K150526 · The Binding Site Group , Ltd. · CFN · May 30, 2015 · Immunology
Device Facts
Record ID
K150526
Device Name
Optilite IgG4 Kit
Applicant
The Binding Site Group , Ltd.
Product Code
CFN · Immunology
Decision Date
May 30, 2015
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 866.5510
Device Class
Class 2
Indications for Use
The Optilite IgG4 kit is intended for the quantitative in vitro measurement of IgG4 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 IgG4 kit is an in vitro diagnostic reagent system for use on the Optilite analyzer. It utilizes polyclonal monospecific sheep anti-human IgG4 (F(ab)2) fragments coated onto polystyrene latex particles. The device measures IgG4 concentration in serum via a turbidimetric immunoassay. When the sample is mixed with the reagent, insoluble complexes form; the analyzer measures the reduction in transmitted light through the suspension, which is inversely proportional to the IgG4 concentration. The analyzer automatically calculates concentrations using a stored calibration curve. The device is intended for use in clinical laboratory settings by trained personnel. It provides quantitative results that assist clinicians in diagnosing abnormal protein metabolism and immune deficiencies. The system includes automated antigen excess detection to flag potentially falsely low results in samples with very high IgG4 levels.
Clinical Evidence
No clinical trials were performed. Substantial equivalence was established through analytical bench testing, including precision (n=10 samples over 21 days), linearity, interference studies (bilirubin, hemoglobin, triglycerides, and 14 common drugs), and a method comparison study using 567 serum samples (26 normal, 541 clinical) comparing the Optilite IgG4 Kit to the predicate device. Passing-Bablok regression showed y = 0.91x + 8.09 with r = 0.999.
Technological Characteristics
Turbidimetric immunoassay; polyclonal monospecific sheep anti-human IgG4 (F(ab)2) fragments on polystyrene latex particles. Reagents include reaction buffer with 0.099% sodium azide. Operates on the Optilite analyzer. Standardized against ERM-DA470k. Automated antigen excess detection. Shelf life 6 months at 2–8°C; open-vial stability 3 months; on-board stability 30 days.
Indications for Use
Indicated for the quantitative in vitro measurement of IgG4 in human serum to aid in the diagnosis of abnormal protein metabolism and immune deficiency. For prescription use only.
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
A. 510(k) Number:
k150526
B. Purpose for Submission:
New Device
C. Measurand:
IgG4 subclass Antibody
D. Type of Test:
Quantitative, turbidimetric
E. Applicant:
The Binding Site Group, Ltd.
F. Proprietary and Established Names:
Optilite® IgG4 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)
1
{1}
H. Intended Use:
1. Intended use(s):
The Optilite IgG4 kit is intended for the quantitative *in vitro* measurement of IgG4 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-IgG4 antisera coated onto polystyrene latex in liquid form in the presence of preservatives; IgG4 calibrator and Controls (Low, High and Elevated levels) in stabilized liquid form with preservatives; and Reaction Buffer (with 0.099% sodium azide as preservative).
J. Substantial Equivalence Information:
1. Predicate device names:
Binding Site Human IgG and IgG subclass (IgG1, IgG2, IgG3, IgG4) liquid reagent kits for use on the SPAplus
2. Predicate 510(k) number:
k072889
{2}
3. Comparison with predicate:
| Similarities | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | Predicate |
| Assay type | Quantitative | Same |
| Detection Method | Turbidimetric immunoassay | Same |
| Sample matrix | Serum | Same |
| Antibody | Polyclonal monospecific sheep anti-human IgG4 (F(ab)2) fragment bound to 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/L) (95% percentile range) | Adults: 39.2–864 | Same |
| Differences | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | Predicate |
| Intended Use | Quantitative measurement of IgG4 in serum | Quantitative measurement of Human IgG and IgG subclasses IgG1, IgG2, IgG3, IgG4 in serum |
| Calibrator | One Optilite IgG4 Calibrator | One calibrator 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/L) | 2.96–216 (1+1 dilution) 37–2700 (1+24 dilution) 179.1–13068 (1+120 dilution) 888–64800 (1+599 dilution) | 3–85 (1:2 dilution) 30–850 (1:10 dilution) 120–3400 (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 formed, 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 ten serum samples over 21 days with two runs per day and two replicates per run on three different reagent lots on four analysers. Results are summarized below.
| Precision Summary | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Sample | 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% |
| 1 | 23.6 | 0.9 | 3.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.9 | 3.5 | 0.2 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 3.3 | 1.2 5.1 |
| 2 | 31.2 | 0.5 | 1.4 | 0.8 | 2.5 | 0.9 | 2.9 | 0.7 | 2.3 | 0.3 | 0.9 | 1.3 4.1 |
| 3 | 48.8 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.4 | 2.8 | 2.1 | 4.1 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 0.6 | 1.2 | 2.5 5.1 |
| 4 | 53.9 | 2.9 | 4.8 | 2.6 | 4.4 | 5.2 | 8.7 | 3.8 | 7.1 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 6.5 10.9 |
| 5 | 124.0 | 1.9 | 1.5 | 2.2 | 1.7 | 5.7 | 4.3 | 0.7 | 0.5 | 3.7 | 3.0 | 6.5 4.9 |
| 6 | 611.6 | 9.1 | 1.4 | 12.0 | 1.9 | 21.2 | 3.4 | 7.3 | 1.2 | 11.7 | 1.9 | 26.0 4.1 |
| 7 | 1148.3 | 16.4 | 1.4 | 25.8 | 2.1 | 42.0 | 3.5 | 14.3 | 1.2 | 28.7 | 2.5 | 51.9 4.3 |
| 8 | 1473.6 | 20.8 | 1.3 | 27.8 | 1.8 | 51.7 | 3.3 | 11.2 | 0.8 | 38.7 | 2.6 | 62.2 4.0 |
{4}
5
| Precision Summary | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 9 | 2152.5 | 23.0 | 1.1 | 77.7 | 3.6 | 40.1 | 1.9 | 39.5 | 1.8 | 22.7 | 1.1 | 90.4 | 4.2 |
| 10 | 4371.3 | 88.3 | 1.9 | 86.7 | 1.8 | 206.2 | 4.4 | 85.4 | 2.0 | 123.3 | 2.8 | 240.5 | 5.1 |
b. Linearity/assay reportable range:
A linearity study was performed following CLSI document Evaluation of the Linearity of Quantitative Measurement Procedures: A Statistical Approach. The linearity of this assay has been confirmed using serially diluted serum samples to cover the range 2.8–240.8 mg/L for Optilite analyzer dilution 1+1; 34.5–3010.4 mg/L for Optilite analyzer dilution 1+24; 169.4–14568.4 mg/L for Optilite analyzer dilution 1+120 and 828.0–72249.6 mg/L for Optilite analyzer dilution 1+599 with deviation from linearity ≤ 10%.
c. Traceability, Stability, Expected values (controls, calibrators, or methods):
Traceability: An Internal Reference standard (IR) was assigned by comparison with the European Reference Material ERM-DA470k. Value assignment from total IgG to IgG4 was performed following the protocol outlined in Williams et al.¹.
Stability:
A real-time stability study of unopened kits was performed on three lots of Optilite IgG4 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. Real time stability study is on-going.
Open-vial stability was performed on three lots of Optilite IgG4 kit with testing time intervals at day 0, 1, 2, and 3 months. Data support the open vial stability claim of 3 months at 2–8°C.
On-board stability was performed on three lots of Optilite IgG4 kit with testing time intervals at 0, 8, 15, 21, and 32 days. Data support the on-board stability claim of 30 days at 8–12°C, provided that the power is left switched on as stated in the product insert.
All stability results were within the sponsor’s acceptance criteria.
d. Detection limit:
The analytical sensitivity was determined in accordance with CLSI EP17-A. The Limit of Blank (LoB) was based on 60 determinations of a blank sample and was
¹ Williams, D. R., Wilson, C. I. and Carr-Smith, H.D. Assignment of IgG Subclass Values to the Protein Reference Preparation DA470k. Clin Chem 2009;55(6) Supplement:A132
{5}
estimated at $95\%$ percentile of the distribution. The Limit of Detection (LoD) was calculated according to the equation: the $\mathrm{LoB} + 1.645(\mathrm{SDs})$ where SDs, the standard deviation, was based on 12 determinations of 5 samples with analyte level near the lower limit of the reportable range. The LoQ was calculated and the total error $(0.367\mathrm{mg / L})$ was within the maximum allowable total error. The tabulated summary is shown below:
| LoB | LoD | LoQ |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 0.000mg/L | 0.299mg/L | 2.960mg/ |
# e. Analytical specificity:
# Interference:
Interferences were assessed according to CLSI EP7-A2 by testing five serum samples with different IgG4 concentration ranges: (1) an IgG4 deficient sample, target level $20\mathrm{mg / L}$ ; (2) a sample close to the close to the medical decision point (MDP) at the lower limit of the reference range, target $37\mathrm{mg / L}$ , (3) a sample with a normal level of IgG4, target level $135\mathrm{mg / L}$ ; (4) a sample close to the upper limit of the reference range, target 845; and (5) a sample with an elevated IgG4 level, target value $>4000\mathrm{mg / L}$ . Each sample was spiked with interfering substances and tested in triplicate. The manufacturer's acceptance criteria were that the mean results from the spiked samples must be within $\pm 10\%$ of the mean of the control samples.
No significant assay interference effects were observed when the five samples were tested with bilirubin at $200\mathrm{mg / L}$ , hemoglobin at $5\mathrm{g / L}$ , or triglyceride at $1000\mathrm{mg / dL}$ . Intralipid at $250\mathrm{mg / dL}$ showed signs of interference and lipemic samples are known to interfere in this assay. A warning is included in the product insert that this assay is not suitable for use with lipemic samples.
Drug Interference results: The data demonstrated that the assay was not affected by the 14 commonly used drugs tested at the concentrations given below when tested in the 5 samples described above.
| Drug | Concentration tested |
| --- | --- |
| Acetaminophen | 1324 μmol/L |
| Acetylsalicylic Acid | 3.63 mmol/L |
| Amoxicillin | 206 μmol/L |
| Ascorbic Acid | 342 μmol/L |
| Caffeine | 308 μmol/L |
| Cefotaxime | 673 μmol/L |
| Cefuroxime | 1416 μmol/L |
| Chloramphenicol | 155 μmol/L |
| Cimetidine | 79.2 μmol/L |
| Digoxin | 7.8 nmol/L |
| Fluconazole | 245 μmol/L |
{6}
| Drug | Concentration tested |
| --- | --- |
| Ibuprofen | 2425 μmol/L |
| Penicillin | 75 mg/L |
| Phenytoin | 198 μmol/L |
## Antigen Excess Detection
The Optilite’s ability to detect antigen excess was evaluated with a sample of 2857 mg/L run neat on three different lots of reagents. This is equivalent to running a sample with a concentration of 71,425 mg/L at the standard measuring dilution of 1:26 (e.g., approximately 26 times the top of the calibration curve). Antigen excess was correctly detected and flagged by the analyser in all cases.
The product insert states that: “Antigen excess check warning protection (‘antigen limit low’ flags) may be seen against IgG4 results” and “Potential occurrences of antigen excess cannot be completely excluded; in rare cases samples with monoclonal IgG4 present may give falsely low results due to antigen excess. Where this is possible or suspected it is recommended that the sample is re-assayed at a higher dilution to confirm the result.”
f. Assay cut-off:
Not applicable.
2. Comparison studies:
a. Method comparison with predicate device:
A method comparison study between the Optilite IgG4 Kit and the predicate device was performed by analyzing 567 serum samples (26 normal donors and 541 clinical samples, of which 322 were pediatric samples). Of the 567 total samples, 541 were clinical samples which included 199 samples with diagnosis and 342 samples with unavailable clinical information. The 199 samples with diagnoses includes: 45 confirmed hypogammaglobulinaemia; 23 hypergammaglobulinaemia; 1 suspected hypogammaglobulinaemia; 9 suspected hypergammaglobulinaemia; 1 anaphylaxis; 14 endocrine and autoimmune conditions were tested including 1 SLE (pediatric); 3 thyroid related disease (all pediatric); 2 diabetes (all pediatric); 8 obesity (all pediatric); 38 AIP; 5 benign conditions (all pediatric); 2 malignant conditions; 13 developmental conditions (all pediatric); 35 other clinical conditions (e.g. hyperkalemia, implanted device management, fracture, etc).
Passing-Bablok regression analysis generated the following result: $y = 0.91x + 8.09$ (mg/L) with correlation coefficient $r = 0.999$.
The package insert states that “Levels of IgG4 in normal adults may be undetectable;
{7}
therefore, low IgG4 alone is insufficient evidence of an antibody deficiency disorder requiring Immunoglobulin replacement. Clinical history and other laboratory findings must be taken into account in the diagnosis of antibody deficiency disorder".
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:
The product insert states the following:
The ranges provided have been obtained from a limited number of samples and are intended for guidance purposes only. Expected values may vary with age, sex, sample type, diet and geographical location. Each laboratory should verify the transferability of the expected values to its own population and, if necessary, determine its own reference interval.
**Adult serum range**
This range was obtained by measuring the subclass content of sera provided by the Birmingham Blood Transfusion Service taken from healthy UK adult donors and generated using Binding Site's BN™II subclass kits and verified using 50 US normal samples on the Optilite IgG4 Kit. Forty-eight of the 50 samples tested were within the 95 percentile range accepted criteria.
| | Number (n) | Mean (mg/L) | Median (mg/L) | 95 Percentile Range (mg/L) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| IgG4 | 30 | 280 | 215.3 | 39.2–864 |
{8}
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.
9
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.