The DiaSorin LIAISON® Ferritin assay is a quantitative automated chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) for the in vitro detection of ferritin in human serum, serum separator tubes (SST), or lithium (Li) Heparin plasma to aid in the diagnosis of iron deficiency anemia and iron overload. This assay must be performed on the LIAISON® XL Analyzer.
Device Story
LIAISON® Ferritin is a quantitative automated chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) performed on the LIAISON® XL Analyzer. The device uses a sandwich immunoassay principle: magnetic particles coated with mouse monoclonal anti-ferritin antibody (solid phase) and mouse monoclonal anti-ferritin antibody labeled with an isoluminol derivative (conjugate). Ferritin in patient samples binds to the solid phase and conjugate; unbound material is washed away. Starter reagents induce a flash chemiluminescence reaction. A photomultiplier measures the light signal (Relative Light Units), which is proportional to the ferritin concentration. The assay aids clinicians in diagnosing iron deficiency anemia and iron overload. Results are quantitative, providing diagnostic information based on ferritin levels in serum or plasma.
Clinical Evidence
Bench testing only. Performance validated per CLSI guidelines (EP5-A3, EP15-A3, EP07-A2, EP06-A2, EP17-A2, EP28-A3C). Method comparison (n=173) against a commercially available method yielded Passing & Bablok slope 0.965 (95% CI: 0.95-0.98) and R²=0.995. Precision studies (n=320) showed total CVs ranging from 4.1% to 6.4%. Analytical measuring range 0.46–2,200 ng/mL. LoQ <0.046 ng/mL. No interference observed for common endogenous/exogenous substances.
Technological Characteristics
Quantitative chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA). Components: magnetic particles coated with mouse monoclonal anti-ferritin antibody, isoluminol-labeled conjugate. Measuring range: 0.46–2,200 ng/mL. Traceable to WHO NIBSC 94/572. Instrumentation: LIAISON XL Analyzer. Software: embedded firmware on LIAISON XL. Sterilization: not applicable (reagents).
Indications for Use
Indicated for the quantitative detection of ferritin in human serum, SST, or lithium heparin plasma to aid in the diagnosis of iron deficiency anemia and iron overload. For use in clinical laboratory settings on the LIAISON® XL Analyzer.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
A ferritin immunological test system is a device that consists of the reagents used to measure by immunochemical techniques the ferritin (an iron-storing protein) in serum and other body fluids. Measurements of ferritin aid in the diagnosis of diseases affecting iron metabolism, such as hemochromatosis (iron overload) and iron deficiency amemia.
{0}
FDA
U.S. FOOD & DRUG
ADMINISTRATION
# 510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION DECISION SUMMARY
ASSAY ONLY
## I Background Information:
A 510(k) Number
K193650
B Applicant
DiaSorin Inc.
C Proprietary and Established Names
LIAISON Ferritin
D Regulatory Information
| Product Code(s) | Classification | Regulation Section | Panel |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| DBF | Class II | 21 CFR 866.5340 - Ferritin Immunological Test System | IM - Immunology |
## II Submission/Device Overview:
A Purpose for Submission:
New assay
B Measurand:
Ferritin
C Type of Test:
Quantitative, Chemiluminescent Immunoassay
Food and Drug Administration
10903 New Hampshire Avenue
Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002
www.fda.gov
{1}
K193650 - Page 2 of 10
## III Intended Use/Indications for Use:
### A Intended Use(s):
See Indications for Use below.
### B Indication(s) for Use:
The DiaSorin LIAISON Ferritin assay is a quantitative automated chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) for the in vitro detection of ferritin in human serum, serum separator tubes (SST), or lithium (Li) Heparin plasma to aid in the diagnosis of iron deficiency anemia and iron overload.
This assay must be performed on the LIAISON XL Analyzer.
### C Special Conditions for Use Statement(s):
Rx - For Prescription Use Only
For in vitro diagnostic use only
### D Special Instrument Requirements:
LIAISON XL analyzer (K103529)
## IV Device/System Characteristics:
### A Device Description:
The LIAISON Ferritin assay contains 100 determinations:
- Magnetic particles - coated with monoclonal anti-ferritin antibody (mouse) in a BSA-containing buffer with 0.09% sodium azide; 2.3 mL
- Calibrator 1, low: containing ferritin from human liver in a human serum albumin-containing buffer with 0.09% sodium azide; 1.0 mL
- Calibrator 2, high: containing ferritin from human liver in a human serum albumin-containing buffer with 0.09% sodium azide; 1.0 mL
- Conjugate: containing monoclonal anti-ferritin antibody (mouse) labeled with isoluminol in a BSA-containing buffer with 0.09% sodium azide; 28.0 mL
- Specimen Diluent, containing human serum albumin and 0.09% sodium azide; 25.0 mL
### B Principle of Operation:
Ferritin present in calibrators, samples or controls binds to an anti-ferritin mouse monoclonal antibody is coated on the magnetic particles (solid phase). After a wash step, an anti-ferritin antibody conjugate binds to the ferritin already bound to the solid phase. After a final wash cycle, the starter reagents are added to trigger a chemiluminescence reaction. The light signal is
{2}
measured by a photomultiplier as relative light units (RLU) and is in proportion of the ferritin concentration present in calibrators, samples, or controls.
K193650 - Page 3 of 10
V Substantial Equivalence Information:
A Predicate Device Name(s):
Elecsys Ferritin
B Predicate 510(k) Number(s):
K971833
C Comparison with Predicate(s):
| Device & Predicate Device(s): | K193650 | K971833 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Device Trade Name | LIAISON Ferritin | Elecsys Ferritin |
| General Device Characteristic Similarities | | |
| Intended Use/Indications For Use | The DiaSorin LIAISON Ferritin assay is a quantitative automated chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) for the in vitro detection of ferritin in human serum, serum separator tubes (SST), and lithium (Li) Heparin plasma to aid in the diagnosis of iron deficiency anemia and iron overload. This assay must be performed on the LIAISON XL Analyzer. | Immunoassay for the in vitro quantitative determination of ferritin in human serum and plasma. The electrochemiluminescence immunoassay “ECLIA” is intended for use on Elecsys and cobas e immunoassay analyzers. |
| Results | Quantitative | Same |
| Sample Size | 10 μL | Same |
| Storage | 2–8°C | Same |
| General Device Characteristic Differences | | |
| Assay Type | Chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) | Electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA) |
| Instrumentation | LIAISON XL Analyzer | Elecsys and cobas e Analyzer |
| Traceability | WHO NIBSC 94/572 | WHO NIBSC 80/602 |
| Sample Types | Human serum, SST serum, and Li heparin plasma | Serum collected using standard sampling tubes; Li-, Na-heparin, K3-EDTA, and sodium citrate plasma |
| Measuring Range | 0.46–2,200 ng/mL | 0.50–2,000 ng/mL |
{3}
| Device & Predicate Device(s): | K193650 | K971833 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Solid Phase | Magnetic particles, coated with mouse monoclonal anti-ferritin antibody | Streptavidin-coated microparticles |
| Conjugate | Mouse monoclonal anti-ferritin antibody labelled with isoluminol | Mouse Monoclonal anti-ferritin antibody labeled with ruthenium complex |
VI Standards/Guidance Documents Referenced:
- CLSI EP5-A3, Evaluation of Precision of Quantitative Measurement Procedures; Approved Guideline.
- CLSI EP15-A3, User Verification of Precision and Estimation of Bias; Approved Guideline.
- CLSI EP07-A, Interference Testing in Clinical Chemistry, Approved Guideline.
- CLSI EP06-A, Evaluation of the Linearity of Quantitative Measurement Procedures; A Statistical Approach; Approved Guideline.
- CLSI EP17-A2, Evaluation of Detection Capability for Clinical Laboratory Measurement Procedures; Approved Guideline.
- CLSI EP28-A3C, Defining, Establishing and Verifying Reference Intervals in the Clinical Laboratory; Approved Guideline.
VII Performance Characteristics (if/when applicable):
A Analytical Performance: All results presented below were within the manufacturer's predetermined acceptance criteria for each study.
1. Precision/Reproducibility:
A 20-day precision study was performed following CLSI EP05-A3 guideline. Six serum samples and two controls, spanning the assay range were tested. Each sample was tested in duplicate per run in two separate runs per day, over 20 operating days (N=80) with two reagent lots on two LIAISON XL analyzers (n = 320):
K193650 - Page 4 of 10
{4}
| Sample ID | Mean (ng/mL) | Repeatability | | Between Run | | Between Day | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| Panel 1 | 5.8 | 0.15 | 2.5 | 0.15 | 2.5 | 0.17 | 3.0 | 0.33 | 5.6 |
| Panel 2 | 18.3 | 0.35 | 1.9 | 0.50 | 2.7 | 0.45 | 2.5 | 0.83 | 4.6 |
| Panel 3 | 178.0 | 2.58 | 1.5 | 4.60 | 2.6 | 4.04 | 2.3 | 7.25 | 4.1 |
| Panel 4 | 1093.0 | 18.77 | 1.7 | 32.10 | 2.9 | 30.70 | 2.8 | 61.43 | 5.6 |
| Panel 5 | 404.9 | 6.67 | 1.6 | 11.00 | 2.7 | 8.56 | 2.1 | 18.48 | 4.6 |
| Panel 6 | 1883.0 | 35.84 | 1.9 | 49.45 | 2.6 | 51.35 | 2.7 | 119.84 | 6.4 |
| Kit control 1 | 32.8 | 0.61 | 1.9 | 0.70 | 2.1 | 0.97 | 2.9 | 1.42 | 4.3 |
| Kit control 2 | 300.0 | 5.81 | 1.9 | 8.51 | 2.8 | 10.97 | 3.7 | 16.12 | 5.4 |
| Sample ID | Mean (ng/mL) | Between Lot | | Between Instrument | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| Panel 1 | 5.8 | 0.14 | 2.4 | 0.12 | 2.0 | 0.33 | 5.6 |
| Panel 2 | 18.3 | 0.02 | 0.1 | 0.34 | 1.9 | 0.83 | 4.6 |
| Panel 3 | 178.0 | 2.90 | 1.6 | 0 | 0 | 7.25 | 4.1 |
| Panel 4 | 1093.0 | 38.05 | 3.5 | 0 | 0 | 61.43 | 5.6 |
| Panel 5 | 404.9 | 10.17 | 2.5 | 0 | 0 | 18.48 | 4.6 |
| Panel 6 | 1883.0 | 89.41 | 4.7 | 0 | 0 | 119.84 | 6.4 |
| Kit control 1 | 32.8 | 0 | 0 | 0.47 | 1.4 | 1.42 | 4.3 |
| Kit control 2 | 300.0 | 5.77 | 1.9 | 0 | 0 | 16.12 | 5.4 |
The reproducibility of the LIAISON Ferritin assay was evaluated on two analyzers with two reagent lots. Six human sera samples and two controls were tested in six replicates per run, one run per day for five days (n=30) on each lot (n=120 per sample). The results are summarized below:
| Sample ID | Mean (ng/mL) | Repeatability | | Between Day | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| Panel 1 | 5.6 | 0.11 | 1.9 | 0.19 | 3.3 | 0.53 | 9.4 |
| Panel 2 | 17.4 | 0.29 | 1.7 | 0.58 | 3.3 | 1.38 | 7.9 |
| Panel 3 | 169.9 | 2.03 | 1.2 | 6.17 | 3.6 | 9.17 | 5.4 |
| Panel 4 | 1046.0 | 14.92 | 1.4 | 30.36 | 2.9 | 69.60 | 6.7 |
| Panel 5 | 391.9 | 6.46 | 1.6 | 10.23 | 2.6 | 22.62 | 5.8 |
| Panel 6 | 1807.0 | 35.34 | 2.1 | 68.74 | 3.8 | 134.35 | 7.4 |
| Kit control 1 | 31.3 | 0.45 | 1.4 | 1.18 | 3.8 | 2.14 | 6.8 |
| Kit control 2 | 287.3 | 5.01 | 1.7 | 13.48 | 4.7 | 18.79 | 6.5 |
| Sample ID | Mean (ng/mL) | Between Lot | | Between Instrument | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| Panel 1 | 5.6 | 0.14 | 2.5 | 0.46 | 8.2 | 0.53 | 9.4 |
| Panel 2 | 17.4 | 0.59 | 3.4 | 1.06 | 6.1 | 1.38 | 7.9 |
| Panel 3 | 169.9 | 6.47 | 3.8 | 0 | 0 | 9.17 | 5.4 |
| Panel 4 | 1046.0 | 60.82 | 5.8 | 0 | 0 | 69.60 | 6.7 |
| Panel 5 | 391.9 | 19.10 | 4.9 | 0 | 0 | 22.62 | 5.8 |
| Panel 6 | 1807.0 | 108.87 | 6.0 | 0 | 0 | 134.35 | 7.4 |
| Kit control 1 | 31.3 | 1.00 | 3.2 | 1.41 | 4.5 | 2.14 | 6.8 |
| Kit control 2 | 287.3 | 12.10 | 4.2 | 0 | 0 | 18.79 | 6.5 |
K193650 - Page 5 of 10
{5}
K193650 - Page 6 of 10
2. Linearity:
Linearity studies were conducted to evaluate the linearity consulting CLSI EP06-A. Four serum samples were evaluated to interrogate the entire measuring range: they were approximately 50, 500, 1500, and 2000 ng/mL. For each sample, a series of seven evenly spaced dilutions were prepared by mixing a ferritin-free serum and a high serum pool. All samples were tested in triplicate on the LIAISON analyzer. The linear and polynomial regression analyses of the mean observed reads (y) against the mean expected values (x) was performed. The percent recovery obtained for all dilutions for each sample was always between 90–110% and no 2nd or 3rd order polynomial fit was statistically better than a linear fit at the 5% significance level for any of the samples used in the study. The linear equations generated are shown below:
| | Slope (95^{th} CI) | Intercept (95^{th} CI) | Correlation coefficient | Sample Range |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Sample A (~50 ng/mL) | 0.99 (0.95–1.03) | 0.27 (-0.41–1.25) | 1.00 | 1.5–44.9 |
| Sample B (~500 ng/mL) | 1.00 (0.91–1.11) | -0.00 (-9.55–20.53) | 0.997 | 1.2–506.0 |
| Sample C (~1500 ng/mL) | 1.02 (0.98–1.05) | 0.03 (-14.50–33.40) | 1.00 | 1.4–1561.0 |
| Sample D (~2000 ng/mL) | 1.01 (0.98–1.04) | -1.40 (-26.6–51.2) | 1.00 | 1.4–2095.0 |
Extended Range:
An extended range study was conducted using five serum samples at concentrations: ranging from 1938 ng/mL, 25013 ng/mL, 50,009 ng/mL, 75,000 ng/mL, and 100,000 ng/mL. The samples were diluted directly using the LIAISON XL Analyzer instrument with Specimen Diluent present on board, in a ratio of 1:50. Each diluted sample was tested in triplicate. The results of diluted samples were compared to the expected concentration. The percent recovery of the tested samples ranged from 99% to 108%.
3. Analytical Specificity/Interference:
Interference studies were conducted according to CLSI EP07-A2 and CLSI EP37-A to evaluate the performance of the LIAISON Ferritin assay in the presence of endogenous and other potential interfering substances including commonly used drugs. Aliquots from three human serum sample pools with ferritin concentrations of approximately 20 ng/mL, 200 ng/mL, and 2000 ng/mL were split and spiked with interferent solvent and one was spiked with potential interferents. Each sample/substance combination was tested in replicates of 18, with the exception of HAMA and RF which were tested in replicates of six. The sponsor defines non-significant interference as within ± 10% bias between the mean spiked sample value and the mean control value. The following substances did not show significant interference at the concentrations listed:
{6}
| Endogenous Substances: | Concentration Tested |
| --- | --- |
| Human albumin | 60 mg/mL |
| Triglyceride | 30 mg/mL |
| Hemoglobin | 10 mg/mL |
| Conjugated bilirubin | 0.2 mg/mL |
| Unconjugated bilirubin | 0.2 mg/mL |
| Human anti-mouse antibodies (HAMA) | 54.5 μg/ml |
| Rheumatoid Factor (RF) | 33.1 IU/mL |
| Exogenous Substance: | Concentration Tested |
| Acetominophen | 0.2 mg/mL |
| Acetylsalicylic acid | 0.5 μg/ml |
| Ampillicin | 53.0 μg/mL |
| L-Ascorbic acid | 1.76 mg/mL |
| Dobesilate calcium monohydrate | 33.3 μg/mL |
| Ferrous sulfate | 15.2 μg/mL |
| Ibuprofen | 500.0 μg/mL |
| Levodopa | 256.0 μg/mL |
| Methotrexate hydrate | 909.0 μg/mL |
| Metronidazole | 119.0 μg/mL |
| N-Acety-L cysteine | 2.87 mg/mL |
| Phenylbutazone | 200 μg/mL |
| Prednisone | 180.0 μg/mL |
| Rifampicin | 64.3 μg/mL |
| Theophylline | 40.0 μg/mL |
| Valproinacid | 505.0 μg/mL |
4. Assay Reportable Range:
The assay reportable range is 0.46 ng/mL to 2200.00 ng/mL. The manufacturer recommends values below 0.46 ng/mL should be reported as <0.46 ng/mL.
5. Traceability, Stability, Expected Values (Controls, Calibrators, or Methods):
Traceability:
The LIAISON Ferritin Assay is traceable to the WHO reference standard 94/572.
Stability:
Real-time shelf-life stability testing supports a shelf-life of 24 months for unopened reagents stored at the labeling recommendation (2–8°C). Opened assay component stability studies
K193650 - Page 7 of 10
{7}
support the claims that the reagents can be stored at the labeling recommendation (2–8°C) for 8 weeks.
Testing serum, SST serum, and Li-heparin samples demonstrated the samples are stable for one month at -20°C; at 20–25°C (i.e., room temperature) up to 24 hours; and at 2–8°C up to seven days.
## 6. Detection Limit:
The limit of blank (LoB), limit of detection (LoD) and limit of quantitation (LoQ) studies were conducted using serum samples.
A LoB study was conducted using two reagent lots and five serum samples stripped of ferritin. The blank samples were tested over four runs (triplicate measurements/sample/run) over three days yielding 60 results per reagent lot (N=60 measurements per lot, 120 measurements per instrument). The four runs for each reagent lot were repeated on a second different LIAISON XL Analyzer, for a total of 240 measurements. The LoB was calculated for each of the two reagent lots using the equation from the CLSI EP17-A2 as follows:
$$
\mathrm{LoB} = \frac{\text{Mean (Blank Dose) + 1.653} \times \text{Standard Deviation (Blank Dose)}}{\text{The claimed LoB for the candidate device is } 0.004\ \mathrm{ng/mL}, \text{ the higher of the two kit lots.}}
$$
A LoD study was conducted using two reagent lots and four human serum samples with ferritin concentration ranging from 0.002 ng/mL to 0.303 ng/mL. Each sample was tested in triplicate in four runs over three days (12 replicates per sample per reagent lot) yielding a total of 48 results per reagent lot. The four runs for each reagent lot were repeated on a second different LIAISON XL Analyzer, for a total of 96 measurements. The LoD was calculated for each of the two reagent lots using the equation from the CLSI EP17-A2 as follows:
$$
\mathrm{LoD} = \frac{\mathrm{LoB} + 1.655 \times \text{Standard Deviation (Sample Dose)}}{\text{The overall assay's LoD was defined as the highest of the two kit lots LoD. The claimed LoD is } 0.073\ \mathrm{ng/mL}.
$$
A LoQ study was conducted using nine different samples ranging from 0.000 to 3.388 ng/mL. Each sample was tested in triplicate in four runs over four days (12 replicates per sample per reagent lot per instrument) yielding a total of 108 results per reagent lot per instrument. Two lots were tested on three instruments. The LoQ was estimated using the precision profile of the samples according to CLSI EP17-A2. The sponsor defined the LoQ as the concentration of ferritin showing an imprecision of 20%. The overall assay's LoQ was defined as the highest of the three (3) kit lots LoQ. The claimed LoQ is 0.461 ng/mL.
## 7. Assay Cut-Off:
Not applicable
## B Comparison Studies:
1. Method Comparison with Predicate Device:
A method comparison study was performed by testing 173 human serum samples in
K193650 - Page 8 of 10
{8}
tested in the study spanned the claimed measuring range and covered medical decision points. The ferritin concentration in the samples tested in the study ranged from 2.0 ng/mL to 1932.0 ng/mL with the candidate device and 1.4 ng/mL to 1920.0 ng/mL with the predicate device. The results of the Passing-Bablok regression analysis are as shown below:
| N | Slope (95% CI) | Intercept (95% CI) | R² |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 173 | 0.96 (0.95–0.98) | -1.12 (-2.13 – -0.32) | 0.995 |
## 2. Matrix Comparison:
A study comparing serum, SST serum, and lithium heparin plasma was performed using 43 matched samples (37 native and 6 contrived) covering the measuring range (3.8–1946 ng/mL, serum). A Passing-Bablok linear regression analysis is shown below:
| | Slope (95% CI) | Intercept (95% CI) | Pearson r |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Serum vs. SST | 1.00 (0.97–1.04) | 0.02 (-0.77– 0.64) | 0.999 |
| Serum vs. Li-heparin | 0.98 (0.94 – 0.99) | -1.73 (-2.14– -0.52) | 0.999 |
## C Clinical Studies:
1. Clinical Sensitivity:
Not applicable
2. Clinical Specificity:
Not applicable
## D Clinical Cut-Off:
Not applicable
## E Expected Values/Reference Range:
Previously established ferritin reference ranges were verified by testing 78 serum specimens (39 female, 39 male) collected from five different sites in the U.S. The specimens were selected to reflect typical racial/ethnic distribution within the U.S. using www.census.gov as a reference.
| | N | Age Range (years) | Median (ng/mL) | 95^{th} Percentile |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Female | 39 | 18–92 | 52.2 | 6.3–317.1 ng/mL |
| Male | 39 | 21–82 | 124.3 | 3.6–362.4 ng/mL |
In the labeling, the sponsor states, "It is recommended that each laboratory establish its own range of expected values for the population taken into consideration."
K193650 - Page 9 of 10
{9}
VIII Proposed Labeling:
The labeling supports the finding of substantial equivalence for this device.
IX Conclusion:
The submitted information in this premarket notification is complete and supports a substantial equivalence decision.
K193650 - Page 10 of 10
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.