Diazyme Immunoglobulin A Assay; Diazyme Immunoglobulin G Assay; Diazyme Immunoglobulin M Assay
K252336 · Diazyme Laboratories, Inc. · Apr 24, 2026 · IM
Device Facts
Record ID
K252336
Device Name
Diazyme Immunoglobulin A Assay; Diazyme Immunoglobulin G Assay; Diazyme Immunoglobulin M Assay
Applicant
Diazyme Laboratories, Inc.
Decision Date
Apr 24, 2026
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Indications for Use
Diazyme Immunoglobulin A Assay is intended as an immunoturbidimetric assay for the quantitative determination of Immunoglobulin A (IgA) in human serum. Measurement of IgA aids in the diagnosis of abnormal protein metabolism and the body’s inability to resist infectious agents. For in vitro diagnostics use only. Diazyme Immunoglobulin G Assay is intended as an immunoturbidimetric assay for the quantitative determination of Immunoglobulin G (IgG) in human serum. Measurement of IgG aids in the diagnosis of abnormal protein metabolism and the body’s inability to resist infectious agents. For in vitro diagnostics use only. Diazyme Immunoglobulin M Assay is intended as an immunoturbidimetric assay for the quantitative determination of Immunoglobulin M (IgM) in human serum. Measurement of IgM aids in the diagnosis of abnormal protein metabolism and the body’s inability to resist infectious agents. For in vitro diagnostics use only.
Device Story
Quantitative immunoturbidimetric assays for IgA, IgG, and IgM in human serum; reagents contain specific antibodies that react with target immunoglobulin antigens to form insoluble immune complexes; turbidity measured spectrophotometrically on Roche cobas c 701 analyzer; turbidity proportional to analyte concentration; used in clinical laboratories by trained personnel; results aid clinicians in diagnosing protein metabolism disorders and immune deficiencies; benefits include standardized, automated quantification of immunoglobulins.
Clinical Evidence
Bench testing only. Performance validated via precision (CLSI EP05-A3), linearity (CLSI EP06), interference (CLSI EP07), and detection limits (CLSI EP17-A2). Method comparison against predicate devices (N=127 for IgA, N=152 for IgG, N=132 for IgM) showed strong correlation (R² ≥ 0.9714).
Technological Characteristics
Immunoturbidimetric assay; utilizes specific antibodies for IgA, IgG, and IgM detection; quantitative measurement via spectrophotometry; intended for use on automated clinical chemistry analyzers.
Indications for Use
Indicated for quantitative determination of IgA, IgG, and IgM in human serum to aid in the diagnosis of abnormal protein metabolism and immune deficiency in adult populations.
Submission Summary (Full Text)
{0}
FDA
U.S. FOOD & DRUG
ADMINISTRATION
# 510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION DECISION SUMMARY
ASSAY ONLY
## I Background Information:
A 510(k) Number
K252336
B Applicant
Diazyme Laboratories, Inc.
C Proprietary and Established Names
Diazyme Immunoglobulin A Assay
Diazyme Immunoglobulin G Assay
Diazyme Immunoglobulin M Assay
D Regulatory Information
| Product Code(s) | Classification | Regulation Section | Panel |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| CZP | Class II | 21 CFR 866.5510 - Immunoglobulins A, G, M, D, and E Immunological Test System | IM - Immunology |
| DEW | Class II | 21 CFR 866.5510 - Immunoglobulins A, G, M, D, and E Immunological Test System | IM - Immunology |
| CFN | Class II | 21 CFR 866.5510 - Immunoglobulins A, G, M, D, and E Immunological Test System | IM - Immunology |
## II Submission/Device Overview:
A Purpose for Submission:
New Assays
B Measurand:
Immunoglobulin A (IgA)
Immunoglobulin G (IgG)
Immunoglobulin M (IgM)
Food and Drug Administration
10903 New Hampshire Avenue
Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002
www.fda.gov
{1}
C Type of Test:
Quantitative immunoturbidimetric assay
III Intended Use/Indications for Use:
A Intended Use(s):
See Indications for Use below.
B Indication(s) for Use:
Diazyme Immunoglobulin A Assay is intended as an immunoturbidimetric assay for the quantitative determination of Immunoglobulin A (IgA) in human serum. Measurement of IgA aids in the diagnosis of abnormal protein metabolism and the body’s inability to resist infectious agents. For in vitro diagnostics use only.
Diazyme Immunoglobulin G Assay is intended as an immunoturbidimetric assay for the quantitative determination of Immunoglobulin G (IgG) in human serum. Measurement of IgG aids in the diagnosis of abnormal protein metabolism and the body’s inability to resist infectious agents. For in vitro diagnostics use only.
Diazyme Immunoglobulin M Assay is intended as an immunoturbidimetric assay for the quantitative determination of Immunoglobulin M (IgM) in human serum. Measurement of IgM aids in the diagnosis of abnormal protein metabolism and the body’s inability to resist infectious agents. For in vitro diagnostics use only.
C Special Conditions for Use Statement(s):
Rx - For Prescription Use Only
D Special Instrument Requirements:
Roche cobas c 701 (K100853)
IV Device/System Characteristics:
A Device Description:
Diazyme Immunoglobulin A (IgA) Assay:
- Reagent 1: Tris Buffer pH 7.5 (≥ 10 mmol/L), Sodium Chloride (≥ 123.20 mmol/L), PEG, and preservative
- Reagent 2: Tris Buffer pH 7.5 (≥ 18.16 mmol/L), Anti IgA antibody, and preservative
Diazyme Immunoglobulin G (IgG) Assay:
- Reagent 1: Tris Buffer pH 7.6 (≥ 18.16 mmol/l), Sodium Chloride (≥ 123.20 mmol/l), PEG, and preservative
K252336 - Page 2 of 12
{2}
- Reagent 2: Tris Buffer, Anti IgG antibody, and preservative
Diazyme Immunoglobulin M (IgM) Assay:
- Reagent 1: Tris Buffer pH 8.0 (≥ 10 mmol/l), Sodium Chloride (≥ 100 mmol/l), PEG, and preservative
- Reagent 2: Tris Buffer pH 7.5 (≥ 10 mmol/l), IgM antibody, and preservative
All assays' calibrators and control materials are sold separately.
## B Principle of Operation:
The Diazyme IgA, IgG, and IgM assays are based on the reaction between the specific immunoglobulin antigen and its corresponding antibody to form an insoluble immune complex. The resulting turbidity is measured spectrophotometrically. In each assay, the amount of complex formed, and thus the degree of turbidity, is directly proportional to the amount of the respective immunoglobulin (IgA, IgG, or IgM) present in the sample.
## V Substantial Equivalence Information:
### A Predicate Device Name(s):
K-ASSAY IgA Assay; K-ASSAY IgG Assay; K-ASSAY IgM Assay
### B Predicate 510(k) Number(s):
K993213
### C Comparison with Predicate(s):
Diazyme Immunoglobulin A Assay:
| Device & Predicate Device(s): | K252336
(Candidate Device) | K993213
(Predicate Device) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Device Trade Name | Diazyme Immunoglobulin A Assay | K-ASSAY IgA Assay |
| General Device Characteristic Similarities | | |
| Intended Use/Indications For Use | Diazyme Immunoglobulin A Assay is intended as an immunoturbidimetric assay for the quantitative determination of Immunoglobulin A (IgA) in human serum. Measurement of IgA aids in the diagnosis of abnormal protein metabolism and the body's inability to resist infectious agents. For in vitro diagnostics use only. | The K-ASSAY IgA Assay is intended to be used for the quantitative determination of IgA in human serum by immunoturbidimetric assay. Measurement of IgA aids in the diagnosis of abnormal protein metabolism and the body's lack of ability to resist infectious agents. FOR IN VITRO DIAGNOSTIC USE. |
| Test Type | Quantitative | Same |
K252336 - Page 3 of 12
{3}
Diazyme Immunoglobulin G Assay:
| Device & Predicate Device(s): | K252336
(Candidate Device) | K993281
(Predicate Device) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Device Trade Name | Diazyme Immunoglobulin G Assay | K-ASSAY IgG Assay |
| General Device Characteristic Similarities | | |
| Intended Use/Indications For Use | Diazyme Immunoglobulin G Assay is intended as an immunoturbidimetric assay for the quantitative determination of Immunoglobulin G (IgG) in human serum. Measurement of IgG aids in the diagnosis of abnormal protein metabolism and the body’s inability to resist infectious agents. For in vitro diagnostics use only. | The K-ASSAY IgG Assay is intended to be used for the quantitative determination of IgG in human serum by immunoturbidimetric assay. Measurement of IgG aids in the diagnosis of abnormal protein metabolism and the body’s lack of ability to resist infectious agents. FOR IN VITRO DIAGNOSTIC USE. |
| Test Type | Quantitative | Same |
| Specimen Type | Human serum | Same |
| Test Principle | Immunoturbidimetric | Same |
| General Device Characteristic Differences | | |
| Linearity range | 100 – 3,200 mg/dL | 100 – 4,500 mg/dL |
Diazyme Immunoglobulin M Assay:
| Device & Predicate Device(s): | K252336
(Candidate Device) | K993323
(Predicate Device) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Device Trade Name | Diazyme Immunoglobulin M Assay | K-ASSAY IgM Assay |
| General Device Characteristic Similarities | | |
| Intended Use/Indications For Use | Diazyme Immunoglobulin M Assay is intended as an immunoturbidimetric assay for the quantitative determination of Immunoglobulin M (IgM) in human serum. Measurement of IgM aids in the diagnosis of abnormal protein metabolism and the body’s inability to resist infectious agents. For in vitro diagnostics use only. | The K-ASSAY IgM Assay is intended to be used for the quantitative determination of IgM in human serum by immunoturbidimetric assay. Measurement of IgM aids in the diagnosis of abnormal protein metabolism and the body’s lack of ability to resist infectious agents. FOR IN VITRO DIAGNOSTIC USE. |
K252336 - Page 4 of 12
{4}
| Device & Predicate Device(s): | K252336
(Candidate Device) | K993323
(Predicate Device) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Test Type | Quantitative | Same |
| Specimen Type | Human serum | Same |
| Test Principle | Immunoturbidimetric | Same |
| General Device Characteristic Differences | | |
| Linearity range | 13.5 – 350 mg/dL | 10 – 350 mg/dL |
## VI Standards/Guidance Documents Referenced:
The following Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guidelines were used:
- CLSI EP05-A3: Evaluation of Precision of Quantitative Measurement Procedures; Approved Guideline – Third Edition
- CLSI EP06, 2nd ed.: Evaluation of Linearity of Quantitative Measurement, Approved Guideline – Second Edition
- CLSI EP07, 3rd ed.: Interference Testing in Clinical Chemistry; Approved Guideline – Third Edition
- CLSI EP09-A3: Method Comparison and Bias Estimation Using Patient Samples: Approved Guideline – Third Edition
- CLSI EP17-A2: Evaluation of Detection Capability for Clinical Laboratory Measurement Procedures; Approved Guideline – Second Edition
- CLSI EP25, 2nd ed: Evaluation of Stability of In Vitro Medical Laboratory Test Reagent Reagents– Second Edition
- CLSI EP28-A3c: Defining, Establishing, and Verifying Reference Intervals in the Clinical Laboratory; Approved Guideline – Third Edition
- CLSI EP37, Supplemental Tables for Interference Testing in Clinical Chemistry – First Edition
## VII Performance Characteristics (if/when applicable):
### A Analytical Performance:
1. Precision/Reproducibility:
a. Within-laboratory precision
The within-laboratory precision for the Diazyme IgA Assay, Diazyme IgG Assay, Diazyme IgM Assay was conducted following CLSI EP05-A3. A panel of five human sera samples for the Diazyme IgA and IgM assays and a panel of six human sera samples
K252336 - Page 5 of 12
{5}
for the Diazyme IgG assay covering the analytical measuring range with levels around the medical decision points were tested in duplicate per run, two runs per day for 20 days using three reagent lots (N=80 x 3 lots). The standard deviation (SD) and %CV of the within-run, between-run, between-day, and total within-laboratory imprecision were calculated for each sample. The within-laboratory precision for each assay using a representative reagent lot (N=80) is shown in the following table:
Diazyme IgA Assay:
| Sample | Mean (mg/dL) | N | Within-Run | | Between-Run | | Between-Day | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 1 | 59.1 | 80 | 0.9 | 1.5 | 0.8 | 1.3 | 3.6 | 6.1 | 3.8 | 6.4 |
| 2 | 74.7 | 80 | 1.6 | 2.2 | 1.3 | 1.7 | 4.4 | 5.9 | 4.9 | 6.5 |
| 3 | 91.1 | 80 | 1.8 | 2.0 | 1.6 | 1.7 | 3.3 | 3.6 | 4.0 | 4.4 |
| 4 | 287.2 | 80 | 6.0 | 2.1 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 18.5 | 6.5 | 19.5 | 6.8 |
| 5 | 516.2 | 80 | 10.1 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 26.2 | 5.1 | 28.1 | 5.4 |
Diazyme IgG Assay:
| Sample | Mean (mg/dL) | N | Within-Run | | Between-Run | | Between-Day | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 1 | 262.9 | 80 | 6.7 | 2.6 | 5.2 | 2.0 | 17.2 | 6.6 | 19.2 | 7.3 |
| 2 | 797.6 | 80 | 34.7 | 4.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 37.7 | 4.7 | 51.3 | 6.4 |
| 3 | 1187.4 | 80 | 40.9 | 3.5 | 12.8 | 1.1 | 38.0 | 3.2 | 57.3 | 4.8 |
| 4 | 2192.4 | 80 | 78.9 | 3.6 | 29.0 | 1.3 | 69.2 | 3.2 | 108.9 | 5.0 |
| 5 | 2943.1 | 80 | 50.8 | 1.7 | 49.3 | 1.7 | 24.8 | 0.8 | 75.0 | 2.6 |
| 6 | 521.6 | 80 | 16.2 | 3.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 10.2 | 2.0 | 19.1 | 3.7 |
Dizyme IgM Assay:
| Sample | Mean (mg/dL) | N | Within-Run | | Between-Run | | Between-Day | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 1 | 38.7 | 80 | 1.1 | 2.9 | 2.3 | 5.9 | 2.4 | 6.1 | 3.5 | 8.9 |
| 2 | 50.0 | 80 | 1.1 | 2.3 | 2.0 | 4.1 | 3.5 | 7.0 | 4.2 | 8.4 |
| 3 | 162.5 | 80 | 2.2 | 1.3 | 1.9 | 1.2 | 5.0 | 3.1 | 5.8 | 3.5 |
| 4 | 227.4 | 80 | 2.2 | 1.0 | 4.2 | 1.8 | 7.0 | 3.1 | 8.4 | 3.7 |
| 5 | 343.5 | 80 | 3.5 | 1.0 | 1.6 | 0.5 | 3.9 | 1.1 | 5.5 | 1.6 |
b. Lot-to-lot imprecision
The lot-to-lot precision for each assay, following the procedure described above, is summarized in the table below:
Diazyme IgA Assay:
| Sample | Mean (mg/dL) | N | Within-Run | | Between-Run | | Between-Day | | Between-Lot | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 1 | 58.12 | 240 | 0.96 | 1.7 | 0.62 | 1.1 | 3.35 | 5.8 | 0.79 | 1.4 | 3.63 | 6.3 |
| 2 | 74.84 | 240 | 1.43 | 1.9 | 1.35 | 1.8 | 5.68 | 7.6 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 6.01 | 8.0 |
| 3 | 90.06 | 240 | 1.83 | 2.0 | 1.84 | 2.0 | 3.60 | 4.0 | 1.05 | 1.2 | 4.56 | 5.1 |
| 4 | 290.27 | 240 | 5.17 | 1.8 | 2.81 | 1.0 | 22.59 | 7.8 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 23.35 | 8.0 |
| 5 | 519.52 | 240 | 9.57 | 1.8 | 2.55 | 0.5 | 21.83 | 4.2 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 23.97 | 4.6 |
K252336 - Page 6 of 12
{6}
Diazyme IgG Assay:
| Sample | Mean (mg/dL) | N | Within-Run | | Between-Run | | Between-Day | | Between-Lot | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 1 | 261.45 | 240 | 7.22 | 2.8 | 5.00 | 1.9 | 15.90 | 6.1 | 4.51 | 1.7 | 18.72 | 7.2 |
| 2 | 533.52 | 240 | 14.89 | 2.8 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 17.16 | 3.2 | 10.65 | 2.0 | 25.09 | 4.7 |
| 3 | 799.24 | 240 | 31.77 | 4.0 | 6.35 | 0.8 | 32.62 | 4.1 | 10.34 | 1.3 | 47.12 | 5.9 |
| 4 | 1186.74 | 240 | 46.57 | 3.9 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 40.75 | 3.4 | 21.95 | 1.9 | 65.66 | 5.5 |
| 5 | 2193.18 | 240 | 73.86 | 3.4 | 13.13 | 0.6 | 86.11 | 3.9 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 114.20 | 5.2 |
| 6 | 2952.36 | 240 | 72.57 | 2.5 | 37.75 | 1.3 | 52.80 | 1.8 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 97.36 | 3.3 |
Dizyme IgM Assay:
| Sample | Mean (mg/dL) | N | Within-Run | | Between-Run | | Between-Day | | Between-Lot | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 1 | 39.27 | 240 | 1.11 | 2.8 | 1.79 | 4.6 | 3.26 | 8.3 | 0.84 | 2.1 | 3.97 | 10.1 |
| 2 | 51.95 | 240 | 1.01 | 2.0 | 1.70 | 3.3 | 3.95 | 7.6 | 1.74 | 3.3 | 4.75 | 9.1 |
| 3 | 168.24 | 240 | 2.62 | 1.6 | 1.72 | 1.0 | 5.01 | 3.0 | 5.44 | 3.2 | 8.03 | 4.8 |
| 4 | 232.70 | 240 | 2.62 | 1.1 | 3.55 | 1.5 | 8.37 | 3.6 | 4.33 | 1.9 | 10.40 | 4.5 |
| 5 | 338.25 | 240 | 3.58 | 1.1 | 1.92 | 0.6 | 8.83 | 2.6 | 5.04 | 1.5 | 10.94 | 3.2 |
c. Site-to-Site Reproducibility
The site-to-site reproducibility study was conducted following CLSI EP05-A3. A panel of five human sera samples for the Diazyme IgA and IgM assays and a panel of seven human sera samples for the Diazyme IgG assay, selected to cover the analytical measuring range and include levels around the medical decision points, was tested across three different Roche cobas c701 analyzers by three different operators, with one run per day, five replicates per run over five days using one lot of reagents, yielding a total of 75 datapoints. The standard deviation (SD) and $\% \mathrm{CV}$ of the within-run, between-day, between-site, and total imprecision were calculated for each sample. The site-to-site reproducibility results for each assay are summarized in the table below:
Diazyme IgA Assay:
| Sample | Mean (mg/dL) | N | Within-Run | | Between-Day | | Between-Site | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 1 | 64 | 75 | 0.88 | 1.4 | 3.78 | 5.9 | 5.19 | 8.1 | 6.48 | 10.2 |
| 2 | 77 | 75 | 1.05 | 1.4 | 3.78 | 4.9 | 6.57 | 8.5 | 7.65 | 9.9 |
| 3 | 82 | 75 | 0.99 | 1.2 | 4.12 | 5.0 | 6.42 | 7.8 | 7.69 | 9.4 |
| 4 | 280 | 75 | 3.54 | 1.3 | 12.00 | 4.3 | 4.91 | 1.8 | 13.44 | 4.8 |
| 5 | 535 | 75 | 6.74 | 1.3 | 15.16 | 2.8 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 15.61 | 2.9 |
Diazyme IgG Assay:
| Sample | Mean (mg/dL) | N | Within-Run | | Between-Day | | Between-Site | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 1 | 282 | 75 | 3.85 | 1.4 | 11.39 | 4.0 | 20.93 | 7.4 | 24.14 | 8.6 |
| 2 | 487 | 75 | 10.65 | 2.2 | 20.45 | 4.2 | 31.79 | 6.5 | 39.27 | 8.1 |
| 3 | 639 | 75 | 12.79 | 2.0 | 27.17 | 4.3 | 33.86 | 5.3 | 45.25 | 7.1 |
K252336 - Page 7 of 12
{7}
| Sample | Mean (mg/dL) | N | Within-Run | | Between-Day | | Between-Site | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 4 | 1053 | 75 | 35.94 | 3.4 | 35.55 | 3.4 | 23.19 | 2.2 | 55.61 | 5.3 |
| 5 | 1734 | 75 | 56.16 | 3.2 | 63.18 | 3.6 | 7.98 | 0.5 | 84.91 | 4.9 |
| 6 | 2319 | 75 | 83.93 | 3.6 | 61.39 | 2.6 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 102.35 | 4.4 |
| 7 | 2934 | 75 | 85.07 | 2.9 | 58.94 | 2.0 | 77.49 | 2.6 | 129.29 | 4.4 |
Dizyme IgM Assay:
| Sample | Mean (mg/dL) | N | Within-Run | | Between-Day | | Between-Site | | Total | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV | SD | %CV |
| 1 | 43 | 75 | 1.40 | 3.3 | 1.13 | 2.6 | 2.83 | 6.6 | 3.36 | 7.8 |
| 2 | 60 | 75 | 1.99 | 3.3 | 2.12 | 3.5 | 2.91 | 4.8 | 4.12 | 6.8 |
| 3 | 147 | 75 | 1.83 | 1.2 | 7.41 | 5.0 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 7.62 | 5.2 |
| 4 | 201 | 75 | 2.59 | 1.3 | 7.12 | 3.5 | 1.44 | 0.7 | 7.71 | 3.8 |
| 5 | 328 | 75 | 2.77 | 0.8 | 5.76 | 1.8 | 7.53 | 2.3 | 9.87 | 3.0 |
## 2. Linearity:
Linearity of each Diazyme IgA, IgG, and IgM assay was evaluated following CLSI EP06-Ed2. For each assay, eleven linearity levels were prepared by mixing a high and low human serum sample in proportional increments to create a dilution series spanning the analytical measuring range. All samples were assayed in quadruplicate within a single run on a Roche cobas c701 analyzer. The linearity results for each assay are summarized in the following tables.
Diazyme IgA Assay:
| Dilution Range (mg/dL) | Slope (95% CI) | Intercept (95% CI) | R² | % Deviation from Linearity |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 25.5 – 693.5 | 0.998 (0.988–1.007) | -0.271 (-1.212–0.670) | 0.9989 | -4.0 – 4.8% |
Diazyme IgG Assay:
| Dilution Range (mg/dL) | Slope (95% CI) | Intercept (95% CI) | R² | % Deviation from Linearity |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 99.25–3705.85 | 0.951 (0.934–0.967) | -6.781 (-10.263– -3.299) | 0.9861 | -9.3–10.3% |
Diazyme IgM Assay:
| Dilution Range (mg/dL) | Slope (95% CI) | Intercept (95% CI) | R² | % Deviation from Linearity |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 13.02 – 383.50 | 0.993 (0.977–1.010) | 9.666 (5.895–13.437) | 0.9976 | -4.1 – 7.7% |
The linearity supports the claimed analytical meaning interval (AMI) for each Diazyme IgA, IgG, and IgM assay shown in the table below:
K252336 - Page 8 of 12
{8}
| | Analytical Measuring Interval |
| --- | --- |
| Diazyme IgA Assay | 28.33 – 655.33 mg/dL |
| Diazyme IgG Assay | 100 – 3200 mg/dL |
| Diazyme IgM Assay | 13.5 – 350 mg/dL |
3. Analytical Specificity/Interference:
Interference testing of the assay in the presence of common endogenous and exogenous substances was performed following CLSI EP07-3rd Edition. For each assay, three samples (low, medium, and high) were tested with various concentrations of interfering substances. The control was the unspiked sample matrix tested under identical conditions alongside each spiked sample. All samples were tested in triplicate on one Roche cobas c 701 analyzer. No significant interference (< ±10% deviation from control) was observed. The results are summarized in the following table.
| Interferent | Diazyme IgA Assay | Diazyme IgG Assay | Diazyme IgM Assay |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Endogenous | | | |
| Bilirubin (Free) | 40 mg/dL | 40 mg/dL | 40 mg/dL |
| Bilirubin Conjugated | 40 mg/dL | 40 mg/dL | 40 mg/dL |
| Triglycerides | 1500 mg/dL | 1500 mg/dL | 1500 mg/dL |
| Hemoglobin | 1000 mg/dL | 1000 mg/dL | 1000 mg/dL |
| Rheumatoid Factor | 100 IU/mL | 75 IU/mL | 100 IU/mL |
| Exogenous | | | |
| Acetaminophen | 78 mg/dL | 78 mg/dL | 78 mg/dL |
| Acyclovir | 66 mg/dL | 66 mg/dL | 66 mg/dL |
| Amoxicillin | 140 mg/dL | 140 mg/dL | 140 mg/dL |
| Atorvastatin | 0.756 mg/dL | 0.756 mg/dL | 0.756 mg/dL |
| Diphenhydramine | 0.3 mg/dL | 0.3 mg/dL | 0.3 mg/dL |
| Fluconazole | 20 mg/dL | 20 mg/dL | 20 mg/dL |
| Ibuprofen | 360 mg/dL | 360 mg/dL | 360 mg/dL |
| Omeprazole | 8.4 mg/dL | 8.4 mg/dL | 8.4 mg/dL |
| Rituximab | 1 mg/dL | N/A | 1 mg/dL |
| Trimethoprim | 18 mg/dL | 18 mg/dL | 18 mg/dL |
4. Detection Limit:
Limit of Blank (LoB), Limit of Detection (LoD), and Limit of Quantitation (LoQ) of the Diazyme IgA, IgG, and IgM assays were assessed following CLSI EP17-A2.
The LoB for each assay was established by testing four blank serum samples – each prepared from individual human serum samples in which the analyte was depleted – in five replicates per day over three days on Roche cobas c701, generating 60 replicates per reagent lot. Three reagent lots were used for the Diazyme IgA Assay, while two reagent lots were used for the Diazyme IgG Assay and the Diazyme IgM Assay. The LoB was calculated as the 95th percentile of the ranked blank sample measurements, averaged across all reagent lots.
K252336 - Page 9 of 12
{9}
The LoD for each assay was established by testing four low-level serum samples in five replicates per day over three days on Roche cobas c701, generating 60 replicates per reagent lot. Three reagent lots were used for the Diazyme IgA Assay, while two reagent lots were used for the Diazyme IgG Assay and the Diazyme IgM Assay. The LoD was calculated using the equation: $$\mathrm{LoD} = \mathrm{LoB} + 1.65 \times \mathrm{SD}$$
The LoQ for each assay was established by testing low-level serum samples on the Roche Cobas c701 analyzer. For the IgA assay, four independent low-level serum samples were tested in triplicate per day over three days with two reagent lots. The LoQ was determined to meet the precision of CV of 20% and using the Westgard total error model (TE = |Bias| + 2s) against a predefined accuracy goal. For the IgG assay, four to six low-level serum samples were tested in five replicates per day over three days with two reagent lots. For the IgM assay, nine low-level serum samples were tested in five replicates per day over three days with two reagent lots. The LoQ for IgG and IgM assays were determined to meet the precision of CV of 20%.
The claimed LoB, LoD, and LoQ values are summarized in the table below.
| | LoB (mg/dL) | LoD (mg/dL) | LoQ (mg/dL) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Diazyme IgA Assay | 0.99 | 2.99 | 28.33 |
| Diazyme IgG Assay | 1.54 | 5.82 | 100 |
| Diazyme IgM Assay | 0.3 | 4.66 | 13.5 |
## 5. Assay Reportable Range:
The assay reportable range is the same as the measuring interval of each assay.
- Diazyme IgA Assay: 28.33 – 655.33 mg/dL
- Diazyme IgG Assay: 100 – 3,200 mg/dL
- Diazyme IgM Assay: 13.5 – 350 mg/dL
Samples with analyte concentrations exceeding the upper limit of the measuring range should be reported as greater than the upper limit (i.e., > 655.33 mg/dL for IgA, > 3,200 mg/dL for IgG, or > 350 mg/dL for IgM). Similarly, samples with analyte concentrations less than the lower limit of the measuring range should be reported as less than the lower limit (i.e., < 28.33 mg/dL for IgA, < 100 mg/dL for IgG, or < 13.5 mg/dL for IgM).
## 6. Traceability, Stability, Expected Values (Controls, Calibrators, or Methods):
a. Traceability:
All three Diazyme immunoglobulin assays are traceable to the international reference materials ERM-DA470k/IFCC.
b. Kit stability:
The stability study was conducted following CLSI EP25-A2.
**Shelf-life stability**: Reagent stability for the Diazyme IgA, IgG, and IgM assays was evaluated using both accelerated stability testing at 37°C and real-time stability testing at
K252336 - Page 10 of 12
{10}
2-8°C, with acceptance criteria requiring recovery within ±10%. The IgA reagents demonstrated stability for 16 days at 37°C, while the IgG and IgM reagents demonstrated stability for 14 days at 37°C. For the on-going real-time stability testing at 2-8°C, three lots of reagents are being evaluated for each assay, with two completed lots demonstrating stability for 12 months for all three assays at 2-8°C for the Diazyme IgA, IgG, and IgM assays.
*On-board stability*: Reagent on-board stability for the Diazyme IgA, IgG, and IgM assays was evaluated using one lot of reagents per assay loaded onto the Roche cobas c701 analyzer and stored in the instrument reagent chamber throughout the duration of each study. Controls and sample pools were tested at indicated time points, with recalibration performed at biweekly intervals. Results support an on-board stability claim of 4 weeks for the Diazyme IgA, IgG, and IgM assays.
7. Assay Cut-Off:
Not applicable
B. Comparison Studies:
1. Method Comparison with Predicate Device:
Method comparison studies were conducted for the Diazyme IgA, IgG, and IgM assays against their respective predicate devices following CLSI EP9-A3. A total of 127, 152, and 132 patient serum samples were tested for the IgA, IgG, and IgM assays, respectively, on the Roche cobas c701, and compared against the Kamiya K-ASSAY IgA, Kamiya K-ASSAY IgG, and Kamiya IgM K-Assay predicate devices run on the Beckman AU400. Deming regression analysis was performed, and results are summarized in the tables below.
Diazyme IgA Assay:
| N | Range (mg/dL)* | Slope (95% CI) | Intercept (95% CI) | R² |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 127 | 38 – 655 | 0.992 (0.970–1.014) | 1.3 (-5.8–8.3) | 0.9921 |
*Tested by predicate
Diazyme IgG Assay:
| N | Range (mg/dL)* | Slope (95% CI) | Intercept (95% CI) | R² |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 152 | 167 – 3017 | 1.067 (1.026–1.108) | -30.6 (-81.0–19.8) | 0.9714 |
*Tested by predicate
Diazyme IgM Assay:
| N | Range (mg/dL)* | Slope (95% CI) | Intercept (95% CI) | R² |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 132 | 19–312 | 0.994 (0.973–1.014) | 5.8 (2.9–8.7) | 0.9927 |
*Tested by predicate
2. Matrix Comparison:
Not applicable. Only human serum specimens are the intended sample type for the Diazyme IgA, IgG, and IgM Assays.
K252336 - Page 11 of 12
{11}
K252336 - Page 12 of 12
# D Clinical Studies:
1. Clinical Sensitivity:
Not applicable.
2. Clinical Specificity:
Not applicable.
3. Clinical Cut-Off:
Not applicable.
4. Other Clinical Supportive Data (When 1. and 2. Are Not Applicable):
Not applicable.
# E Expected Values/Reference Range:
Reference interval for the Diazyme IgA, IgG, and IgM assays was established following CLSI C28-A3 by using serum samples from apparently healthy adult males and females. The results are summarized in the table below:
| | N | Reference Interval |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Diazyme IgA Assay | 120 | 104 – 522 mg/dL |
| Diazyme IgG Assay | 129 | 640 – 1600 mg/dL |
| Diazyme IgM Assay | 122 | 52 – 217 mg/dL |
It is strongly recommended that each laboratory establish a normal range for the population in their region.
# 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.
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.