CEDIA Buprenorphine II Assay; CEDIA Buprenorphine II Calibrators; CEDIA Negative Calibrator II; CEDIA Buprenorphine II Control Set
Applicant
Microgenics Corporation
Product Code
DJG · Clinical Toxicology
Decision Date
Apr 6, 2017
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 862.3650
Device Class
Class 2
Attributes
Real-World Evidence
Real-World Evidence
Submission
Device
Sponsor
RWD Sources
RWE Use Summary
Key Tags
K163101 · Apr 6, 2017
CEDIA Buprenorphine II Assay; CEDIA Buprenorphine II Calibrators; CEDIA Negative Calibrator II; CEDIA Buprenorphine II Control Set
Microgenics Corporation
Clinical urine patient samples
The sponsor used 153 clinical patient urine samples to evaluate the accuracy and performance of the CEDIA Buprenorphine II Assay by comparing results against LC-MS/MS (the reference method).
Qualitative and semi-quantitative agreement with LC-MS/MS
Indications for Use
The CEDIA® Buprenorphine II Assay is a homogeneous enzyme immunoassay for the qualitative and/or semiquantitative determination for the presence of buprenorphine and its metabolites in human urine at a cut-off concentration of 10 ng/mL. The assay is intended to be used in laboratories and provides a simple and rapid analytical screening procedure to detect buprenorphine in human urine. The assay is designed for use with a number of clinical chemistry analyzers. The semi-quantitative mode is for the purpose of enabling laboratories to determine an appropriate dilution of the specimen for confirmation by a confirmatory method such as LC-MS/MS or permitting laboratories to establish quality control procedures. The assay provides only a preliminary analytical test result. A more specific alternative chemical method must be used to obtain a confirmed analytical result. Gas chromatography/ mass spectrometry (GC/MS) or Liquid chromatography/ mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) is the preferred confirmatory method. Clinical and professional judgment should be applied to any drug of abuse test result, particularly when preliminary results are used. For In Vitro Diagnostic Use Only. CEDIA® Buprenorphine II Calibrators: The CEDIA® Buprenorphine II calibrators and CEDIA Negative Calibrator II are intended for the calibration of the CEDIA® Buprenorphine II Assay in human urine. For In Vitro Diagnostic Use Only. CEDIA® Buprenorphine II Control Set: The CEDIA® Buprenorphine II controls are used to validate the CEDIA® Buprenorphine II Assay calibration in human urine. For In Vitro Diagnostic Use Only.
Device Story
The CEDIA Buprenorphine II Assay is a homogeneous enzyme immunoassay used in clinical laboratories to screen human urine for buprenorphine and its metabolites. The device utilizes a bacterial enzyme, beta-galactosidase, engineered into two inactive fragments; one fragment is conjugated to buprenorphine. In the assay, buprenorphine in the patient sample competes with the enzyme-conjugated buprenorphine for binding to a mouse monoclonal anti-buprenorphine antibody. If buprenorphine is absent, the antibody binds the enzyme-conjugated fragment, preventing re-association into an active enzyme. If buprenorphine is present, it binds the antibody, allowing the enzyme fragments to re-associate and cleave a substrate, producing a color change measured spectrophotometrically at 570/660 nm. The resulting absorbance is proportional to the analyte concentration. Results are used by clinicians as a preliminary screen to guide further confirmatory testing via LC-MS/MS or GC/MS. The assay is designed for use on automated clinical chemistry analyzers.
Clinical Evidence
No clinical data. Performance established via bench testing. Precision evaluated over 20 days (n=80) across multiple concentrations relative to the 10 ng/mL cutoff. Method comparison performed against LC-MS/MS reference method; qualitative agreement among positives was 100% (50/50) and among negatives was 55% (57/103). Linearity and spike recovery studies confirmed performance across the reportable range. Specificity testing demonstrated minimal cross-reactivity with common opiates and structurally unrelated compounds.
Indicated for the qualitative and/or semiquantitative screening of buprenorphine and its metabolites in human urine in laboratory settings. Intended for use by clinical professionals to aid in drug testing; requires confirmation by GC/MS or LC-MS/MS.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
An opiate test system is a device intended to measure any of the addictive narcotic pain-relieving opiate drugs in blood, serum, urine, gastric contents, and saliva. An opiate is any natural or synthetic drug that has morphine-like pharmocological actions. The opiates include drugs such as morphine, morphine glucoronide, heroin, codeine, nalorphine, and meperedine. Measurements obtained by this device are used in the diagnosis and treatment of opiate use or overdose and in monitoring the levels of opiate administration to ensure appropriate therapy.
Special Controls
*Classification.* Class II (special controls). An opiate test system is not exempt if it is intended for any use other than employment or insurance testing or is intended for Federal drug testing programs. The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 862.9, provided the test system is intended for employment and insurance testing and includes a statement in the labeling that the device is intended solely for use in employment and insurance testing, and does not include devices intended for Federal drug testing programs (*e.g.,* programs run by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), the Department of Transportation (DOT), and the U.S. military).
Predicate Devices
Microgenics CEDIA Buprenorphine Assay (k040316)
Submission Summary (Full Text)
{0}
1
# 510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION DECISION SUMMARY ASSAY ONLY TEMPLATE
A. 510(k) Number:
k163101
B. Purpose for Submission:
New device
C. Measurand:
Buprenorphine
D. Type of Test:
Qualitative and semi-quantitative immunoassay
E. Applicant:
Microgenics Corporation
F. Proprietary and Established Names:
CEDIA Buprenorphine II Assay
CEDIA Buprenorphine II Calibrators
CEDIA Negative Calibrator II
CEDIA Buprenorphine II Control Set
G. Regulatory Information:
| Regulation section | Classification | Product Code | Panel |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 21 CFR 862.3650 | Class II | DJG | Toxicology (91) |
| 21 CFR 862.3200 | Class II | DLJ | Toxicology (91) |
| 21 CFR 862.3280 | Class I, reserved | LAS | Toxicology (91) |
H. Intended Use:
1. Intended use(s):
Refer to Indications for Use below
{1}
2. **Indication(s) for use:**
The CEDIA® Buprenorphine II Assay is a homogeneous enzyme immunoassay for the qualitative and/or semiquantitative determination for the presence of buprenorphine and its metabolites in human urine at a cut-off concentration of 10 ng/mL. The assay is intended to be used in laboratories and provides a simple and rapid analytical screening procedure to detect buprenorphine in human urine. The assay is designed for use with a number of clinical chemistry analyzers.
The semi-quantitative mode is for the purpose of enabling laboratories to determine an appropriate dilution of the specimen for confirmation by a confirmatory method such as LC-MS/MS or permitting laboratories to establish quality control procedures.
The assay provides only a preliminary analytical test result. A more specific alternative chemical method must be used to obtain a confirmed analytical result. Gas chromatography/ mass spectrometry (GC/MS) or Liquid chromatography/ mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) is the preferred confirmatory method.
Clinical and professional judgment should be applied to any drug of abuse test result, particularly when preliminary results are used. For In Vitro Diagnostic Use Only.
CEDIA® Buprenorphine II Calibrators:
The CEDIA® Buprenorphine II calibrators and CEDIA Negative Calibrator II are intended for the calibration of the CEDIA® Buprenorphine II Assay in human urine. For In Vitro Diagnostic Use Only.
CEDIA® Buprenorphine II Control Set:
The CEDIA® Buprenorphine II controls are used to validate the CEDIA® Buprenorphine II Assay calibration in human urine. For In Vitro Diagnostic Use Only.
3. **Special conditions for use statement(s):**
For prescription use only.
4. **Special instrument requirements:**
The CEDIA Buprenorphine II Assay is intended for use on automated clinical analyzers capable of maintaining a constant temperature, pipetting, mixing reagents, measuring enzymatic rates at 570 nm and timing the reaction accurately can be used to perform this immunoassay. All performance data was collected on a Beckman Coulter AU680 analyzer.
I. **Device Description:**
CEDIA® Buprenorphine II Assay is supplied as two liquid and two lyophilized reagent
{2}
kit homogeneous enzyme immunoassay:
1. EA Reconstitution Buffer
Contains buffer salts, mouse monoclonal anti-buprenorphine derivative antibody 0.8 - 1.0 mg/L, stabilizer, and preservative.
1a. EA Reagent
Contains 0.171 g/L Enzyme Acceptor, buffer salts and preservative.
2. ED Reconstitution Buffer
Contains buffer salts, stabilizers, and preservatives
2a. ED Reagent
Contains 0.175 mg/L Enzyme Donor conjugated to buprenorphine derivative, 1.67 g/L chlorophenol red-β-D-galactopyranoside, stabilizers, detergent and preservative.
The assay uses specific antibodies that can detect buprenorphine and its metabolites without significant cross-reactivity to other opiate compounds. In the assay, analyte in the sample competes with analyte conjugated to one inactive fragment of β-galactosidase for antibody binding site. If analyte is present in the sample, it binds to antibody, leaving the inactive enzyme fragments free to form active enzymes. If analyte is not present in the sample, antibody binds to analyte conjugated on the inactive fragment, inhibiting the reassociation of inactive β-galactosidase fragments, and no active enzyme is formed. The amount of active enzyme formed, and resultant absorbance change, is directly proportional to the amount of analyte present in the sample.
J. Substantial Equivalence Information:
1. Predicate device name(s):
Microgenics CEDIA Buprenorphine Assay
2. Predicate 510(k) number(s):
k040316
3. Comparison with predicate:
| Similarities - Assay | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | k040316 – Microgenics CEDIA Buprenorphine Assay |
| Intended Use | Same | Detection of buprenorphine in human urine |
| Methodology | Same | CEDIA (Cloned Enzyme |
{3}
| Similarities - Assay | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | k040316 – Microgenics CEDIA Buprenorphine Assay |
| | | Donor Immunoassay) |
| Intended Users | Same | Prescription users only |
| Reagents Form | Same | Lyophilized (requiring reconstitution) and liquid ready to use |
| Antibody | Same | Mouse monoclonal |
| Storage | Same | 2 – 8°C until expiration date |
| Target Analyte | Same | Buprenorphine |
| Differences - Assay | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | Predicate |
| Cutoff | 10 ng/mL | 5 ng/mL |
| Similarities – Calibrators | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | Predicate |
| Form | Same | Liquid – ready to use |
| Storage | Same | 2 – 8°C until expiration date |
| Differences - Calibrators | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | Predicate |
| Calibrator Name | CEDIA® Buprenorphine II calibrators and controls | CEDIA® Buprenorphine calibrators and controls |
| Calibrator Levels | 0, 10, 20, 50, 100 ng/mL | 0, 5, 20, 50, 75 ng/mL |
| Similarities – Controls | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | Predicate |
| Form | Same | Liquid – ready to use |
| Storage | Same | 2 – 8°C until expiration date |
{4}
| Differences - Controls | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | Predicate |
| Control Names | CEDIA®
Buprenorphine II controls | CEDIA®
Buprenorphine controls |
| Control Levels | 7.5 and 12.5 ng/mL | 3 and 7 ng/mL |
| Form | Same | Liquid – ready to use |
| Storage | Same | 2 – 8° C until expiration date |
## K. Standard/Guidance Document Referenced (if applicable):
- CLSI EP05-A3 - Evaluation of Precision of Quantitative Measurement Procedures; Approved Guideline - Third Edition.
- CLSI EP06-A- Evaluation of the Linearity of Quantitative Measurement Procedures: A Statistical Approach; Approved Guideline.
- CLSI EP07-A2 - Interference Testing In Clinical Chemistry; Approved Guideline - Second Edition.
- CLSI EP09-A3 - Measurement Procedure Comparison and Bias Estimation Using Patient Samples; Approved Guideline – Third Edition.
- CLSI EP25-A- Evaluation of Stability of In Vitro Diagnostic Reagents; Approved Guideline.
## L. Test Principle:
CEDIA® technology uses recombinant DNA technology to produce a unique homogeneous enzyme immunoassay system. The assay is based on the bacterial enzyme β-galactosidase, which has been genetically engineered into two inactive fragments. These fragments spontaneously re-associate to form fully active enzymes that, in the assay format, cleave a substrate. This generates a color change that can be measured spectrophotometrically.
## M. Performance Characteristics (if/when applicable):
### 1. Analytical performance:
#### a. Precision/Reproducibility:
Precision was evaluated using CLSI Guideline EP05-A3 as a guideline, at one site with one analyzer, two operators, and two lots of reagents, calibrators and controls. Testing was carried out for 20 days with two runs per day, at least two hours apart and two replicates per run in both Qualitative and Semi-quantitative modes, giving a total of 80 determinants (n = 80). Drug-free negative urine was spiked with buprenorphine analyte to final concentrations of -100%, -75%,
{5}
-50%, -25%, below cutoff and +25%, +50%, +75% and +100%, above cutoff, and the concentrations were confirmed by LC-MS/MS. Results are summarized below:
Qualitative Mode – Lot 1
| % of Cutoff | Target Conc. (ng/mL) | Measured Conc. (ng/mL) | # of determinants | # Negative/# Positive |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| -100 | 0 | 0 | 80 | 80/0 |
| -75 | 2.5 | 2.99 | 80 | 80/0 |
| -50 | 5 | 5.31 | 80 | 80/0 |
| -25 | 7.5 | 7.63 | 80 | 80/0 |
| 100 | 10 | 10.99 | 80 | 18/62 |
| +25 | 12.5 | 12.97 | 80 | 0/80 |
| +50 | 15 | 15.05 | 80 | 0/80 |
| +75 | 17.5 | 18.92 | 80 | 0/80 |
| +100 | 20 | 20.38 | 80 | 0/80 |
Qualitative Mode – Lot 2
| % of Cutoff | Target Conc. (ng/mL) | Measured Conc. (ng/mL) | # of determinants | # Negative/# Positive |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| -100 | 0 | 0 | 80 | 80/0 |
| -75 | 2.5 | 2.99 | 80 | 80/0 |
| -50 | 5 | 5.31 | 80 | 80/0 |
| -25 | 7.5 | 7.63 | 80 | 80/0 |
| 100 | 10 | 10.99 | 80 | 27/53 |
| +25 | 12.5 | 12.97 | 80 | 0/80 |
| +50 | 15 | 15.05 | 80 | 0/80 |
| +75 | 17.5 | 18.92 | 80 | 0/80 |
| +100 | 20 | 20.38 | 80 | 0/80 |
Semi-Quantitative Mode – Lot 1
| % of Cutoff | Target Conc. (ng/mL) | Measured Conc. (ng/mL) | # of determinants | # Negative/# Positive |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| -100 | 0 | 0 | 80 | 80/0 |
| -75 | 2.5 | 2.99 | 80 | 80/0 |
| -50 | 5 | 5.31 | 80 | 80/0 |
| -25 | 7.5 | 7.63 | 80 | 80/0 |
| 100 | 10 | 10.99 | 80 | 7/73 |
| +25 | 12.5 | 12.97 | 80 | 0/80 |
| +50 | 15 | 15.05 | 80 | 0/80 |
| +75 | 17.5 | 18.92 | 80 | 0/80 |
| +100 | 20 | 20.38 | 80 | 0/80 |
{6}
Semi-Quantitative Mode – Lot 2
| % of Cutoff | Target Conc. (ng/mL) | Measured Conc. (ng/mL) | # of determinants | # Negative/# Positive |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| -100 | 0 | 0 | 80 | 80/0 |
| -75 | 2.5 | 2.99 | 80 | 80/0 |
| -50 | 5 | 5.31 | 80 | 80/0 |
| -25 | 7.5 | 7.63 | 80 | 80/0 |
| 100 | 10 | 10.99 | 80 | 35/45 |
| +25 | 12.5 | 12.97 | 80 | 0/80 |
| +50 | 15 | 15.05 | 80 | 0/80 |
| +75 | 17.5 | 18.92 | 80 | 0/80 |
| +100 | 20 | 20.38 | 80 | 0/80 |
b. Linearity/assay reportable range:
The sponsor performed a spike recovery study using two lots each of reagent, calibrators and controls and analyzed concentrations of 7.5, 10, and 12.5 ng/mL. Samples were analyzed in semi-quantitative mode in replicates of 5. Recoveries ranged from 96.6% - 105.3%.
The sponsor also performed a linearity study using two lots each of reagent, calibrators and controls and analyzed concentrations of 0, 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, and 100 ng/mL. Samples were analyzed in semi-quantitative mode in replicates of 5. Recoveries ranged from a low of 98.3% to a high of 119.8%. Recovery at the claimed cutoff of 10 ng/mL was 109.7%.
c. Traceability, Stability, Expected values (controls, calibrators, or methods):
Traceability: The primary calibrators and controls are traceable to a commercially available Buprenorphine drug stock with a starting concentration of 1 mg/mL.
Value Assignment: The nominal values for calibrators are 0, 10, 20, 50 and 100 ng/mL, and 7.5 and 12.5 ng/mL for controls. All values are verified by LC-MS/MS.
The sponsor's protocols and acceptance criteria were reviewed and found to be acceptable.
Stability: Real time and accelerated stability studies for both controls and calibrators were conducted. Protocols and acceptance criteria were reviewed and found to be acceptable. The results support the manufacturer's stability claims of 60 days for an opened vial and 18 months for an unopened vial for both calibrators and controls. Real time studies are ongoing.
{7}
d. Detection limit:
Not applicable.
e. Analytical specificity:
Buprenorphine and metabolites
To evaluate cross-reactivity, drug-free urine was spiked with norbuprenorphine, buprenorphine-β-D-glucuronide and norbuprenorphine-β-D glucuronide. Percent cross-reactivity was calculated as (Cut-off concentration / Lowest concentration of cross reactant that gives a positive result) x 100. Results are summarized below:
| Compound | Lowest concentration producing a positive result (ng/mL) | Percent cross-reactivity |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Buprenorphine | 10 | 100 |
| Norbuprenorphine | 8 | 125 |
| Buprenorphine-β-D-glucuronide | 13 | 77 |
| Norbuprenorphine-β-D-glucuronide | 10 | 100 |
Opiates and Structurally Related Compounds
The following opiates and structurally related compounds were analyzed and found to have a cross-reactivity of $< 0.01\%$ .
| Compound | Highest Concentration Tested | Result |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 6-Acetyl morphine | 100,000 | Negative |
| Diacetylmorphine (Heroin) | 100,000 | Negative |
| Codeine | 100,000 | Negative |
| Dextromethorphan | 100,000 | Negative |
| Dihydrocodeine | 100,000 | Negative |
| EDDP (2-ethylidene-1,5-dimethyl-3,3-diphenylpyrrolidine) | 100,000 | Negative |
| EMDP ((2-Ethyl-5-methyl-3,3- | 100,000 | Negative |
| diphenylpyrrolidine) | | |
{8}
| Compound | Highest Concentration Tested | Result |
| --- | --- | --- |
| diphenylpyrroline) | | |
| Fentanyl | 100,000 | Negative |
| Hydrocodone | 100,000 | Negative |
| Hydromorphone | 100,000 | Negative |
The following opiates and structurally related compounds were analyzed and found to have a cross-reactivity of <0.1%.
| Compound | Highest Concentration Tested | Result |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Hydromorphone-β-Dglucuronide | 10,000 | Negative |
| Oxymorphone-β-Dglucuronide | 10,000 | Negative |
## Structurally unrelated compounds
Interference from structurally unrelated compounds was evaluated by spiking these compounds into urine samples containing near cutoff negative (7.5 ng/mL) and near cutoff positive (12.5 ng/mL) concentrations of buprenorphine. The compounds listed in the table below did not cause any positive or negative interference at the concentrations shown:
| Compound | Concentration tested |
| --- | --- |
| Acetaminophen | 500,000 |
| Acetylsalicylic acid | 500,000 |
| Amitryptyline | 50,000 |
| Amoxicillin | 100,000 |
| Amphetamine | 1,000,000 |
| Amisulpride | 100,000 |
| Benzoylecgonine | 1,000,000 |
| Caffeine | 100,000 |
| Carbamazepine | 100,000 |
| Chlorpromazine | 100,000 |
| Clomipramine | 25,000 |
| Chloroquine | 100,000 |
| Cimetidine | 500,000 |
| Desipramine | 10,000 |
| Doxepine | 25,000 |
| Diphenylhydramine | 100,000 |
| Ephedrine | 100,000 |
{9}
| Compound | Concentration tested |
| --- | --- |
| Fluoxethine | 100,000 |
| Fluphenazine | 100,000 |
| Hydroxychlroquine | 100,000 |
| Ibuprofen | 100,000 |
| Imipramine | 25,000 |
| Maprotiline | 100,000 |
| Mitragynine | 100,000 |
| 7-OH Mitragynine | 10,000 |
| Nalbuphine | 100,000 |
| Nortryptiline | 50,000 |
| Oxazepam | 100,000 |
| Phencyclidine | 100,000 |
| Phenobarbital | 100,000 |
| Ranitidine | 500,000 |
| Secobarbital | 100,000 |
| Sulpiride | 100,000 |
| Thioridazine | 100,000 |
| Trimipramine | 25,000 |
## Endogenous compounds
Potential interference from endogenous compounds was evaluated by spiking these compounds into urine samples containing near cutoff negative (7.5 ng/mL) and near cutoff positive (12.5 ng/mL) concentrations of buprenorphine. The compounds or conditions listed in the table below did not cause any positive or negative interference at the concentrations shown:
| Compounds | Tested Conc. (mg/dL) |
| --- | --- |
| Negative Urine | 0 |
| Acetaminophen | 10 |
| Acetone | 500 |
| Acetylsalicylic Acid | 10 |
| Ascorbic Acid | 150 |
| Caffeine | 10 |
| Creatinine | 400 |
| Ethanol | 10 |
| Galactose | 5 |
| Glucose | 1000 |
| Hemoglobin | 150 |
| Human Serum Albumin | 200 |
| Ibuprophen | 10 |
| Oxalic acid | 50 |
{10}
| Compounds | Tested Conc. (mg/dL) |
| --- | --- |
| Riboflavin | 3 |
| Sodium Chloride | 1000 |
| Urea | 1000 |
## Specific gravity and pH
Interference from specific gravity and pH was evaluated by adjusting the specific gravity and pH of samples with near cutoff negative (7.5 ng/mL) and near cutoff positive (12.5 ng/mL) concentrations of buprenorphine. The following specific gravity or pH levels did not cause any positive or negative interference:
Specific gravity of 1.002, 1.004, 1.008, 1.013, 1.016, 1.018, 1.022, 1.023, 1.025, and 1.030.
pH of 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11
f. Assay cut-off:
Analytical performance of the device around the claimed cutoff is described in precision section (1 a.) above.
2. Comparison studies:
a. Method comparison with predicate device:
Candidate Device Results vs. stratified LC-MS/MS Values – Semi-quantitative
| Candidate Device Results | Negative or less than half the cutoff concentration by LC-MS/MS analysis | Near Cutoff Negative (Between 50% below the cutoff and the cutoff concentration by LC-MS/MS analysis) | Near Cutoff Positive (Between the cutoff and 50% above the cutoff concentration by LC-MS/MS analysis) | High Positive (greater than 50% above the cutoff concentration by LC-MS/MS analysis) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Positive | 43 | 4 | 5 | 45 |
| Negative | 50 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
LC-MS/MS values used to categorize samples in this table are based on the concentration of buprenorphine found in the sample.
% Agreement among positives is 50/50 = 100%
% Agreement among negatives is 56/103 = 54%
{11}
Candidate Device Results vs. stratified LC-MS/MS Values - Qualitative
| Candidate Device Results | Negative or less than half the cutoff concentration by LC-MS/MS analysis | Near Cutoff Negative (Between 50% below the cutoff and the cutoff concentration by LC-MS/MS analysis) | Near Cutoff Positive (Between the cutoff and 50% above the cutoff concentration by LC-MS/MS analysis) | High Positive (greater than 50% above the cutoff concentration by LC-MS/MS analysis) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Positive | 42 | 4 | 5 | 45 |
| Negative | 51 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
LC-MS/MS values used to categorize samples in this table are based on the concentration of buprenorphine found in the sample.
$\%$ Agreement among positives is $50 / 50 = 100\%$
$\%$ Agreement among negatives is $57 / 103 = 55\%$
Summary of discordant results
| Sample ID | Qual | Semi-Quant (ng/mL) | Bup | NorBup | BupGlu | NorBup Gluc |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 51 | Pos | 10.08 | <0.65* | 2.27 | 1.96 | 6.18 |
| 52 | Pos | 10.02 | <0.65* | 0.69 | 3.15 | 6.84 |
| 53 | Neg | 10.42 | <0.65* | 1.08 | 7.89 | 1.82 |
| 54 | Pos | 11.59 | <0.65* | 1.09 | 5.67 | 5.54 |
| 55 | Pos | 10.40 | <0.65* | 3.27 | 2.54 | 7.92 |
| 56 | Pos | 16.36 | <0.65* | 4.02 | 7.46 | 3.73 |
| 57 | Pos | 17.31 | <0.65* | 3.28 | 10.67 | 3.09 |
| 58 | Pos | 19.82 | <0.65* | 5.03 | 10.91 | 2.05 |
| 59 | Pos | 18.73 | <0.65* | 3.10 | 9.09 | 6.59 |
| 60 | Pos | 22.63 | <0.65* | 4.18 | 8.30 | 7.34 |
| 61 | Pos | 18.95 | <0.65* | 1.96 | 9.90 | 9.90 |
| 62 | Pos | 26.11 | <0.65* | 4.36 | 10.87 | 6.92 |
| 63 | Pos | 24.99 | <0.65* | 5.26 | 8.41 | 9.01 |
| 64 | Pos | 24.91 | <0.65* | 3.86 | 23.19 | <0.65* |
| 65 | Pos | 20.87 | <0.65* | 1.44 | 14.06 | 14.06 |
| 66 | Pos | 23.21 | <0.65* | 2.23 | 25.24 | 2.50 |
| 67 | Pos | 30.27 | <0.65* | 4.42 | 8.82 | 16.84 |
| 68 | Pos | 31.35 | <0.65* | 16.52 | 9.41 | 5.47 |
{12}
| Sample ID | Qual | Semi-Quant (ng/mL) | Bup | NorBup | BupGlu | NorBup Gluc |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 69 | Pos | 35.38 | <0.65* | 7.13 | 5.30 | 22.38 |
| 70 | Pos | 40.38 | <0.65* | 12.21 | 18.65 | 9.11 |
| 71 | Pos | 38.44 | <0.65* | 2.93 | 12.40 | 28.84 |
| 72 | Pos | 48.60 | <0.65* | 23.41 | 15.34 | 5.44 |
| 73 | Pos | 62.31 | <0.65* | 5.47 | 36.52 | 25.00 |
| 74 | Pos | 81.31 | <0.65* | 33.59 | 23.42 | 12.72 |
| 75 | Pos | 88.67 | <0.65* | 26.22 | 32.43 | 23.1 |
| 76 | Pos | 79.26 | <0.65* | 6.34 | 80.00 | 2.77 |
| 77 | Pos | >100 | <0.65* | 8.63 | 56.89 | 46.95 |
| 78 | Pos | >100 | <0.65* | 101.98 | 10.40 | 9.90 |
| 79 | Pos | >100 | <0.65* | 7.91 | 26.43 | 144.00 |
| 80 | Pos | >100 | <0.65* | 49.66 | 97.61 | 121.12 |
| 81 | Pos | >100 | <0.65* | <0.65* | 145.72 | 394.81 |
| 82 | Pos | >100 | <0.65* | 129.95 | 105.07 | 664.47 |
| 83 | Pos | >100 | 0.81 | 32.14 | 39.52 | 59.14 |
| 84 | Pos | 63.54 | 0.86 | 7.41 | 29.46 | 31.38 |
| 85 | Pos | 20.48 | 0.90 | 5.42 | 11.54 | <0.65* |
| 86 | Pos | >100 | 0.91 | 54.00 | 18.10 | 10.52 |
| 87 | Pos | 46.32 | 2.00 | 12.03 | 13.58 | 16.24 |
| 88 | Pos | >100 | 2.00 | 6.83 | 193.42 | 131.65 |
| 89 | Pos | >100 | 2.02 | 75.75 | 174.74 | 442.98 |
| 90 | Pos | 66.32 | 2.48 | 6.53 | 57.67 | 1.52 |
| 91 | Pos | >100 | 3.63 | 80.26 | 733.7 | 624.02 |
| 92 | Pos | >100 | 4.38 | 69.28 | 146.16 | 349.33 |
| 93 | Pos | >100 | 4.45 | 59.03 | 55.01 | 17.31 |
| 100 | Pos | >100 | 8.64 | 36.91 | >1000** | 224.42 |
| 101 | Pos | >100 | 8.94 | 51.32 | 497.32 | 55.06 |
| 102 | Pos | >100 | 5.22 | 35.13 | 85.99 | 22.24 |
| 103 | Pos | 77.36 | 6.60 | 147.58 | 195.67 | 40.28 |
Abbreviations: Bup - Buprenorphine, NorBup - Norbuprenorphine, BupGlu - Buprenorphine Glucuronide, NorBupGluc - Norbuprenorphine Glucuronide
*0.65 ng/mL is the lower limit of quantitation for the buprenorphine, norbuprenorphine, buprenorphine-glucuronide and norbuprenorphine-glucuronide LC-MS/MS assays
{13}
**1000 ng/mL is the upper limit of quantitation for the buprenorphine, norbuprenorphine, buprenorphine-glucuronide and norbuprenorphine-glucuronide LC-MS/MS assays.
b. Matrix comparison:
Not applicable. This assay is intended to be used with urine samples only.
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:
Not applicable.
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.
14
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.