The Optilite Freelite Mx Kappa Free Kit is intended for the quantitative in vitro measurement of Kappa free light chains in serum and urine using the Binding Site Optilite analyzer. Measurement of free light chains aids in the diagnosis and monitoring of multiple myeloma, lymphocytic neoplasms, Waldenström’s macroglobulinaemia, AL amyloidosis, light chain deposition disease and connective tissue diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in conjunction with other laboratory and clinical findings. The Optilite Freelite Mx Lambda Free Kit is intended for the quantitative in vitro measurement of Lambda free light chains in serum and urine using the Binding Site Optilite analyzer. Measurement of free light chains aids in the diagnosis and monitoring of multiple myeloma, lymphocytic neoplasms, Waldenström’s macroglobulinaemia, AL amyloidosis, light chain deposition disease and connective tissue diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in conjunction with other laboratory and clinical findings.
Device Story
The Optilite Freelite Mx Kappa and Lambda Free Kits are in vitro diagnostic reagents used on the Binding Site Optilite analyzer. The device measures free light chains in serum and urine samples via turbidimetric immunoassay. Input samples are mixed with sheep anti-human kappa or lambda antibody (F(ab')2 fragments) bound to 200nm polystyrene latex particles. As antigen-antibody complexes form, light scatter increases, which is monitored by the analyzer to determine concentration based on a pre-established calibration curve. The system is operated by laboratory personnel in a clinical setting. Results assist clinicians in diagnosing and monitoring plasma cell dyscrasias and related connective tissue diseases. The device provides quantitative data that, when interpreted alongside other clinical findings, supports patient management and disease monitoring.
Clinical Evidence
Bench testing only. Performance evaluated via precision (within-run, between-run, between-day, between-instrument), linearity, and analytical sensitivity (LoB, LoD, LoQ). Method comparison performed against a predicate device using 165 urine samples for Kappa (r=0.992) and 115 urine samples for Lambda (r=0.947). Clinical sensitivity/specificity calculated for urine samples; Kappa positive agreement 90.7%, negative 98.8%; Lambda positive agreement 73.7%, negative 100%.
Technological Characteristics
Turbidimetric immunoassay using sheep anti-human kappa/lambda F(ab')2 fragments bound to 200nm polystyrene latex particles. Reagents include glycine buffered saline, sodium azide, Proclin, benzamidine, EACA, and BSA. Operates on the Binding Site Optilite analyzer. Quantitative measurement via light scatter intensity. Standardized via internal master calibrator.
Indications for Use
Indicated for quantitative measurement of Kappa and Lambda free light chains in serum and urine to aid in diagnosis and monitoring of multiple myeloma, lymphocytic neoplasms, Waldenström’s macroglobulinaemia, AL amyloidosis, light chain deposition disease, and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). For prescription use only.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
An immunoglobulin (light chain specific) immunological test system is a device that consists of the reagents used to measure by immunochemical techniques both kappa and lambda types of light chain portions of immunoglobulin molecules in serum, other body fluids, and tissues. In some disease states, an excess of light chains are produced by the antibody-forming cells. These free light chains, unassociated with gamma globulin molecules, can be found in a patient's body fluids and tissues. Measurement of the various amounts of the different types of light chains aids in the diagnosis of multiple myeloma (cancer of antibody-forming cells), lymphocytic neoplasms (cancer of lymphoid tissue), Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia (increased production of large immunoglobulins), and connective tissue diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis or systemic lupus erythematosus.
Predicate Devices
Freelite Human Kappa Free Kit for use on the Siemens BN II (K040009)
Freelite Human Lambda Free Kit for use on the Siemens BN II (K040009)
Submission Summary (Full Text)
{0}
# 510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION DECISION SUMMARY
A. 510(k) Number:
K173732
B. Purpose for Submission:
Modified IVD assay on previously cleared instrument
C. Measurand:
Kappa (κ) free light chains and Lambda (λ) free light chains
D. Type of Test:
Quantitative, Turbidimetry
E. Applicant:
The Binding Site Group, Ltd.
F. Proprietary and Established Names:
Optilite Freelite Mx Kappa Free Kit
Optilite Freelite Mx Lambda Free Kit
G. Regulatory Information:
1. Regulatory Section:
21 CFR 866.5550, Immunoglobulin (light chain specific) immunological test system
2. Classification:
Class II
3. Product Code:
DFH, Kappa antigen, antiserum, control
DEH, Lambda antigen, antiserum, control
{1}
4. Panel:
Immunology (82)
H. Intended Use:
1. Intended use:
The Optilite Freelite Mx Kappa Free Kit is intended for the quantitative in vitro measurement of Kappa free light chains in serum and urine using the Binding Site Optilite analyzer. Measurement of free light chains aids in the diagnosis and monitoring of multiple myeloma, lymphocytic neoplasms, Waldenström’s macroglobulinaemia, AL amyloidosis, light chain deposition disease and connective tissue diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in conjunction with other laboratory and clinical findings.
The Optilite Freelite Mx Lambda Free Kit is intended for the quantitative in vitro measurement of Lambda free light chains in serum and urine using the Binding Site Optilite analyzer. Measurement of free light chains aids in the diagnosis and monitoring of multiple myeloma, lymphocytic neoplasms, Waldenström’s macroglobulinaemia, AL amyloidosis, light chain deposition disease and connective tissue diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in conjunction with other laboratory and clinical findings.
2. Indication for use:
Same as intended use.
3. Special conditions for use statement:
For prescription use only.
Warning: The kappa free light chain results for a given specimen determined with assays from different manufacturers or on different systems can vary due to differences in assay methods and reagent specificity. The results reported by the laboratory to the physician must include the identity of the kappa free light chain assay used. Values obtained with different assays or systems cannot be used interchangeably. If, in the course of serially monitoring a patient, the assay or system used for determining kappa free light chain levels is changed, additional sequential testing should be carried out. Prior to changing assay or system, the laboratory MUST confirm baseline values for patients being serially monitored.
{2}
Warning: The lambda free light chain results for a given specimen determined with assays from different manufacturers or on different systems can vary due to differences in assay methods and reagent specificity. The results reported by the laboratory to the physician must include the identity of the lambda free light chain assay used. Values obtained with different assays or systems cannot be used interchangeably. If, in the course of serially monitoring a patient, the assay or system used for determining lambda free light chain levels is changed, additional sequential testing should be carried out. Prior to changing assay or system, the laboratory MUST confirm baseline values for patients being serially monitored.
4. Special instrument requirements:
Optilite Analyzer (Indiko) (K110035)
I. Device Description:
The Optilite Freelite Mx Kappa Free Kit is comprised of the following reagents:
- Latex Reagent: Sheep anti-Human Kappa (polyclonal monospecific) antibody (F(ab')2 fragment) bound to 200nm polystyrene latex particles. In 0.033M Glycine buffered saline pH8 (containing Sodium Azide (0.033%), Proclin (0.05%), Benzamidine (0.01%) and EACA (0.1%) as preservative plus BSA (0.033%)
- Calibrator and Controls: Pooled human serum, supplied in stabilized liquid form. Containing 0.099% sodium azide, 0.1% EACA and 0.01% benzamidine as preservatives.
- Reaction Buffer: Containing 0.099% sodium azide as a preservative.
The Optilite Freelite Mx Lambda Free Kit is comprised of the following reagents:
- Latex Reagent: Sheep anti-Human Lambda (polyclonal monospecific) Free antibody (F(ab')2 fragment) bound to 200nm polystyrene latex particles. In 0.033M Glycine buffered saline pH8 (containing Sodium Azide (0.033%), Proclin (0.05%), Benzamidine (0.01%) and EACA (0.1%) as preservatives plus BSA (0.1665%)
- Calibrator and Controls: Pooled human serum, supplied in stabilized liquid form. Containing 0.099% sodium azide, 0.1% EACA and 0.01% benzamidine as preservatives.
- Reaction Buffer: Containing 0.099% sodium azide as a preservative.
Note - In Optilite Freelite kits, the latex reagent and reaction buffer are supplied in a single wedge with a chamber for each fluid. They are therefore labelled as a single component Optilite Kappa Free Mx Reagent or Optilite Lambda Free Mx Reagent.
{3}
J. Substantial Equivalence Information:
1. Predicate device name:
Freelite Human Kappa Free Kit and Freelite Human Lambda Free Kit for use on Siemens BNII
2. Predicate 510(k) number:
K040009
3. Comparison with predicate:
| Similarities | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device
Optilite Freelite Mx Free Kit | Predicate
Freelite Human Free Kit
(K040009) |
| Intended Use
(Kappa) | Quantitation of kappa free light chains in serum and urine. It is intended to aid in the diagnosis and monitoring of multiple myeloma, lymphocytic neoplasms, Waldenström's macroglobulinaemia, AL amyloidosis, light chain deposition disease and connective tissue diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in conjunction with other laboratory and clinical findings. | Same |
| Intended Use
(Lambda) | Quantitation of lambda free light chains in serum and urine. It is intended to aid in the diagnosis and monitoring of multiple myeloma, lymphocytic neoplasms, Waldenström's macroglobulinaemia, AL amyloidosis, light chain deposition disease and connective tissue diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in conjunction with other laboratory and clinical findings. | Same |
| Analyte | Kappa Free Light Chain
Lambda Free Light Chain | Same |
| Assay Format | Quantitative | Same |
{4}
| Similarities | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device
Optilite Freelite Mx Free Kit | Predicate
Freelite Human Free Kit
(K040009) |
| Detection
Antibody | LK016.M.OPT.A: Sheep anti-human kappa antibody (F(ab)2 fragment) bound to latex particles
LK018.OPT.A: Sheep anti-human kappa antibody (F(ab)2 fragment) bound to latex particles | Same |
| Calibration | The Optilite analyzer produces a calibration curve by performing multiple dilutions of a single calibrator fluid | Same |
| Traceability | Internally produced master calibrator | Same |
| Sample matrix | Serum and urine | Same |
| Open vial stability | 3 months | Same |
{5}
| Differences | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device
Optilite Freelite Mx Free Kit | Predicate
Freelite Human Free Kit
(K040009) |
| Instrument | Optilite | Siemens BNII |
| Test Method | Turbidimetric | Nephelometric |
| Adult Reference Interval | Free Kappa: 32.90 mg/L*
Free Lambda: 3.79 mg/L* | Free Kappa: 1.35–24.19 mg/L
Free Lambda: 0.24–6.66 mg/L
Kappa/Lambda Ratio: 2.04–10.37
Reference intervals taken from predicate product inserts. |
| Measuring Range and Dilutions (Kappa) | 1/1: 0.3–12.65 mg/L
1/2: 0.6–25.3 mg/L
1/10: 2.9–127 mg/L*
1/100: 29–1270 mg/L
1/1000: 290–12700 mg/L
1/5000: 1450–63500 mg/L | 1/1: 0.06–1.9 mg/L
1/5: 0.3–9.5 mg/L
1/20: 1.2–38 mg/L
1/100: 5.9–190 mg/L*
1/400: 23.6–760 mg/L
1/2000: 118–3800 mg/L
1/8000: 472–15200 mg/L |
| Measuring Range and Dilutions (Lambda) | 1/1: 0.74–17.35 mg/L
1/2: 1.3–34.7 mg/L
1/8: 5.2–139 mg/L*
1/80: 52–1390 mg/L
1/800: 520–13900 mg/L
1/8000: 5200–139000 mg/L | 1/1: 0.05–1.6 mg/L
1/5: 0.25–8.0 mg/L
1/20: 1.0–32.0 mg/L
1/100: 5.0–160 mg/L*
1/400: 20.0–640 mg/L
1/2000: 100–3200 mg/L
1/8000: 400–12800 mg/L |
| On Board Stability | 30 days | None quoted |
* 97.5th Percentile (one sided reference interval)<br>
* Measuring range at standard dilution
## K. Standard/Guidance Documents Referenced:
- CLSI EP17-A Protocols for Determination of Limits of Detection and Limit of Quantification; Approved Guideline
- CLSI EP7-A2 Interference Testing in Clinical Chemistry; Approved Guideline – Second Edition
- CLSI EP6-A Evaluation of The Linearity of Quantitative Measurement Procedures: A Statistical Approach; Approved Guideline
- CLSI EP5-A2 Evaluation of Precision of Quantitative Measurement Procedures; Approved Guideline – Second Edition
{6}
- CLSI EP28-A3c Defining, Establishing, And Verifying Reference Intervals in The Clinical Laboratory; Approved Guideline – Third Edition (formerly CLSI C28-A3c)
## L. Test Principle:
Evaluating the concentration of a soluble antigen (e.g. Kappa free light chains) by turbidimetry involves the addition of the test sample to a solution containing the appropriate antibody in a reaction vessel or cuvette. A beam of light is passed through the cuvette and, as the antigen-antibody reaction proceeds, the light passing through the cuvette is scattered increasingly as insoluble immune complexes are formed. Light scatter is monitored by measuring the decrease in intensity of the incident beam of light. The antibody in the cuvette is in excess so the amount of immune complex formed is proportional to the antigen concentration. A series of calibrators of known antigen concentration are assayed initially to produce a calibration curve of measured light scatter versus antigen concentration. Samples of unknown antigen concentration can then be assayed and the results read from the calibration curve.
## M. Performance Characteristics:
1. **Analytical performance**: All results presented below met the manufacturer’s predetermined acceptance criteria.
### a. Precision/Reproducibility:
Kappa: The within-run, between-run, between-day and between-instrument precision were determined by testing four urine sample pools over 21 days with two runs per day using one reagent lot on three analyzers. Results are summarized below.
| Sample | Mean (mg/L) | Within Run | | Between Run | | Between Day | | Between Instrument | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 1 | 5.49 | 0.28 | 5.1 | 0.10 | 1.8 | 0.30 | 5.4 | 0.35 | 6.3 | 0.42 | 7.6 |
| 2 | 33.08 | 0.70 | 2.1 | 1.61 | 4.9 | 2.08 | 6.3 | 0.55 | 1.7 | 2.72 | 8.2 |
| 3 | 99.16 | 3.12 | 3.1 | 4.56 | 4.6 | 4.29 | 4.3 | 2.62 | 2.7 | 6.99 | 7.1 |
| 4 | 179.12 | 5.16 | 2.9 | 5.11 | 2.9 | 13.89 | 7.8 | 12.88 | 7.2 | 15.68 | 8.8 |
Lambda: The within-run, between-run, between-day and between-instrument precision were determined by testing five urine sample pools over 23 days with two runs per day using one reagent lot on three analyzers. Results are summarized below.
{7}
| Sample | Mean (mg/L) | Within Run | | Between Run | | Between Day | | Between Instrument | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 1 | 4.48 | 0.11 | 2.5 | 0.22 | 4.9 | 0.27 | 4.8 | 0.05 | 1.1 | 0.33 | 7.3 |
| 2 | 7.19 | 0.35 | 4.8 | 0.37 | 5.1 | 0.36 | 5.1 | 0.48 | 6.7 | 0.62 | 8.7 |
| 3 | 54.37 | 1.22 | 2.2 | 3.17 | 5.8 | 2.88 | 5.3 | 3.25 | 6.0 | 4.45 | 8.2 |
| 4 | 109.27 | 5.19 | 4.8 | 4.39 | 4.0 | 5.72 | 5.2 | 4.45 | 4.1 | 8.89 | 8.1 |
| 5 | 133.46 | 4.09 | 3.1 | 3.66 | 2.7 | 10.11 | 7.6 | 11.62 | 8.7 | 11.50 | 8.6 |
b. Linearity/assay reportable range:
A linearity study was performed following CLSI EP6-A. The linearity of the Kappa Free and Lambda Free assays was confirmed using serially diluted urine samples to cover the standard measuring ranges of $2.9 - 127\mathrm{mg / L}$ (Kappa) and $5.2 - 139\mathrm{mg / L}$ (Lambda) respectively. The results demonstrated that the kappa free and lambda free assays are linear over the ranges of $2.383 - 142.687\mathrm{mg / L}$ (Kappa) and $3.87 - 160.02\mathrm{mg / L}$ (Lambda) with deviation from linearity $\leq 10\%$ .
c. Traceability, Stability, Expected values (controls, calibrators, or methods):
Traceability: Internally produced master calibrator
Stability: On board, open vial and real time stability was evaluated in K150658.
d. Detection limit:
The analytical sensitivity was determined in accordance with CLSI EP17-A and was carried out using both serum and urine matrices. The Limit of Blank (LoB) was based on 60 determinations of blank samples (analyte depleted serum and urine at a low analyte concentration) and was estimated at the 95th percentile of the distribution. The Limit of Detection (LoD) was calculated from the LoB and the combined SD of the five Limit of Quantitation (LoQ) samples. The LoQ was calculated from five independent samples (serum samples: samples were diluted with analyte depleted serum; urine samples: in house urine samples at low analyte concentration were pooled with an in house urine with a higher analyte concentration) to achieve a concentration close to the bottom of the measuring range) tested twelve times over five days. The tabulated summary of results is shown below.
{8}
| | LoB | LoD | LoQ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Kappa Free (Serum) | 0.195mg/L | 0.224mg/L | 0.330mg/L |
| Kappa Free (Urine) | 0.210mg/L | 0.232mg/L | 0.330mg/L |
| Lambda Free (Serum) | 0.285mg/L | 0.393mg/L | 0.740mg/L |
| Lambda Free (Urine) | 0.080mg/L | 0.184mg/L | 0.740mg/L |
e. Analytical specificity:
Interference:
Interferences were assessed according to CLSI EP7-A2 by testing a single urine sample for the Kappa Free assay and the Lambda Free assay. Samples were prepared with an analyte concentration around the reference limit of each assay. Each sample was made up using urine from a healthy adult donor and urine from a kappa or lambda myeloma patient. Samples containing interferents were compared to matched control samples which contained no interferent. The mean results from the spiked samples must be within 10% of the mean of the control samples.
Kappa:
No significant assay interference effects were observed when the samples were tested with substances at the concentrations given below.
| Substance | Concentration |
| --- | --- |
| Ascorbic Acid | 200 mg/L |
| Albumin | 5 g/L |
| Bilirubin | 100 mg/L |
| Bortezomib | 6 mg/mL |
| Cyclophosphamide | 330 mg/mL |
| Digoxin | 0.375 μg/mL |
| Haemoglobin | 240 mg/L |
| Penicillin | 75 mg/L |
| Phenytoin | 15 mg/L |
| Theophylline | 150 mg/L |
{9}
Lambda:
No significant assay interference effects were observed when the samples were tested with substances at the concentrations given below.
| Substance | Concentration |
| --- | --- |
| Ascorbic Acid | 200 mg/L |
| Albumin | 5 g/L |
| Bilirubin | 100 mg/L |
| Bortezomib | 3.6 mg/mL |
| Cyclophosphamide | 330 mg/mL |
| Digoxin | 0.375 μg/mL |
| Haemoglobin | 250 mg/L |
| Penicillin | 75 mg/L |
| Phenytoin | 15 mg/L |
| Theophylline | 150 mg/L |
Cross reactivity:
No significant cross reactivity was observed during testing Freelite Human Kappa Free Kit and Freelite Human Lambda Free Kit for use on Siemens (K040009). The specificity of the antisera is unchanged.
Antigen Excess Detection:
The possibility of antigen excess occurring when using the device on the Optilite analyzer was evaluated in K150658.
f. Assay cut-off:
Not applicable. Refer to expected values of reference range.
2. Comparison studies:
a. Method comparison:
Kappa:
A comparison study was performed by analyzing 165 urine samples (including 86 with analyte levels below the reference limit) using the Optilite Freelite Mx Kappa Free kit and the predicate (K040009) assay. Passing Bablok regression analysis generated the following results:
$$
y = 1.02x - 0.21 \ (\mathrm{mg/L}) \quad (y = \text{Optilite}; x = \text{predicate analyzer})
$$
correlation coefficient $r = 0.992$
{10}
Lambda:
A comparison study was performed by analyzing 115 urine samples (including 59 with analyte levels below the reference limit) using the Optilite Freelite Mx Lambda Free kit and the predicate (K040009) assay. Passing Bablok regression analysis generated the following results:
$$
y = 1.11x - 0.27 \ (\mathrm{mg/L}) \quad (y = \text{Optilite}; x = \text{predicate analyzer})
$$
correlation coefficient $r = 0.947$
b. Matrix comparison:
Not applicable
3. Clinical studies:
a. Clinical Sensitivity/clinical specificity:
The reference interval limits were used for determination of positive and negative samples as below.
| | Predicate (mg/L) | Test (mg/L) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Kappa Free | 23 | 32.9 |
| Lambda Free | 2.18 | 3.79 |
Kappa:
A total of 170 samples were assayed using the test and predicate devices. Four (short volume or high activity) samples were excluded in the concordance analysis.
| | Predicate Assay | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | Positive | Negative | Total |
| Test Assay | Positive | 78 | 1 | 79 |
| | Negative | 8 | 79 | 87 |
| | Total | 86 | 80 | 166 |
| Agreement | % Agreement | 95% Confidence Interval |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Positive | 90.7% | 82.7% to 95.2% |
| Negative | 98.8% | 93.3% to 99.8% |
| Overall | 94.6% | 90.0% to 97.1% |
{11}
Lambda:
A total of 170 samples were assayed using the test and predicate devices. Two (short volume or high activity) samples were excluded in the concordance analysis.
| | Predicate Assay | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | Positive | Negative | Total |
| Test Assay | Positive | 56 | 0 | 56 |
| | Negative | 20 | 92 | 112 |
| | Total | 76 | 92 | 168 |
| Agreement | % Agreement | 95% Confidence Interval |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Positive | 73.7% | 62.8% to 82.3% |
| Negative | 100.0% | 96.0% to 100.0% |
| Overall | 88.1% | 92.3% to 92.2% |
b. Other clinical supportive data (when a. is not applicable):
Not applicable
4. Clinical cut-off:
Not applicable
5. Expected values/Reference range:
| Normal adult urine | Mean (mg/L) | Median (mg/L) | Reference Limit (mg/L) 97.5th Percentile |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Kappa free | 7.64 | 4.54 | 32.90 |
| Lambda free | 1.03 | 0.74 | 3.79 |
N. Proposed Labelling:
The labelling 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.