For the qualitative screening of human IgG antibodies to extractable nuclear antigens (ENA) in human serum by indirect enzyme immunoassay as an aid in the diagnosis of certain autoimmune disorders. This test system screens for antibodies to Sm, Sm/RNP, SSA, SSB, Scl-70 and Jo-1 in one well. Positive samples should be evaluated further using tests designed for each ENA antibody. These reagents can be used either manually or in conjunction with the MAGO® or MAGO® PLUS Automated EIA Processors.
Device Story
Is-ENA-6 Screen Test System is an ELISA-based in vitro diagnostic kit for detecting IgG antibodies to six extractable nuclear antigens (ENA) in human serum. Purified antigens are immobilized on microtiter wells; patient serum is added; if specific antibodies are present, they bind to the antigens. After washing, enzyme-labeled anti-human immunoglobulin conjugate is added, followed by a substrate solution. The resulting color intensity is measured photometrically, providing an indirect measure of antibody concentration. The assay is performed manually or using MAGO/MAGO PLUS automated processors in clinical laboratories. Results assist clinicians in the diagnosis of autoimmune disorders; positive results require follow-up testing with specific ENA antibody assays.
Clinical Evidence
Performance evaluated using 150 normal donor sera and 88 clinical patient sera. Testing compared manual, MAGO, and MAGO PLUS methods. Relative sensitivity ranged from 92.0% to 92.1%; relative specificity ranged from 97.2% to 97.9%. Overall agreement was 95.3% to 95.7%. Precision studies (intra- and inter-assay) were conducted across three days using six serum samples (2 negative, 4 positive). Correlation between manual and automated methods showed R-squared values of 0.9707 (Manual vs. MAGO), 0.9799 (Manual vs. MAGO PLUS), and 0.988 (MAGO vs. MAGO PLUS).
Technological Characteristics
ELISA-based immunoassay; solid-phase microtiter wells coated with purified antigens; photometric detection of colorimetric substrate reaction. Compatible with manual processing or automated MAGO/MAGO PLUS processors. In vitro diagnostic reagent kit.
Indications for Use
Indicated for qualitative screening of human IgG antibodies to extractable nuclear antigens (Sm, Sm/RNP, SSA, SSB, Scl-70, Jo-1) in human serum as an aid in diagnosing autoimmune disorders. For use in clinical laboratory settings.
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
Zeus Scientific ENA Screen, ELISA Test System
Submission Summary (Full Text)
{0}------------------------------------------------
# 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: K980759
#### Applicant Information:
| Date Prepared: | April 10, 1998 |
|----------------|-----------------------------------------|
| 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-ENA-6 Screen Test System |
|----------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Common Name: | ENA Screening Test |
| Classification Name: | Antinuclear Antibody Immunological Test System<br>(866.5100), product code LLL |
#### Equivalent Device:
Zeus Scientific ENA Screen, ELISA Test System
Device Description: The Is-ENA-6 Screen Test Kit System is an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for the detection of IgG to six extractable nuclear antigens (ENAs), in human serum.
Intended Use: The assay is intended for use in detecting IgG antibodies to ENA's (SSA, SSB, Sm, Sm/RNP, Scl-70 and Jo-1 in one well) in a single human serum sample. The results of the assay can be used as an aid in the diagnosis of autoimmune disorders.
#### Principle of the Procedure:
The Is-ENA-6 Screen Test System is an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay to detect IgG to six ENAs in human serum. Purified antigens are attached to a solid phase microtiter well. Diluted test sera are added to each well. If antibodies which recognize the antigens are present in the patient sample they will bind to the antigens 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 antibodies present in the patient sample.
{1}------------------------------------------------
# Performance Characteristics
### A. Comparison Testing
The Diamedix Is-ENA-6 Screen Test Kit was evaluated relative to another commercially available ENA Screen test kit. One hundred and fifty sera from normal blood donors and eighty-eight sera from clinical patients were tested by the Is-ENA-6 Screen Test Kit and the comparative method. Testing was performed manually and using the MAGO and MAGO PLUS Automated Processors. The results obtained are shown in Table 1.
| | Manual | | | MAGO | | | MAGO PLUS | | |
|----------------------|-----------|------|-----------|-----------|------|-----------|-----------|------|-----------|
| TABLE 1. | # of Sera | % | 95%CI | # of Sera | % | 95% CI | # of Sera | % | 95% CI |
| Relative Sensitivity | 81/88 | 92.0 | 84.3-96.7 | 82/89 | 92.1 | 84.5-96.8 | 82/89 | 92.1 | 84.5-96.8 |
| Relative Specificity | 143/146 | 97.9 | 94.1-99.6 | 142/146 | 97.2 | 93.1-99.2 | 143/146 | 97.9 | 94.1-99.6 |
| Overall Agreement | 224/234* | 95.7 | 92.3-97.9 | 224/235** | 95.3 | 91.8-97.6 | 225/235** | 95.7 | 92.3-97.9 |
* Four equivocal samples were exluded from calculations; ** Three equivocal samples were excluded from calculations. Ten sera were discordant in the manual and MAGO PLUS testing; an additional sample was discordant in the MAGO testing. All discordant samples were tested in 6 specific commercially available ENA test kits for anti-SSA, -SSB, -Sm, -Sm/RNP, Scl-70 and Jo-1. The resolution of discordant samples is summarized in Table 2.
#### TABLE 2.
| Sample # | Is-ENA-6 Screen<br>Result | Other ENA Screen<br>Result | Resolution |
|--------------|---------------------------|----------------------------|---------------------------------|
| 82-normal | POS | NEG | NEG in all 6 specific ENA tests |
| 84-normal | NEG | POS | NEG in all 6 specific ENA tests |
| 90-normal* | POS | NEG | NEG in all 6 specific ENA tests |
| 91-normal | NEG | POS | NEG in all 6 specific ENA tests |
| 112-clinical | POS | NEG | POS for anti-SSA |
| 128-clinical | NEG | POS | NEG in all 6 specific ENA tests |
| 138-clinical | NEG | POS | POS for anti-Jo-1 |
| 140-clinical | NEG | POS | NEG in all 6 specific ENA tests |
| 173-clinical | POS | NEG | POS for anti-SSA |
| 205-normal | NEG | POS | NEG in all 6 specific ENA tests |
| 225-normal | NEG | POS | NEG in all 6 specific ENA tests |
* This sample was a weak positive (Index 1.2) during MAGO testing only.
### B. Precision
The precision of the Is-ENA-6 Screen test kit was determined by testing six different sera (2 negative and 4 positive) and the kit calibrator and controls in triplicate in two different runs on three different days. Precision was evaluated manually and using the MAGO and MAGO PLUS Processors. The intra- and interassay precision is shown in Table3.
| TABLE 3. | Overall | MANUAL | | MAGO | | MAGO PLUS | |
|----------|-----------|-----------|-----------|-----------|-----------|-----------|-----------|
| SERUM | Mean Abs. | Intra-CV% | Inter CV% | Intra-CV% | Inter-CV% | Intra-CV% | Inter-CV% |
| A (NEG) | 0.024 | 10.3 | 15.1 | 44.8 | 47.0 | 26.1 | 25.1 |
| B (NEG) | 0.044 | 4.7 | 9.3 | 10.1 | 28.6 | 5.8 | 15.3 |
| C (POS) | 0.600 | 7.0 | 8.4 | 7.3 | 12.0 | 5.9 | 11.6 |
| D (POS) | 0.927 | 4.0 | 10.4 | 7.1 | 11.0 | 6.3 | 8.3 |
| E (POS) | 1.004 | 3.0 | 9.3 | 6.6 | 9.9 | 6.7 | 9.9 |
| F (POS) | 1.488 | 4.9 | 8.5 | 6.7 | 10.4 | 4.9 | 7.9 |
| c/o CAL | 0.368 | 6.6 | 11.2 | 3.7 | 9.2 | 3.3 | 5.0 |
| POS | 0.487 | 3.1 | 7.7 | 5.6 | 9.1 | 3.6 | 7.0 |
| NEG | 0.060 | 9.0 | 12.9 | 18.1 | 23.0 | 10.7 | 13.7 |
{2}------------------------------------------------
### C. Expected Values
The expected value for a normal patient is a negative result. However, positive results for autoantibodies may be found in some apparently healthy individuals. Patient sera containing autoantibodies to those antigens represented in the Is-ENA-6 Screen test will give positive results which can be further evaluated in specific tests. The number of positive samples detected is dependent upon the populations being tested. The expected values in a normal S. Florida blood donor population were evaluated by assaying 150 sera both manually and using the MAGO and MAGO PLUS Automated Processors. Figures 1, 3 and 5 show the distribution of results in this normal population. For manual and MAGO PLUS testing 98.6% of the normals gave negative results; for MAGO 98% gave negative results. Two normal samples positive in the Is-ENA-6 Screen were subsequently shown to be strongly positive for SSA antibodies.
In the present studies 88 sera obtained from patients with an autoimmune disease or with a known autoantibody reactivity were evaluated in the Is-ENA-6 Screen. Figures 2, 4 and 6 show the distribution of results for this population.
Image /page/2/Figure/3 description: The image contains six line graphs comparing expected values of normal and clinical samples using different methods: Manual, MAGO, and MAGO PLUS. Figures 1, 3, and 5 show the expected values for normal samples using Manual, MAGO, and MAGO PLUS methods, respectively, with a noticeable spike in index values towards the end of the sample range. Figures 2, 4, and 6 depict the expected values for clinical samples using the same methods, showing a gradual increase in index values as the number of samples increases.
{3}------------------------------------------------
# D. Correlation of Manual, MAGO and MAGO PLUS Results
Correlation of manual, MAGO and MAGO PLUS Index Values for the 238 samples tested in the Is-ENA-6 Screen Test Kit is shown in Figures 7, 8 and 9.
Image /page/3/Figure/2 description: This image is a scatter plot titled "Figure 7. Manual vs MAGO Correlation". The x-axis is labeled "Mago" and ranges from 0.0 to 7.0, while the y-axis is labeled "Manual" and ranges from 0.0 to 9.0. A trend line is plotted through the data points, and the R-squared value is 0.9707.
Image /page/3/Figure/3 description: The image is a scatter plot comparing "Manual" and "Mago Plus" measurements. The x-axis represents "Mago Plus" values ranging from 0.0 to 8.0, while the y-axis represents "Manual" values ranging from 0.0 to 10.0. A linear trendline is fitted to the data points, indicating a strong positive correlation between the two measurement methods. The R-squared value is 0.9799, suggesting a high degree of variance explained by the linear model.
Figure 8. Manual vs MAGO PLUS Correlation
Image /page/3/Figure/4 description: The image is a scatter plot titled "Figure 9. MAGO vs MAGO PLUS Correlation". The x-axis represents the MAGO index, and the y-axis represents the MAGO Plus Index. The scatter plot shows a strong positive correlation between the two indices, with an R-squared value of 0.988.
Mago Index
Figure 9. MAGO vs MAGO PLUS Correlation
{4}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/4/Picture/2 description: The image is a black and white 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 faces in profile, stacked on top of each other. The faces are connected by a flowing ribbon-like shape.
APR 23 1998
Food and Drug Administration 2098 Gaither Road Rockville MD 20850
Lynne Stirling, Ph.D. Diamedix Corporation 2140 N. Miami Avenue Miami, Florida 33127
Re : K980759 Diamedix Is-ENA-6 Screen Test System Trade Name: Regulatory Class: II Product Code: LLL February 26, 1998 Dated: Received: February 27, 1998
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, 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.
{5}------------------------------------------------
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 ..... ..............................................................................................................................................................
{6}------------------------------------------------
## Appendix G. Indications for Use Statement
# INDICATIONS FOR USE STATEMENT
# 510(K) NUMBER : K980759
### DEVICE NAME : Is-ENA-6 Screen Test System
Indications for Use : For the qualitative screening of human IgG antibodies to extractable nuclear antigens (ENA) in human serum by indirect enzyme immunoassay as an aid in the diagnosis of certain autoimmune disorders. This test system screens for antibodies to Sm, Sm/RNP, SSA, SSB, Scl-70 and Jo-1 in one well. Positive samples should be evaluated further using tests designed for each ENA antibody. These reagents can be used either manually or in conjunction with the MAGO® or MAGO® PLUS Automated EIA Processors.
prescription use
✓
in 4/23/98
Peter E. Makison
(Division S... Ort)
Division ...ical Laboratory Devices
510(k) Number k980759
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.