K142735 · The Binding Site Group , Ltd. · CFN · Dec 21, 2014 · Immunology
Device Facts
Record ID
K142735
Device Name
The Optilite IgG3 kit
Applicant
The Binding Site Group , Ltd.
Product Code
CFN · Immunology
Decision Date
Dec 21, 2014
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 866.5510
Device Class
Class 2
Attributes
Pediatric
Indications for Use
The Optilite IgG3 kit is intended for the quantitative in vitro measurement of human IgG3 in serum, using the Binding Site Optilite analyser. Measurement of this immunoglobulin is an aid in the diagnosis of abnormal protein metabolism and the body's lack of ability to resist infectious agents. The test result should be used in conjunction with other laboratory and clinical findings.
Device Story
The Optilite IgG3 Kit is an in vitro diagnostic assay designed for use on the Binding Site Optilite analyzer. It measures IgG3 concentrations in human serum samples. The device utilizes immunoturbidimetric technology to quantify IgG3 levels. It is intended for use in clinical laboratory settings by trained laboratory personnel. Results are provided to clinicians to assist in diagnosing conditions related to abnormal protein metabolism and immune system function. The output is a quantitative value used alongside other clinical and laboratory findings to inform patient management and diagnostic decisions.
Clinical Evidence
No clinical trials were performed. Substantial equivalence is supported by analytical bench testing, including precision (total CV 5.8-12.1%), linearity (r=1.000), and method comparison against the predicate using 293 clinical serum samples (Passing-Bablok regression y = 1.04x - 6.04, r = 0.991).
Technological Characteristics
Turbidimetric immunoassay; polyclonal monospecific sheep anti-human IgG3 (F(ab)2) fragment bound to 200 nm polystyrene latex particles. Reagents include preservatives (ProClin, sodium azide, EACA, benzamidine). Operates on Optilite analyzer; automated calculation of concentration via stored calibration curve. Traceable to ERM-DA470k reference material.
Indications for Use
Indicated for quantitative measurement of human IgG3 in serum to aid in diagnosis of abnormal protein metabolism and immune deficiency in pediatric and adult populations. Contraindicated for samples containing rheumatoid factor, paraproteins, high levels of circulating immune complexes, or samples that are highly lipemic or hemolyzed.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
An immunoglobulins A, G, M, D, and E immunological test system is a device that consists of the reagents used to measure by immunochemical techniques the immunoglobulins A, G, M, D, an E (serum antibodies) in serum. Measurement of these immunoglobulins aids in the diagnosis of abnormal protein metabolism and the body's lack of ability to resist infectious agents.
{0}
510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION DECISION MEMORANDUM ASSAY ONLY TEMPLATE
A. 510(k) Number:
k142735
B. Purpose for Submission:
New Device
C. Measurand:
IgG3 subclass Antibody
D. Type of Test:
Quantitative, turbidimetric
E. Applicant:
The Binding Site Group, Ltd.
F. Proprietary and Established Names:
Optilite® IgG3 Kit
G. Regulatory Information:
1. Regulation section:
21 CFR §866.5510 – Immunoglobulins A, G, M, D, E Immunological Test System
2. Classification:
Class II
3. Product code:
CFN – Method, Nephelometric, Immunoglobulins (G, A, M)
4. Panel:
Immunology (82)
H. Intended Use:
{1}
1. Intended use(s):
The Optilite IgG3 kit is intended for the quantitative in vitro measurement of human IgG3 in serum, using the Binding Site Optilite analyser. Measurement of this immunoglobulin is an aid in the diagnosis of abnormal protein metabolism and the body's lack of ability to resist infectious agents. The test result should be used in conjunction with other laboratory and clinical findings.
2. Indication(s) for use:
Same as Intended Use
3. Special conditions for use statement(s):
For prescription use only
4. Special instrument requirements:
Optilite analyzer (k141100)
I. Device Description:
The device consists of the following: polyclonal monospecific sheep anti-IgG3 antisera coated onto polystyrene latex in liquid form in the presence of preservatives (0.05% ProClin™; 0.033% sodium azide; 0.1% E-amino-n-caproic acid (EACA); 0.01% benzamidine); IgG3 calibrator and Controls (Low, High and Elevated levels) in stabilized liquid form (with preservatives: 0.099% sodium azide, 0.1% EACA and 0.01% benzamidine); Reaction Buffer (with 0.099% sodium azide as preservative); and Optilite Diluent 1.
J. Substantial Equivalence Information:
1. Predicate device name(s):
Binding Site Human IgG and IgG subclass (IgG1, IgG2, IgG3, IgG4) liquid reagent kits for use on the SPAplus
2. Predicate 510(k) number(s):
k072889
3. Comparison with predicate:
{2}
| Similarities | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | Predicate |
| Assay type | Quantitative | Same |
| Detection Method | Turbidimetric immunoassay | Same |
| Sample matrix | Serum | Same |
| Antibody | Polyclonal monospecific sheep anti-human IgG3 (F(ab)2) fragment bound to 200 nm latex particles | Same |
| Traceability | Standardized against ERM-DA470k European Reference Material (previously CRM470) | Same |
| Open vial stability | 3 months | Same |
| On board vial stability | 30 days | Same |
| Reference Ranges (mg/dL) (95% percentile range) | Adults: 218.2-1760.6 Pediatric: 0-2 yrs: 186-853 2-4 yrs: 173-676 4-6 yrs: 99-1221 6-8 yrs: 155-853 8-10 yrs: 127-853 10-12 yrs: 173-1730 12-14 yrs: 283-1250 14-18 yrs: 230-1096 | Same |
| Differences | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | Predicate |
| Intended Use | Quantitative measurement of IgG3 in serum | Quantitative measurement of Human IgG and IgG subclasses IgG1, IgG2, IgG3, IgG4 in serum |
| Calibrator | One Optilite IgG3 Calibrator | Six Calibrators for each: IgG, IgG1, IgG2, IgG3, IgG4 |
| Controls | Low, High and Elevated levels, liquid, ready-to-use | Low and high IgG and IgG subclasses: IgG1, IgG2, IgG3, IgG4 |
| Instruments | Optilite® Analyzer | SPAPLUS™ Analyser |
| Measuring range (mg/dL) | 5.5-220 (1:2 dilution) 55-2200 (1:20 dilution) | 55-1000 (1:10 dilution) 220-4000 (1:40 dilution) |
{3}
K. Standard/Guidance Document Referenced (if applicable):
CLSI EP05-A2: Evaluation of Precision Performance of Quantitative Measurement Methods; Approved Guideline – Second Edition
CLSI EP06-A: Evaluation of the Linearity of Quantitative Measurement Procedures: A Statistical Approach
CLSI EP07-A2: Interference Testing in Clinical Chemistry
CLSI EP17-A: Protocols for Determination of Limits of Detection and Limits of Quantitation
CLSI C28-A3: Defining, Establishing and Verifying Reference Intervals in the Clinical Laboratory
L. Test Principle:
The determination of soluble antigen concentration by turbidimetric methods involves the reaction with specific antiserum to form insoluble complexes. When light is passed through the suspension, a portion of the light is transmitted and focused onto a photo iodide by an optical lens system. The amount of transmitted light is indirectly proportional to the specific protein concentration in the test sample. Concentrations are automatically calculated by reference to a calibration curve stored within the instrument.
M. Performance Characteristics (if/when applicable):
1. Analytical performance:
a. Precision/Reproducibility:
The within-run, between-run, between-day, between-lot and between-instrument precision were determined by testing five serum samples over 21 days with two runs per day on three different reagent lots on three analysers. Results are summarized below.
| Precision Summary | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | Mean (mg/L) | Within run | | Between run | | Between day | | Between lot | | Between instrument | | Total | |
| | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| Level 1* | 9.1 | 0.8 | 8.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 8.8 | 0.1 | 1.6 | 0.5 | 5.5 | 1.1 | 12.1 |
| Level 2 | 118.5 | 6.0 | 5.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 7.8 | 6.6 | 3.1 | 2.6 | 2.6 | 2.2 | 9.9 | 8.3 |
| Level 3 | 164.3 | 5.0 | 3.0 | 1.5 | 0.9 | 11.2 | 6.8 | 5.8 | 3.3 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 12.3 | 7.5 |
| Level 4 | 256.5 | 9.7 | 3.8 | 3.0 | 1.2 | 13.7 | 5.3 | 7.6 | 3.0 | 4.0 | 1.6 | 17.0 | 6.6 |
| Level 5 | 1785.4 | 35.3 | 2.0 | 34.4 | 1.9 | 91.1 | 5.1 | 38.9 | 2.2 | 55.3 | 3.1 | 103.6 | 5.8 |
*performed at the 1:2 dilution
{4}
b. Linearity/assay reportable range:
A linearity study was performed following CLSI document Evaluation of the Linearity of Quantitative Measurement Procedures: A Statistical Approach, Approved Guideline (EP6-A). The linearity of this assay has been confirmed using serially diluted serum samples to cover the range 5.4 – 216.4 mg/L for Optilite Analyzer Dilution 1+1 and 54.1 – 2164.4 mg/L for Optilite Analyzer Dilution 1+19 with deviation from linearity ≤9.9%. Regression equation for the high linear range (280.27-2477.50 mg/L: y=0.99x + 4.36; r = 1.000 and for the low linear range (38.38-677.14 mg/L: y=1.01x + 1.52; r =1.000.
c. Traceability, Stability, Expected values (controls, calibrators, or methods):
An Internal Reference standard (IR) was assigned by comparison with the European Reference Material ERM-DA470k. Value assignment from total IgG to IgG3 was performed following the protocol outlined in Carr-Smith, H.D. et al. IgG subclass value assignment to protein reference preparation CRM470. Clin. Chem. Vol. 43, No.56, PS238 and Williams, D.R. et al. Assignment of IgG Subclass values to the Protein Reference Preparation DA470k. Clin. Chem. Vol. 55, No. S6, PS C-90.
Stability:
A real-time stability study was performed on three lots of Optilite IgG3 kit with testing time intervals at day 0, 3 months and 6.5 months. Data support a shelf life claim of 6 months at 2-8°C.
Open kit stability was performed on three lots of OptiliteIg3 kit with testing time intervals at day 0, 1 week and 3 months. Data support the open kit stability claim of 3 months at 2-8°C.
Throughout this study the kit components were stored at the recommended storage temperature of 2-8°C.
On-board stability was performed on three lots of OptiliteIg3 kit with testing time intervals at day 0, 14, 21, 28, and 35. Data support the on-board stability claim of 30 days at 8-12°C.
All stability results were within the sponsor’s acceptance criteria. Real time stability study is on-going.
d. Detection limit:
The analytical sensitivity was determined in accordance with CLSI EP17-A2. The Limit of Blank (LoB) was based on 60 determinations of a blank sample and was estimated at 0.92 mg/L. The Limit of Detection (LoD) was calculated at 1.40 mg/L according to the equation: the LoB + 1.645 x SDs where SDs, the standard deviation, was based on 60 determinations of a sample with analyte level near the lower limit of the reportable range. The LoQ was calculated at 5.50 mg/L and the
5
{5}
bias was 0.86 mg/L. The tabulated summary is shown below:
| LoB | LoD | LoQ |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 0.92mg/L | 1.40mg/L | 5.50mg/L |
e. Analytical specificity:
Interference by endogenous and other substances:
No significant assay interference (±10%) by triglycerides (1000 mg/dL), Intralipid (2000 mg/dL), 200 mg/L bilirubin, or 5g/L hemoglobin using IgG3 samples at 115.7 mg/L, 245.1 mg/L and 1188.9 mg/L.
No significant assay interference by the following 16 therapeutic drugs:
| Drug | Concentration tested |
| --- | --- |
| Acetaminophen | 1324μmol/L |
| Acetylsalicylic Acid | 3.63mmol/L |
| Amoxicillin | 206μmol/L |
| Ascorbic Acid | 342μmol/L |
| Caffeine | 308μmol/L |
| Cefotaxime | 673μmol/L |
| Cefuroxime | 1416μmol/L |
| Chloramphenicol | 155μmol/L |
| Cimetidine | 79.2μmol/L |
| Digoxin | 7.8nmol/L |
| Fluconazole | 245μmol/L |
| Ibuprofen | 2425μmol/L |
| Penicillin | 75mg/L |
| Phenytoin | 198μmol/L |
| Theophylline | 222μmol/L |
| Vancomycin | 69μmol/L |
The package insert states that "turbidimetric assays are not suitable for measurement of samples containing rheumatoid factor or paraproteins, highly lipemic or hemolyzed samples, or samples containing high levels of circulating immune complexes due to the unpredictable degree of non-specific scatter these sample types might generate. Unexpected results should be confirmed using alternative assay method".
Antigen excess effect:
The possibility of antigen excess occurring when using the device on The Binding Site Optilite® was evaluated with samples with IgG3 concentrations above the assay range (2500, 2900, and 3300 mg/L). No antigen excess effect up to 3300 mg/L of IgG3 was observed.
The package insert states that "potential occurrences of antigen excess cannot be
{6}
completely excluded; in rare cases samples with monoclonal IgG3 may give falsely low results due to antigen excess. Where this is possible or suspected it is recommended that the samples are re-assayed at a higher dilution to confirm result.”
f. Assay cut-off:
Not applicable.
2. Comparison studies:
a. Method comparison with predicate device:
A method comparison study between Optilite IgG3 Kit and predicate device was performed by analyzing 293 samples including 26 normal and 267 clinical sera (22 hypergammaglobulinemia, 2 hypogammaglobulinemia, 13 suspected hypergammaglobulinemia, 6 suspected hypogammaglobulinemia, and 224 unknown diagnosis).
Passing-Bablok regression analysis generated the following result: $y = 1.04x - 6.04$ mg/L with correlation coefficient $r = 0.991$.
The package insert states that “diagnosis cannot be made and treatment must not be given on the basis of IgG3 measurements alone. Clinical history and other laboratory findings must be taken into account”.
b. Matrix comparison:
Not applicable
3. Clinical studies:
a. Clinical Sensitivity and specificity:
Not applicable
b. Other clinical supportive data (when a. and b. are not applicable):
Not applicable
4. Clinical cut-off:
Not applicable
5. Expected values/Reference Interval:
Adult reference interval: 218.2-1760.6 mg/L
7
{7}
Pediatric reference interval is as follows:
| Age Group (years) | Number (n) | 95% Reference Interval (mg/L) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 0 – 2 | 39 | 186 - 853 |
| 2 – 4 | 36 | 173 – 676 |
| 4 – 6 | 49 | 99 – 1221 |
| 6 – 8 | 43 | 155 – 853 |
| 8 – 10 | 32 | 127 – 853 |
| 10 – 12 | 46 | 173 – 1730 |
| 12 – 14 | 54 | 283 – 1250 |
| 14 – 18 | 48 | 230 - 1096 |
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.
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.