The Diamedix Is-dsDNA an Enzyme Immunoassay (EIA) for the detection and quantitative determination of IgG antibodies in human serum to DNA antigen as an aid in the diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus in patients with clinical signs of the disease. These reagents can be used either manually or in conjunction with the MAGO® Automated EIA Processor.
Device Story
Is-dsDNA Test System is an ELISA for detecting/quantitating IgG antibodies to dsDNA in human serum. Purified DNA is immobilized on microtiter wells; patient serum is added; if anti-dsDNA antibodies are present, they bind to the antigen. After washing, enzyme-labeled anti-human immunoglobulin conjugate is added, followed by substrate. Color intensity is measured photometrically, providing an indirect measure of antibody concentration. The assay is performed either manually or using the MAGO Automated EIA Processor in a clinical laboratory setting. Results assist physicians in diagnosing SLE. The device provides quantitative results (IU/ml) to aid clinical decision-making.
Clinical Evidence
Performance evaluated using 200 normal donor sera and 50 SLE patient sera. Manual testing showed 94.9% relative sensitivity and 100% relative specificity. MAGO Automated Processor testing showed 90.6% relative sensitivity and 100% relative specificity. Linearity was demonstrated across the reportable range (R-squared 0.9821 manual, 0.9961 MAGO). Precision (intra- and inter-assay) was assessed across multiple days. Cross-reactivity testing showed no interference from other autoantibodies (SSA, SSB, Sm/RNP, Jo-1, Scl-70).
Technological Characteristics
Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) using purified DNA immobilized on solid-phase microtiter wells. Employs enzyme-labeled anti-human immunoglobulin conjugate and substrate for photometric detection. Compatible with manual processing or the MAGO Automated EIA Processor. Standardized against the Wo/80 WHO Standard.
Indications for Use
Indicated for the detection and quantitative determination of IgG antibodies to dsDNA in human serum as an aid in the diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in patients presenting with clinical signs of the disease.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
An antinuclear antibody immunological test system is a device that consists of the reagents used to measure by immunochemical techniques the autoimmune antibodies in serum, other body fluids, and tissues that react with cellular nuclear constituents (molecules present in the nucleus of a cell, such as ribonucleic acid, deoxyribonucleic acid, or nuclear proteins). The measurements aid in the diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus (a multisystem autoimmune disease in which antibodies attack the victim's own tissues), hepatitis (a liver disease), rheumatoid arthritis, Sjögren's syndrome (arthritis with inflammation of the eye, eyelid, and salivary glands), and systemic sclerosis (chronic hardening and shrinking of many body tissues).
Predicate Devices
varelisa dsDNA Antibodies
Submission Summary (Full Text)
{0}------------------------------------------------
K974694
MAR - 3 1998
## Appendix E. 510(k) Summary of Safety and Effectiveness
## The following section is included as required by the Safe Medical Device Act (SMDA) of 1990.
Name: Address:
ﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤ
Diamedix Corporation 2140 N. Miami Avenue Miami, FL 33127
ﻣﻌﻤﻮﺩ
Contact Person: Phone Number: Fax Number:
"
Dr. Lynne Stirling 305-324-2354 305-324-2585
{1}------------------------------------------------
## 510(k) Summary of Safety and Effectiveness
This summary of 510(k) safety and effectiveness information is being submitted in accordance with the requirements of SMDA 1990 and 21 CFR 807.92.
The assigned 510(k) number is: _ K974694
#### Applicant Information:
| Date Prepared: | December 15, 1997 |
|----------------|-----------------------------------------|
| Name: | Diamedix Corporation |
| Address: | 2140 N. Miami Avenue<br>Miami, FL 33127 |
| Contact Person: | Dr. Lynne Stirling |
|-----------------|--------------------|
| Phone Number: | 305-324-2354 |
| Fax Number: | 305-324-2585 |
### Device Information:
| Trade Name: | Is-dsDNA Test System |
|----------------------|----------------------|
| Common Name: | Anti-DNA EIA Test |
| Classification Name: | Anti-DNA Antibody |
い
#### Equivalent Device:
varelisa dsDNA Antibodies
Device Description: The Is-dsDNA Test Kit System is an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for the detection and quantitation of IgG to DNA in human serum
Intended Use: The assay is intended for use in detecting IgG antibodies to dsDNA in a single human serum sample. The results of the assay are to be used as an aid in the diagnosis of SLE.
### Principle of the Procedure:
The Is-dsDNA Test System is an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay to detect IgG toDNA in human serum. Purified DNA is attached to a solid phase microtiter well. Diluted test sera are added to each well. If antibodies which recognize the DNA antigen are present in the patient sample they will bind to the antigen in the well. After incubation, the wells are washed to remove unbound antibody. An enzyme labeled anti-human immunoglobulin (conjugate) is added to each test well. If antibody is present the enzyme-linked antibody will bind to it. After incubation, the wells are washed to remove unbound conjugate. A substrate solution is then added to each well. If enzyme is present from prior step, the reaction is stopped and the color intensity is measured photometrically producing an indirect measure of the specific antibody present in the patient sample.
{2}------------------------------------------------
## SUMMARY OF SAFETY AND EFFECTIVENESS
## Performance Charactistics
### A. Comparison Testing
The Diamedix Is-dsDNA Test Kit was evaluated relative to another commercially available anti-dsDNA test kit that is also standardized against the Wo/80 WHO Standard. Two hundred sera from normal blood donors and 50 sera from SLE patients were tested by the Is-dsDNA test kit and the comparative method. Testing was performed both manually and using the MAGO Automated Processor. Results are shown in Table 1.
| TABLE 1 | | Manual | | MAGO | | |
|-----------------------|-----------|--------|-----------|-----------|-------|------------|
| | # of Sera | % | 95% CI | # of Sera | % | 95% CI |
| Relative Sensitivity | 37/39 | 94.9 | 82.7-99.4 | 29/32 | 90.6 | 75.0-98.0 |
| Relative Specificiity | 199/199 | 100.0 | 98.2-100 | 201/201 | 100.0 | 98.2-100.0 |
| Overall Agreement | 236/238* | 99.2 | 97.0-99.9 | 230/233** | 98.7 | 96.3-99.7 |
* 12 equivocal/borderline results excluded from calculations
ﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪﺓ ﺍﻟ
** 16 equivocal/borderline results excluded from calculations; I sample QNS
For manual testing there were three samples negative by the Is-dsDNA and positive by the comparative method. When these samples were tested by a referee method two were positive and one was negative. For MAGO testing there were two samples that were negative in the Is-dsDNA and positive in the comparative method. When these samples were tested by a referee method one was negative and one was positive.
#### B. Linearity
Figures 1 and 2 show typical examples of the Is-dsDNA linearity. These figures depict the inhouse reference standard (which has been standardized against the Wo/80 Standard) tested by the Is-dsDNA after serial two-fold manual dilution in Sample Diluent. Separate dilutions were tested both manually and with MAGO. The results demonstrate a high degree of linearity for the Is-dsDNA Test Kit throughout the reportable range of the assay.
Image /page/2/Figure/10 description: The image contains two scatter plots comparing manual linearity and MAGO linearity. Both plots show the relationship between dilution and absorbance. The R-squared value for manual linearity is 0.9821, while the R-squared value for MAGO linearity is 0.9961, indicating a slightly better fit for the MAGO linearity data.
000275
{3}------------------------------------------------
## C. Precision
The precision of the Is-dsDNA test kit was determined by testing six different sera and the kit calibrator and controls in triplicate in two runs on three different days. Precision was evaluated both manually and using the MAGO. The intra-and interassay precision is shown in Tables 2 and 3.
| (AD) | BL | 1 | C |
|------|----|---|---|
|------|----|---|---|
#### Is-dsDNA Precision (Manual)
| Intra-assay * | | | Interassay ** | | |
|---------------|----------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------|--|
| | Day 1 | Day 2 | Day 3 | | |
| SERUM | Mean SD %CV | Mean SD %CV | Mean SD %CV | Mean SD %CV | |
| A (Neg) | 7.8 1.6 N/A | 6.7 0.7 N/A | 7.4 0.9 N/A | 7.3 1.2 N/A | |
| B (Neg) | 6.0 0.9 N/A | 4.9 0.2 N/A | 5.5 0.3 N/A | 5.5 0.7 N/A | |
| C (Pos) | 78.2 10.1 12.9 | 71.1 5.0 7.0 | 75.0 2.7 3.6 | 74.8 7.0 9.3 | |
| D (Pos) | 114.4 10.3 9.0 | 107.9 9.8 9.0 | 122.9 11.2 9.1 | 115.1 11.7 10.2 | |
| E (Pos) | 202.8 16.2 8.0 | 199.0 27.7 13.9 | 232.3 27.3 11.7 | 211.4 27.5 13.0 | |
| F (Pos) | 364.2 26.0 7.1 | 336.3 10.5 3.1 | 376.6 17.0 4.5 | 359.1 24.9 6.9 | |
| Cal. | 372.9 26.1 7.0 | 346.0 37.4 10.8 | 384.1 20.4 5.3 | 367.7 31.7 8.6 | |
| Pos. | 79.0 4.1 5.2 | 75.2 5.7 7.6 | 82.9 4.4 5.4 | 79.1 5.6 7.0 | |
| Neg. | 7.1 2.1 N/A | 5.6 1.3 N/A | 5.7 1.4 N/A | 6.1 1.7 N/A | |
| | | ls-dsDNA Precision (MAGO) |
|--|--|---------------------------|
| | | |
| Is-dsDNA Precision (MAGO) | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|---------------------------|---------------|-------|------|------|-----------|------|---------------|-------|------|------|-------|------|------|
| | Intra-assay * | | | | | | Interassay ** | | | | | | |
| | | Day 1 | | | Day 2 | | | Day 3 | | | | | |
| | SERUM | Mean | SD | %CV | Mean | SD | %CV | Mean | SD | %CV | Mean | SD | %CV |
| | A (Neg) | 8.9 | 3.7 | N/A | 5.5 | 4.1 | N/A | 18.5 | 8.0 | N/A | 11.0 | 7.7 | N/A |
| | B (Neg) | 9.0 | 1.9 | N/A | 6.6 | 4.4 | N/A | 9.4 | 2.1 | N/A | 8.3 | 3.1 | N/A |
| | C (Pos) | 81.7 | 8.5 | 10.4 | 78.8 | 11.7 | 14.9 | 85.3 | 12.3 | 14.4 | 81.9 | 10.7 | 13.1 |
| | D (Pos) | 114.7 | 13.5 | 11.8 | 102.6 | 13.4 | 13.0 | 112.8 | 18.7 | 16.6 | 110.0 | 15.5 | 14.1 |
| | E (Pos) | 249.9 | 34.7 | 13.9 | 280.1 | 42.4 | 15.1 | 285.7 | 40.0 | 14.0 | 271.9 | 40.2 | 14.8 |
| | F (Pos) | 360.3 | 12.6 | 3.5 | 366.5 | 15.0 | 4.1 | 398.0 | 20.8 | 5.2 | 374.9 | 23.0 | 6.1 |
| | Cal. | 373.4 | 20.9 | 5.6 | 390.6 | 26.5 | 6.8 | 391.7 | 28.5 | 7.3 | 385.2 | 25.4 | 6.6 |
| | Pos. | 100.1 | 15.6 | 15.6 | 102.3 | 10.4 | 10.1 | 104.2 | 7.8 | 7.5 | 102.2 | 11.2 | 11.0 |
| | Neg. | 17.5 | 7.2 | N/A | 13.2 | 5.5 | N/A | 23.4 | 12.5 | N/A | 18.0 | 9.4 | N/A |
| | * n = 6 | | | | ** n = 18 | | | | | | | | |
### D. Crossreactivity
The absence of cross-reactivity in the Is-dsDNA was established by testing several sera (samples 1 to 11) containing some type of autoantibody by other methods, but with no antibody to ds DNA by other methods. These results are shown in Table 4.
| Sample # | Is-dsDNA | Interp | Specificity |
|----------|----------|--------|------------------|
| | IU/ml | | |
| 1 | 7.7 | NEG | SSA, SSB |
| 2 | 9.3 | NEG | SSA, SSB, Sm/RNP |
| 3 | 14.1 | NEG | Sm/RNP |
| 4 | 4.1 | NEG | Jo-1 |
| 5 | 9.1 | NEG | Jo-1 |
| 6 | 12.3 | NEG | Scl-70 |
| 7 | 22.2 | NEG | Scl-70 |
| 8 | 4.1 | NEG | SSA, Sm/RNP |
| 9 | 15.3 | NEG | SSA, SSB |
| 10 | 11.7 | NEG | Sm, Sm/RNP |
| 11 | 18.9 | NEG | Sm, Sm/RNP |
TABLE 4
000276
{4}------------------------------------------------
In addition to the samples listed in Table 4, 49 samples containing varying levels of single-stranded DNA were also tested in the Is-dsDNA test Kit. Thirty seven samples were negative, one sample was borderline and eleven samples were positive. All eleven positive samples were also positive by at least two other commercially available tests for detecting dsDNA antibodies which would indicate that these samples indeed contain both ssDNA and dsDNA.
### E. Expected Values
Antibodies to dsDNA are found in 60-70% of patients with SLE and are rarely present in normal populations. The expected values in the normal population were evaluated by assaying 200 normal donor sera collected in South Florida. Figures 3 and 5 show the distribution of dsDNA results in the normal population performed manually and on MAGO respectively. The distribution of IU/ml values for 50 sera from SLE patients is shown in Figures 4 and 6 performed manually and on MAGO respectively.
Image /page/4/Figure/3 description: The image contains four figures, each displaying a graph. Figures 3 and 4 are labeled "MANUAL," while Figures 5 and 6 are labeled "MAGO." Figures 3 and 5 are titled "Normals," and Figures 4 and 6 are titled "SLE patients." Each graph plots data points with "Number of Sera" on the x-axis and "IU/ml" on the y-axis, showing different distributions for normals and SLE patients under both MANUAL and MAGO conditions.
{5}------------------------------------------------
# F. Correlation of Manual and Mago Results
. .
- V OCT Cateles of the MAGO IU/ml values for 249 samples tested in the Is-dsDNA Test Kit is shown in Figure 7.
Image /page/5/Figure/2 description: This image is a scatter plot showing the relationship between two variables. The y-axis is labeled "MAGO (IU/ml)" and ranges from 0 to 600. The data points are clustered near the origin and then spread out along a positive trend line. The R-squared value is 0.9334, indicating a strong positive correlation.
Image /page/5/Figure/6 description: The image shows the words "FIGURE 7" in bold, black font. The text is arranged on a single line, with "FIGURE" preceding the number "7". The image appears to be a label or title for a figure in a document.
Manual (IUml)
{6}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/6/Picture/1 description: The image shows the logo for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The logo consists of a stylized depiction of an eagle with its wings spread, positioned to the right of the department's name. The text "DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES - USA" is arranged in a circular fashion around the eagle symbol.
Food and Drug Administration 2098 Gaither Road Rockville MD 20850
Lynne Stirling, Ph.D. Vice President, Regulatory Affairs MAR - 3 1998 Diamedix Corporation 2140 N. Miami Avenue Miami, Florida 33127
Re : K974694 Is-dsDNA Test System Trade Name: Regulatory Class: II Product Code: LRM Dated: December 15, 1997 December 16, 1997 Received:
Dear Dr. Stirling:
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, labelinq, and prohibitions aqainst misbranding and adulteration.
If your device is classified (see above) into either class II (Smecial Controls) or class III (Premarket Approval), it may be subject to such additional controls. Existing major requlations 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 requlation (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 Requlations.
{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.gov/cdrh/dsmamain.html"
Sincerely yours,
Steven Butman
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}------------------------------------------------
Page__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
510(k) Number (if known):_K97 4694
Device Name:
Indications For Use:
lndications for Use :The Diamedix Is-dsDNA an Enzyme Immunoassay (ElA) for the detection and quantitative determination of IgG antibodies in human serum to DNA antigen as an aid in the diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus in patients with clinical signs of the disease. These reagents can be used either manually or in conjunction with the MAGO® Automated EIA Processor.
(PLEASE DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE-CONTINUE ON ANOTHER PAGE IF NEEDED)
Concurrence of CDRH, Office of Defice Evaluation (ODE)
_
(Division Sign-Off)
Division of Clinical Laboratory Devices
510(k) Number K674694
**Prescription Use**
(Per 21 CFR 801.109)
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.