use only
4. Special instrument requirements:
ARCHITECT c8000 System
I. Device Description:
The Carbamazepine Assay kit is supplied ready-to-use in liquid form, for storage at 2 to 8°C. Each Carbamazepine Assay kit contains three bottles of Antibody Reagent (R1; 3 x 27mL), three bottles of Microparticle Reagent (R2; 3 x 9mL), and the package insert. Each kit is sufficient for 300 tests. The R1 antibody reagent contains <1.0% anti-carbamazepine monoclonal antibody (mouse) in Bis-Tris buffer and <0.09% NaN₃ as preservative. The R2 microparticle reagent contains <1.0% carbamazepine-coated microparticles in Tris buffer and <0.09% NaN₃ as preservative.
J. Substantial Equivalence Information:
1. Predicate device name(s):
Abbott Aeroset® Carbamazepine Assay
2. Predicate 510(k) number(s):
K993028
3. Comparison with predicate:
| Item | Candidate device: Abbott Carbamazepine Assay (k123518) | Predicate device: Abbott Aeroset® Carbamazepine Assay (k993028) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Intended Use | The Abbott carbamazepine assay is used for the in vitro quantitative measurement of carbamazepine in human serum or plasma on the ARCHITECT cSystems. The measurements obtained are used in monitoring levels of carbamazepine to help ensure appropriate therapy. | Same |
{2}
| Methodology | Homogenous particle-enhanced turbidimetric inhibition immunoassay (PETINIA). | Homogeneous enzyme immunoassay based on competition for antibody binding sites between the analyte drug in the specimen and exogenous drug labeled with the enzyme glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PDH). |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Sample Matrix | Human serum or human plasma (including Li heparin, Na heparin, K EDTA, Na citrate, Na fluoride/K oxalate ) | Same |
| Reagent | Liquid ready-to-use | Same |
| Analyzer | Architect cSystems | Abbott Aeroset analyzer |
| Claimed Assay range | 1.9 to 20.0 μg/mL | 0.5 to 20.0 μg/mL |
| Calibrators | Liquid ready-to-use, six levels (0, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 20 μg/mL) Not provided with the kit. | Liquid ready-to-use, six levels (0, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 20 μg/mL) Provided with the kit. |
K. Standard/Guidance Document Referenced (if applicable):
CLSI EP5-A2; Evaluation of Precision Performance of Quantitative Measurement Methods; Approved Guideline – Second Edition
CLSI EP9-A2; Method Comparison and Bias Estimation Using Patient Samples; Approved Guideline – Second Edition
CLSI EP17-A2; Evaluation of Detection Capability for Clinical Laboratory Measurement Procedures; Approved Guideline – Second Edition
L. Test Principle:
The Abbott carbamazepine assay is a homogenous particle-enhanced turbidimetric inhibition immunoassay (PETINIA) used for the analysis of carbamazepine in serum or plasma. The assay is based on competition between drug in the sample and drug coated onto a microparticle of antibody binding sites of the carbamazepine antibody reagent. The carbamazepine-coated microparticle reagent is rapidly agglutinated in the presence of the anti-carbamazepine antibody reagent and in the absence of any competing drug in the sample. The rate of absorbance change is measured photometrically, and is directly proportional to the rate of agglutination of the particles. When a sample containing carbamazepine is added, the agglutination reaction is partially inhibited, slowing down the rate of absorbance change. A concentration-dependent classic agglutination inhibition curve can be obtained, with maximum rate of agglutination at the lowest carbamazepine concentration and the
{3}
lowest agglutination rate at the highest carbamazepine concentration.
## M. Performance Characteristics (if/when applicable):
### 1. Analytical performance:
All studies were performed on the Architect c8000.
#### a. Precision/Reproducibility:
Precision was evaluated following the CLSI EP5-A2 guidance. Pooled patient samples at five carbamazepine concentrations and negative serum pools spiked with carbamazepine stock solution (1 mg/mL) at five carbamazepine concentrations were tested. Testing was performed at two locations (an internal and an external site) on an Architect c8000 clinical chemistry analyzer using one lot each of the reagents and the calibrators. Each carbamazepine sample was assayed in replicates of two, twice a day for 20 days with a total of 40 runs and n=80. Each run per day was separated by at least two hours. The mean, within-run and total-run SD, and with-run and total-run %CV were calculated. The results obtained are as shown in the table below:
| Sample | Mean (μg/mL) | Within-run | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| Internal Site | | | | | |
| Spike 1 | 2.25 | 0.05 | 2.1 | 0.09 | 3.9 |
| Spike 2 | 3.49 | 0.07 | 2.1 | 0.1 | 2.8 |
| Spike 3 | 8.18 | 0.13 | 1.6 | 0.2 | 2.4 |
| Spike 4 | 15.27 | 0.24 | 1.5 | 0.48 | 3.1 |
| Spike 5 | 17.19 | 0.31 | 1.8 | 0.33 | 1.9 |
| Patient 1 | 1.93 | 0.06 | 3.0 | 0.12 | 6.3 |
| Patient 2 | 3.99 | 0.07 | 1.6 | 0.1 | 2.6 |
| Patient 3 | 8.15 | 0.08 | 1.0 | 0.18 | 2.1 |
| Patient 4 | 12.05 | 0.18 | 1.5 | 0.24 | 2.0 |
| Patient 5 | 18.09 | 0.31 | 1.7 | 0.39 | 2.2 |
| External Site | | | | | |
| Spike 1 | 2.32 | 0.06 | 2.7 | 0.1 | 4.1 |
| Spike 2 | 3.17 | 0.07 | 2.2 | 0.09 | 2.9 |
| Spike 3 | 7.94 | 0.09 | 1.1 | 0.12 | 1.6 |
| Spike 4 | 13.46 | 0.32 | 2.4 | 0.38 | 2.8 |
| Spike 5 | 15.15 | 0.16 | 1.1 | 0.25 | 1.7 |
#### b. Linearity/assay reportable range:
The claimed assay range is 1.9 to 20 ug/mL. To evaluate linearity, a series of carbamazepine concentrations in serum were prepared by spiking into negative serum and diluting the high sample to ten concentrations spanning (and exceeding) the assay range. Concentrations included carbamazepine ranged from 1.24 to 20.6 ug/mL. Four replicates were measured for each
{4}
concentration and the mean of measured concentration was compared with its expected concentration. The expected concentration was based on dilution factors and the high sample concentration. The concentration of the high sample was determined by chromatographic testing traceable to purified carbamazepine.
The linear regression results are:
| Study Site | Slope | Intercept | R² |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Manufacturer Site | 1.073 | 0.029 | 0.9990 |
| External Site | 0.983 | 0.065 | 0.9984 |
Recoveries relative to the target concentrations were within $\pm 10\%$ or within $\pm 0.4~\mathrm{ug/mL}$.
This evaluation supports linearity across the claimed measuring range of 1.9 to $20.0~\mathrm{ug/mL}$.
## Spike/Recovery
Purified carbamazepine was gravimetrically spiked into negative human serum at 2, 8 and $18\mu \mathrm{g} / \mathrm{mL}$. Twenty one replicates for each sample were tested in the assay. The average measured concentration was compared to its expected concentration for each spiked sample, as determined by a chromatographic method. The percent recoveries were less than $\pm 10\%$ for the mid and high samples (8 and $18\mu \mathrm{g} / \mathrm{mL}$) and were within $0.4\mu \mathrm{g} / \mathrm{mL}$ for samples $< 4\mu \mathrm{g} / \mathrm{mL}$.
To validate labeling recommendations for dilution of high samples, high concentration carbamazepine samples were prepared by adding reference material to serum. Samples were manually diluted into Calibrator 1 or saline. Three high sample concentrations (20, 25, and $30~\mathrm{ug/mL}$) were tested with three replicates and two separate 4-fold dilutions each for a total of 18 measurements diluted into saline and 18 measurements diluted into Calibrator 1. Recoveries ranged from $101 - 107\%$ of expected. The automated dilution into saline was similarly tested and recoveries were within $95 - 101\%$ of expected.
c. Traceability, Stability, Expected values (controls, calibrators, or methods):
Calibrators were previously cleared under k120936. See k120936 for traceability, stability, and expected values information on calibrators.
d. Detection limit:
The sponsor performed a study following CLSI EP17 guidelines to determine the LoB and LoQ of the Abbott Carbamazepine assay on the Architect c8000 analyzer. The LoB was calculated to be $0.1018\mu \mathrm{g / mL}$.
5
{5}
Precision and bias at the LoQ were evaluated by adding reference material to carbamazepine-free serum and carbamazepine-free plasma to attain concentrations ranging from 0.5 to 3.2 ug/mL. Four replicates per day were measured over 17 days with 2 lots of reagent. At the claimed lower limit of 1.9 ug/mL the upper 95% confidence limit of the CV was within <7%, and bias relative to the known concentration was within ± 0.4 ug/mL.
e. Analytical specificity:
Interference by metabolites, drugs, and endogenous compounds was tested by spiking the potential interferents into human serum containing carbamazepine at concentrations of 4, 8, and 12 ug/mL. Corresponding control samples were prepared by adding the equal volume of solvent that was in the stock solution of the compound tested. Samples were measured in duplicate by the carbamazepine assay. The compounds listed below did not interfere at the concentrations shown below in the table. Recoveries were all within ± 6% of expected.
| Compound tested for interference | Concentration (μg/mL) |
| --- | --- |
| 5-(p-Hydroxyphenyl-5-phenylhydantoin | 1000 |
| Acetaminophen | 200 |
| N-acetylcysteine | 150 |
| Acetylsalicylic acid | 1000 |
| Amitriptyline | 2 |
| Amobarbital | 50 |
| Ampicillin-Na | 100 |
| Ascorbic acid | 30 |
| Cefoxin | 2500 |
| Cetirizine dihydrochloride | 3 |
| Chlordiazepoxide | 30 |
| Chlorpromazine | 100 |
| Clonazepam | 12 |
| Cyclosporine | 5 |
| Desipramine | 3 |
| Diazepam | 25 |
| Ethosuximide | 1000 |
| Ethotoin | 50 |
| Glutethimide | 50 |
| Hydroxyzine Dihydrochloride | 1 |
| Ibuprofen | 500 |
| Imipraminee | 6 |
{6}
The following compounds were tested for cross-reactivity at the following three serum carbamazepine concentrations. Results are shown in the table:
| | Percent Bias/Recovery | | | %-Cross-reactivity | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Compound | 4 ug/mL CBMZP | 8 ug/mL CBMZP | 12 ug/mL CBMZP | 4 ug/mL CBMZP | 8 ug/mL CBMZP | 12 ug/mL CBMZP |
| Eslicarbazepine | 4.3% | 5% | 1% | 9.0% | 20% | 6% |
| Carbamazepine-10,11-epoxide | 15.2% | .9 | 8.2 | 31.5% | 35% | 549.8 |
| 10-Hydroxycarbamazepine | 6.2% | 6.3 | -1.3% | 12.8% | 24% | -8% |
| Oxcarbazepine | 3.5% | 3.9 | 8.2 | 7.2% | 15% | 49.8% |
Potentially interfering endogenous compounds were spiked at the highest possible
{7}
concentrations expected from the intended use population into human serum pool containing approximately 4, 8, and 12 µg/mL of carbamazepine. The potential interference of Rheumatoid Factor (RF) and triglyceride was assessed using RF patient specimens and two triglyceride specimens naturally high in these substances and then spiking with carbamazepine at approximately 8 µg/mL. Corresponding control samples were prepared by supplementing the human serum pool with the equal volume of solvent that was in the stock solution of the compound tested or by spiking carbamazepine into negative human serum. Each prepared sample and its control solution were measured in replicates of three. The following compounds at listed concentrations cause minimal interference to the assay. Carbamazepine recoveries observed were within ±3% of expected, and no trends were observed.
| Compound | Concentration tested |
| --- | --- |
| Bilirubin, unconjugated | 60.0 mg/dL |
| Bilirubin, conjugated | 30.0 mg/dL |
| Hemoglobin | 800.0 mg/dL |
| Triglycerides | 1000.0 mg/dL |
| Cholesterol | 500.0 mg/dL |
| Human serum albumin (HSA) | 7.5 g/dL |
| Gamma globulin (IgG) | 12.0 g/dL |
| HAMA | 400.0 ng/mL |
| Rheumatoid factor (RF) | 919.0 IU/mL |
Recoveries for the potential interferents above at all carbamazepine concentrations were within +/- 8% of expected values and no trends were observed.
f. Assay cut-off:
Not applicable
2. Comparison studies:
a. Method comparison with predicate device:
Two correlation studies were performed using a modified CLSI guideline EP9-A2 to evaluate the accuracy of the Abbott's Carbamazepine Assay by comparing patient sample measurements to the predicate Abbott Aeroset Carbamazepine Assay. In the first study, 103 serum samples with carbamazepine concentrations ranging from 2.2 to 18.2 ug/mL were tested by the candidate carbamazepine assay (on-test) and Abbott Aeroset Carbamazepine assay. In the second study, a different set of 105 serum samples ranging from approximately 2-15 ug/mL were evaluated with the candidate carbamazepine assay (on-test) and Abbott Aeroset Carbamazepine assay.
{8}
Data analysis was performed using Passing-Bablok regression model. Results are summarized below:
| Comparative Methods | N | Slope (95% CI) | Intercept (95% CI) | Correlation Coeff. (R) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Manufacturer Site | | | | |
| On-test vs. Abbott Aeroset assay | 103 | 0.905 (0.857 – 0.960) | 0.564 (0.202 – 1.00) | 0.9675 |
| External Laboratory | | | | |
| On-test vs. Abbott Aeroset assay | 105 | 0.956 (0.923 – 0.989) | 0.013 (-0.208 – 0.283) | 0.9827 |
# b. Matrix comparison:
Matrix comparison studies were performed to evaluate the performance of the following: serum in plastic, serum separator tubes (SST) in plastic, plasma with sodium fluoride/potassium oxalate in plastic, plasma with sodium heparin in plastic and glass, plasma with lithium heparin in plastic with or without gel, plasma with K3 EDTA in glass and plastic, plasma with K2 EDTA in plastic, and sodium citrate in plastic and glass, compared to the control matrix (serum in glass) in the candidate carbamazepine assay.
Samples were spiked with carbamazepine at multiple concentrations spanning the assay range. Each spiked sample was measured in duplicate by the Carbamazepine Assay. The results of samples prepared in the evaluating matrix were compared to those of serum in glass by determining the slope, intercept, and correlation coefficient, and recovery for each sample relative to expected.
| Matrix Comparison | N | Range μg/mL | Slope | Intercept | Correlation Coeff. (R) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| X: Serum in glass | 24 | 1.60-19.10 | 0.991 | 0.030 | 0.9982 |
| Y: Serum in plastic | | | | | |
| X: Serum in glass | 24 | 1.60-19.10 | 1.003 | -0.086 | 0.9986 |
| Y: SST in plastic | | | | | |
| X: Serum in glass | 23 | 1.35-19.85 | 0.997 | -0.066 | 0.9987 |
| Y: Plasma w/ NaF / K Oxalate | | | | | |
| X: Serum in glass | 25 | 1.51-18.53 | 1.007 | 0.029 | 0.9986 |
| Y: Plasma w/ Na Heparin in glass | | | | | |
| X: Serum in glass | 25 | 1.51-18.53 | 0.969 | 0.196 | 0.9709 |
| Y: Plasma w/ Na Heparin in plastic | | | | | |
| X: Serum in glass | 24 | 1.81-19.80 | 0.988 | 0.095 | 0.9986 |
| Y: Plasma w/ Li Heparin w/gel in plastic | | | | | |
| X: Serum in glass | 24 | 1.81-19.80 | 0.993 | -0.115 | 0.9992 |
{9}
| Y: Plasma w/ Li Heparin w/o gel plastic | | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| X: Serum in glass | 23 | 1.36-18.70 | 1.003 | -0.082 | 0.9982 |
| Y: Plasma w/ K3 EDTA in glass | | | | | |
| X: Serum in glass | 23 | 1.52-19.15 | 1.010 | -0.087 | 0.9988 |
| Y: Plasma w/ K3 EDTA in plastic | | | | | |
| X: Serum in glass | 23 | 1.36-18.70 | 0.988 | 0.115 | 0.9993 |
| Y: Plasma w/ K2 EDTA in plastic | | | | | |
| X: Serum in glass | 24 | 1.38-18.61 | 1.042 | -0.302 | 0.9985 |
| Y: Plasma w/ Na Citrate in glass | | | | | |
| X: Serum in glass | 24 | 1.38-18.61 | 1.047 | -0.275 | 0.9988 |
| Y: Plasma w/ Na Citrate in plastic | | | | | |
Recoveries were largely within $\pm 4\%$ of the expected value (based on serum in glass) and were all within $\pm 8\%$.
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):
Not applicable
4. Clinical cut-off:
Not applicable
5. Expected values/Reference range:
The package insert includes the following:
Therapeutic effect is usually achieved in the serum and plasma carbamazepine concentration range of 4.0 to $12.0~\mu \mathrm{g / mL}$ (17.0 to $51.0~\mu \mathrm{mol / L}$). Peak carbamazepine concentrations above $15.0~\mu \mathrm{g / mL}$ (63.0 $\mu \mathrm{mol / L}$) are often associated with toxicity. $^{1,2}$
In addition, the sponsor has included the following in the labeling: For effective treatment, some patients may require serum levels of carbamazepine outside these ranges. Therefore, the expected range is provided only as a guide, and individual patient results should be interpreted in light of other clinical signs and symptoms.
$^{1}$ Levy, R.H., Wilensky, A.J., Freil, P.N. Other antiepileptic drugs. In: Evans, W.E., Schentag, J.J., Jusko, W.J., editors. Applied Pharmacokinetics: Principles of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring, 2nd ed. Spokane, W.A.: Applied Therapeutics; 1986: 540-569.
$^{2}$ Goldman, L., Ausiello, D., editors. Cecil Medicine, 23rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Saunders; 2008:2994.
{10}
N. Proposed Labeling:
The labeling is sufficient and it satisfies the requirements of 21 CFR Part 809.10.
O. Conclusion:
The submitted information in this premarket notification is complete and supports a substantial equivalence decision.
11
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.