K973391 · Ventana Medical Systems, Inc. · DEM · Oct 3, 1997 · Immunology
Device Facts
Record ID
K973391
Device Name
CHEMMATE KAPPA
Applicant
Ventana Medical Systems, Inc.
Product Code
DEM · Immunology
Decision Date
Oct 3, 1997
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 866.5130
Device Class
Class 2
Indications for Use
The ChemMate™ Kappa (rabbit polyclonal anti-human kappa light chains) is intended for laboratory use to qualitatively identify by light microscopy human kappa light chains in immunoglobulin secreting plasma cells and plasmacytoid B Ivmphocytes in normal and pathological paraffin embedded tissues processed in zinc formalin, neutral buffered formalin, Bouin's or B5 fixative. 11.19.20 Positive results aid in the differential diagnosis, classification and immunophenotyping of lymphomas and must be interpreted by a pathologist within the context of clinical data, gross and microscopic morphological criteria and multiple chemical and immunohistochemical stains.
Device Story
ChemMate™ Kappa is a rabbit polyclonal antibody reagent used in immunohistochemical staining to detect human kappa light chains in paraffin-embedded tissue sections. The device is intended for laboratory use by trained personnel. It is designed for use with the ChemMate™ SDK605 or SDK305 Secondary Detection - Peroxidase/DAB kit and is optimized for the Techmate™ automated staining system. The antibody binds to free kappa light chains and those within intact immunoglobulins. Pathologists examine the resulting stained tissue samples via light microscopy. The presence of kappa light chain staining, when evaluated alongside clinical data, morphological criteria, and other immunohistochemical markers, assists in the differential diagnosis and immunophenotyping of lymphomas and lymphoproliferative disorders. The device provides qualitative information that helps distinguish between reactive lymphoid hyperplasia (typically polyclonal) and B-cell neoplasms (typically monoclonal).
Clinical Evidence
No clinical trials were conducted. Evidence is based on literature reviews of immunoperoxidase staining performance in various lymphoid tissues, including non-malignant lymphoid hyperplasia, B-cell neoplasms, plasmacytomas, and Hodgkin's disease. Studies cited (e.g., Picker et al., Hitzman et al., Harris et al.) demonstrate the utility of kappa/lambda light chain staining in differentiating monoclonal (neoplastic) from polyclonal (reactive) cell populations. Bench testing confirmed reproducibility across 281 tissue specimens.
Technological Characteristics
Rabbit polyclonal antibody to human kappa light chains. Optimized for use with ChemMate™ SDK605/SDK305 Secondary Detection - Peroxidase/DAB kits. Compatible with automated immunohistochemical staining systems (Techmate™). Designed for paraffin-embedded tissue sections fixed in zinc formalin, neutral buffered formalin, Bouin's, or B5 fixative. Qualitative detection via light microscopy.
Indications for Use
Indicated for laboratory use to qualitatively identify human kappa light chains in immunoglobulin-secreting plasma cells and plasmacytoid B lymphocytes in paraffin-embedded tissues (fixed in zinc formalin, neutral buffered formalin, Bouin's, or B5). Used as an aid in the differential diagnosis, classification, and immunophenotyping of lymphomas. Must be interpreted by a pathologist in the context of clinical data and other stains.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
An alpha-1-antitrypsin immunological test system is a device that consists of the reagents used to measure by immunochemical techniques the alpha-1-antitrypsin (a plasma protein) in serum, other body fluids, and tissues. The measurements aid in the diagnosis of several conditions including juvenile and adult cirrhosis of the liver. In addition, alpha-1-antitrypsin deficiency has been associated with pulmonary emphysema.
Submission Summary (Full Text)
{0}------------------------------------------------
KY13341
OCT - 3 1997
#### 510(k) Summary
Date: September 29, 1997
VENTANA MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC. 3865 North Business Center Drive Tucson, Arizona 85705
Telephone: (520) 887-2155 Facsimile: (520) 887-2558
Stephen A. Tillson, Ph.D. Contact: Vice President Scientific Affairs/ Quality Assurance
Registration #: 2028492
ChemMate™ Kappa Trade Name:
Class II
FOR IN VITRO DIAGNOSTIC USE. Intended Use:
The ChemMate™ Kappa (rabbit polyclonal anti-human kappa light chains) is intended for laboratory use to qualitatively identify by light microscopy human kappa light chains in immunoglobulin secreting plasma cells and plasmacytoid B Ivmphocytes in normal and pathological paraffin embedded tissues processed in zinc formalin, neutral buffered formalin, Bouin's or B5 fixative. 11.19.20 Positive results aid in the differential diagnosis, classification and immunophenotyping of lymphomas and must be interpreted by a pathologist within the context of clinical data, gross and microscopic morphological criteria and multiple chemical and immunohistochemical stains.
This antiserum has been optimally prediluted for use with the ChemMate™ SDK605 or SDK305 Secondary Detection - Peroxidase/DAB kit. Additionally, the prediluted ChemMate™ Kappa antibody as well as the ChemMate™ SDK605 Secondary Detection - Peroxidase/DAB kit has been optimized for use with the Techmate™ for automated immunohistochemical staining.
{1}------------------------------------------------
# 510K SUMMARY OF SAFETY AND EFFECTIVENESS
#### Summary and Explanation
ChemMate™ Kappa is comprised of a rabbit polyclonal antibody to human kappa light chains. The antibody reacts with free kappa light chains as well as kappa chains in intact immunoglobulin molecules.
In a large study involving paraffin-embedded tissues as well as frozen tissues and acetone fixed cryostat sections, Picker et al. demonstrated that 24 of 31 non-malignant, lymphoid hyperplasia cases, diagnosed by histologic criteria, co-expressed both kappa and lambda light chains. Six of these cases were uninterpretable, and one was light chain restricted. Further investigation of the light chain restricted case by Southern Blot analysis showed no clonal rearrangement of Ig genes, leading the authors to conclude that the results of this case were false positive. Positive cells included cells of primary follicles, mantle zones and dendritic reticulum cells. Most cells of germinal centers appeared negative. Additionally, 198 of 297 B-cell neoplasms were shown to be light chain restricted with 127 cases expressing kappa and 71 cases expressing lambda. Of the remaining 99 cases, 74 were light chain negative and 25 were uninterpretable.1
Hitzman et al. confirmed the usefulness of immunoperoxidase staining of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded bone marrow sections with antibodies against kappa (and lambda) light chains. Additionally, the value of utilizing these antibodies in the characterization of lymphoproliferative disorders was demonstrated. Results supported the premise that reactive plasmacytosis or lymphoid hyperplasia are generally characterized by polvclonal proliferations of cells positive for both kappa and lambda immunoglobulins and that B-cell neoplasms typically express either kappa or lambda intracellular immunoglobulins. In 10 reactive cases (5 plasmacytosis and 5 lymphocytosis cases), all were positively labeled by both kappa and lambda antibodies. In 76 bone marrow myeloma cases, 68 were monotypic (42 expressing kappa and 26 expressing lambda), one case was negative for both and 7 cases were biclonal. Of 8 lymphoma cases tested, 5 were monotypic (3 expressing kappa and 2 expressing lambda) and 3 were negative. including both of the poorly differentiated lymphocytic lymphomas. Six metastatic tumors with various origins were all negative for both kappa and lambda.2 And, in a study involving plasmacytomas. Petruch, et al. reported that of the 46 plasmacytomas containing neoplastic plasma cells, 24 expressed kappa light chains and the other 22 expressed lambda light chains.3
Harris et al.4 further substantiated the immunoreactivity of kappa and lambda in a study involving frozen sections of malignant lymphomas. They reported
{2}------------------------------------------------
that 15 out of 15 cases of nodular lymphoma were single light chain positive for either kappa (8 cases) or lambda (7 cases). Results of reactive lymph nodes did not reveal a monotypic phenotype, but instead revealed a dual expression of kappa and lambda labeling. This difference in staining allowed the differentiation of neoplastic and reactive tissues. In 31 cases of diffuse lymphoma, 24 exhibited monotypic staining for kappa (14 cases) or lambda (10 cases), 5 cases were negative for both and 2 cases were uninterpretable. In 18 cases of diffuse large cell lymphomas, kappa or lambda labeled all 16 Bcell cases (9 expressing kappa and 7 expressing lambda). Two T-cell cases were negative for both kappa and lambda.4
Findings reported by Mori et al. further expanded the immunoreactivity profile thus far presented for kappa (and lambda). In their study involving four cases of paraffin-embedded mantle zone lymphomas, immunohistochemistry was used to substantiate immunoglobulin phenotypes. Results revealed that all cases were monoclonal, 3 expressed kappa and 1 expressed lambda. These results were identical to those obtained from clinical serum findings. The immunoglobulin phenotype of the plasma cells surrounding the neoplastic nodules of the mantle zone lymphomas were also analyzed. In 2 cases, the plasma cells surrounding the nodules possessed the same monoclonal immunoqlobulins as the neoplastic cells in the nodules. In the other 2 cases, some of the plasma cells surrounding the nodules were polyclonal, but most possessed the same monoclonal immunogobulin as the cells of the nodules. 5 In a study conducted by Meis et al.6 in which kappa was also used as part of a panel of antibodies, formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphomas were evaluated. In 15 cases of Hodgkin's disease, the cytoplasm of Reed-Sternberg cells reacted positively in eight cases. Five of the eight cases were polyclonal, expressing both kappa and lambda light chains. In 10 cases of T-cell lymphoma, only one case was positive, exhibiting polyclonal expression of both kappa and lambda. It was suggested that the polyclonal large lymphocytes that were positive in this case might be attributed to the presence of neoplastic transformed B-lymphocytes, as opposed to the true conserved T-cell lineage cells. Seven of 10 B-cell lymphomas reacted positively for kappa and/or lambda. Of these, 1 case was polyclonal, 4 were kappa monotypic and 2 were lambda monotypic. All six monoclonal cases were large cell B-cell lymphomas. Cytoplasmic and membranous staining of varying intensities was seen in these cases. The one polyclonal case, a B-cell immunoblastic sarcoma (large cell B-cell lymphoma), showed light cytoplasmic staining of only rare tumor cells. In two histiocytic lymphoma cases, the cytoplasm of rare tumor cells was diffusely stained for both kappa and lambda. The authors cautioned that the immunostaining of kappa (and lambda) light chains is not always specific, all of the data must be considered when developing a differential diagnosis.6
{3}------------------------------------------------
#### Hodgkin's Disease
In a study by Rabia and Kahn' involving immunoperoxidase labeling of kappa (and lambda) among a panel of other antibodies, 15 formalin and B-5 fixed and 5 formalin fixed cases of Hodgkin's disease were evaluated. Results with kappa and lambda revealed polytvpic labeling of Reed-Sternberg cells and their monoclonal variants in 19 of the 20 cases. Such findings have lead some investigators to suggest that thev are transformed lymphocytes of B-cell lineage. The remaining case demonstrated monoclonal labeling. Reactive plasma cells in all cases labeled polytvpically for kappa and lambda and showed more intense cytoplasmic labeling than neoplastic cells. Most B-cell neoplasms possess monoclonal kappa or lambda light chains.
lmmunoelectronmicroscopy, however, has shown the presence of kappa (and lambda), along with albumin, diffusely in the cytoplasm of Reed Sternberg cells not associated with organelles involved with protein synthesis and storage. These low molecular weight proteins may be able to cross the cell membrane whereas larger molecules may not.8 Kadin, et al. demonstrated polyclonal Ig on the plasma membrane of Reed Sternberg cells and its internalization as well. The authors suggest this may be facilitated via Fc or complement receptors, followed by endocytosis. As a result of these observations, the B-cell origin of the Reed-Sternberg cell is not firmly established. 9
The use of immunoperoxidase labeling for kappa (and lambda) for determining the phenotype of specific cells should be accompanied by caution and careful consideration of the entire morphological and clinical picture, particularly since the presence of kappa or lambda may be as result of passive diffusion into neoplastic cells or as result of membrane damage or active phagoctyosis.7
In summary, the use of immunoperoxidase labeling for kappa and lambda in a panel of antibodies is a useful tool in the differentiation and immunophenotyping of lymphomas. However, the results should be interpreted within the context of clinical data, gross and microscopic morphological criteria and multiple chemical and immunohistochemical stains. This differential approach is of particular need since it has been established that the presence of kappa (and/ or lambda) may not be solely attributable to specific staining, but may in fact be result of passive diffusion into neoplastic cells or as result of membrane damage or active phagoctyosis. °
## Product Specific Limitations:
- 1. In poorly fixed tissue specimens, nonspecific staining of non-lymphoid tissues may be observed, particularly epithelium and smooth muscle.
{4}------------------------------------------------
- 2. Rare cases of T-cell lymphoma have been reported to stain positively for kappa and lambda light chains, polytypically. §
- 3. In Hodgkin's disease, some Reed-Sternberg cells have been reported as staining positively for kappa and/or lambda light chains.6
- 4. The use of immunoperoxidase labeling for kappa (and lambda) for determining the phenotype of specific cells should be accompanied by caution and careful consideration of the entire morphological and clinical picture, particularly since the presence of kappa or lambda may be a result of passive diffusion into neoplastic cells or as result of membrane damage or active phagoctvosis.6
- 5. Kappa and/or lambda-positive B-cells may be present in tissues other than those of lymphoid origin. Though these reactions are positive for kappa, interpretation should always be considered within the context of the predominant cell tvpe of the tissue in question11.
## Performance Characteristics:
Reproducibility: ChemMate™ Kappa, and ChemMate™ Negative Control Reagent have been tested on serial sections of 281 tissue specimens (both normal and tumor specimens were included in the study). Runs were performed a total of three times, with each run being performed on a different day. Consistent staining results were obtained.
Immunoreactivity: Kappa and lambda polytypic expression has been reported in non-malignant lymphoid hyperplasia with positive cells including cells of primary follicles, mantle zones and dendritic reticulum cells. Additionally, kappa reactivity has been reported in B-cell Ivmphomas, typically as monotypic, and exceptionally as polytypic expression10. Some plasmacytomas have also been reported as being reactive for kappa. For a more comprehensive review of reported kappa immunoreactivity, please refer to the Summary and Explanation and Product Specific Limitations sections.
## References:
- 1. Picker L. et al. Immunophenotypic criteria for the diagnosis of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Am J Path. 1987, 128:181
- 2. Hitzman J, et al. Immunoperoxidase staining of bone marrow sections. Cancer. 1981, 48:2438
- 3. Pertruch U, et al. Frequent expression of haemopoietic and nonhaemopoietic antigens by neoplastic plasma cells. An immunohistochemical study using formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue. Histopath. 1992, 20:35
{5}------------------------------------------------
- 4. Harris N, et al. Demonstration of immunoglobulin in malignant lymphomas. Am J Clin Path. 1982, 78:14
- 5. Mori N, et al. Immunohistochemical study of mantle zone lymphoma. Am J Clin Path. 1988, 89:143
- 6. Meis J, et al. A comprehensive marker study of large cell lymphoma, Hodgkin's disease and true histiocytic lymphoma in paraffin-embedded tissue. Am J Clin Path. 1986, 86:591
- 7. Rabia M and Kahn L. Immunohistochemistry of Hodgkin's disease. Cancer. 1983, 52:2064
- 8. Poppema S, et al. The significance of intracytoplasmic proteins in Reed-Sternberg cells. Cancer. 1978, 42:1793
- 9. Kadin ME, et al. Exogenous immunoglobulin and the macrophage origin of Reed-Sternberg cells in Hodgkin's disease. N Engl J Med. 1978, 299:1208
- 10. Cleary ML, et al. Monoclonality of lymphoproliferative lesions in cardiactransplant recipients. NEJM 1984; 310:477
- 11. Ernst PB, et al. Immunity in mucosal tissues. Basic and Clinical Immunology, 6th edition, chapter 12. Stites, DP, et al. Editors. Norwalk, CT, Appleton & Lang Press, 1987:159
{6}------------------------------------------------
#### DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
Image /page/6/Picture/1 description: The image contains the words "Public Health Service". The text is black and the background is white. The text is aligned to the left.
Image /page/6/Picture/2 description: The image is a seal for the Department of Health & Human Services - USA. The seal is circular and contains the text "DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES - USA" around the perimeter. In the center of the seal is a stylized image of three human figures, one behind the other.
OCT - 3 1997
Food and Drug Administration 2098 Gaither Road Rockville MD 20850
Stephen A. Tillson, Ph.D. Vice President Scientific Affair/ Quality Assurance VENTANA MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC. 3865 North Business Center Drive Tucson, Arizona 85705
Re: K973391 Trade Name: ChemMate™ Kappa Regulatory Class: II Product Code: DEM Dated: July 7, 1997 Received: July 10, 1997
Dear Dr. Tillson:
We have reviewed your Section 510(k) notification of intent to market the device referenced above and we have determined the device is substantially equivalent (for the indications for use stated in the enclosure) to devices marketed in interstate commerce prior to May 28, 1976, the enactment date of the Medical Device Amendments or to devices that have been reclassified in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (Act). You may, therefore, market the device, subject to the general controls provisions of the Act. The general controls provisions of the Act include requirements for annual registration, listing of devices, good manufacturing practice, labeling, and prohibitions against misbranding and adulteration.
If your device is classified (see above) into either class II (Special Controls) or class III (Premarket Approval), it may be subject to such additional controls. Existing major regulations affecting your device can be found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Parts 800 to 895. A substantially equivalent determination assumes compliance with the current Good Manufacturing Practice requirement, as set forth in the Quality System Regulation (QS) for Medical Devices: General regulation (21 CFR Part 820) and that, through periodic (QS) inspections, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will verify such assumptions. Failure to comply with the GMP regulation may result in regulatory action. In addition, FDA may publish further announcements concerning your device in the Federal Register. Please note: this response to your premarket notification submission does not affect any obligation you might have under sections 531 through 542 of the Act for devices under the Electronic Product Radiation Control provisions, or other Federal Laws or Regulations.
{7}------------------------------------------------
Page 2
Under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA-88), this device may require a CLIA complexity categorization. TO determine if it does, you should contact the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) at (770)488-7655.
This letter will allow you to begin marketing your device as described in your 510(k) premarket notification. The FDA finding of substantial equivalence of your device to a legally marketed predicate device results in a classification for your device and thus, permits your device to proceed to the market.
If you desire specific advice for your device on our labeling regulation (21 CFR Part 801 and additionally 809.10 for in vitro diagnostic devices), please contact the Office of Compliance at (301) 594-4588. Additionally, for questions on the promotion and advertising of your device, please contact the Office of Compliance at (301) 594-4639. Also, please note the regulation entitled, "Misbranding by reference to premarket notification" (21 CFR 807.97). Other general information on your responsibilities under the Act may be obtained from the Division of Small Manufacturers Assistance at its toll free number (800) 638-2041 or at (301) 443-6597 or at its internet address "http://www.fda.qov/cdrh/dsmamain.html"
Sincerely yours,
Steven Putman
Steven I. Gutman, M.D., M.B.A. Director Division of Clinical Laboratory Devices Office of Device Evaluation Center for Devices and Radiological Health
Enclosure
{8}------------------------------------------------
510(k) Number (if known): K973391
ChemMate Kappa Device Name:
Antibody Reagent
## Indications For Use:
To qualitatively aid in the identification by light microscopy of human cells of lymphoid origin, by recognizing kappa light chains in immunoglobulin secreting plasma cells and plasmacytoid B lymphocytes, in normal and pathologic paraffin embedded tissues precessed in neutral buffered formalin, B5, or Bouin's fixative. Positive results aid in the differential diagnosis, classification and immunophenotyping of lymphomas and must be interpreted by a pathologist within the context of clinical data, gross and microscopic morphological criteria and multiple chemical and immunohistochemical stains.
(PLEASE DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE-CONTINUE ON ANOTHER PAGE IF NEEDED)
| | Concurrence of CDRH, Office of Device Evaluation (ODE) | |
|--|--------------------------------------------------------|--|
|--|--------------------------------------------------------|--|
I Numb
**Prescription Use**
(Per 21 CFR 801.109)
C
OR
Over-The-Counter. Use ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
(Optional Format 1-2-96)
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.