Mouse IgG1, clone DAK-GO1 Negative Control Reagents are fluorescent conjugated (fluorescein isothiocyanate isomer 1 (FITC), R-Phycoerythrin (RPE), or R-Phycoerythrin-Cyanin 5 (RPE-CY5)) monoclonal antibodies that have been developed for use as negative control reagents for FITC, RPE or RPE-CY5 conjugated monoclonal antibodies of the IgG, heavy chain isotype in preparations of normal whole peripheral blood by flow cytometric methods. Negative control reagents are one component of the suggested controls for monoclonal antibody (MAb) combinations for routine immunophenotyping of lymphocytes in peripheral blood.
Device Story
Monoclonal mouse IgG1 (clone DAK-GO1) conjugated with FITC, RPE, or RPE-CY5; directed against Aspergillus niger glucose oxidase (non-mammalian antigen). Used as negative control reagents in flow cytometry to assess non-specific binding of IgG1 isotype antibodies in peripheral blood lymphocyte immunophenotyping. Reagents supplied in buffer with NaN3 and carrier protein. Operated by laboratory technicians in clinical settings. Output is fluorescence data measured by flow cytometer; used by clinicians to establish baseline non-specific binding levels, ensuring accuracy of specific antibody staining results. Benefits include improved diagnostic reliability by distinguishing true positive staining from background noise.
Clinical Evidence
Bench testing only. Reproducibility assessed via 10 replicates from 3 donors on 2 flow cytometers; results showed low variability. Specificity tested on 5 healthy donors across RBCs, granulocytes, monocytes, lymphocytes, and platelets; no specific binding observed for FITC/RPE conjugates. RPE-CY5 showed minor monocyte binding, manageable via gating. Correlation studies against predicate reagents performed on 36-150 samples; linear regression confirmed expected lack of 1:1 correlation typical for negative controls.
Technological Characteristics
Monoclonal mouse IgG1 (clone DAK-GO1) conjugated to FITC, RPE, or RPE-CY5. Supplied in Tris-HCl buffer, pH 7.2, 15mM NaN3, 1% carrier protein. Storage 2-8°C in dark. Analyzed via flow cytometry. No specific binding to human antigens.
Indications for Use
Indicated for use as negative control reagents in flow cytometric immunophenotyping of lymphocytes in normal whole peripheral blood. Intended for professional in vitro diagnostic use.
Regulatory Classification
Identification
An automated differential cell counter is a device used to identify one or more of the formed elements of the blood. The device may also have the capability to flag, count, or classify immature or abnormal hematopoietic cells of the blood, bone marrow, or other body fluids. These devices may combine an electronic particle counting method, optical method, or a flow cytometric method utilizing monoclonal CD (cluster designation) markers. The device includes accessory CD markers.
Special Controls
*Classification.* Class II (special controls). The special control for this device is the FDA document entitled “Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Premarket Notifications for Automated Differential Cell Counters for Immature or Abnormal Blood Cells; Final Guidance for Industry and FDA.”
Predicate Devices
Gentrak Genclone mouse IgG1, 679.1MC
Submission Summary (Full Text)
{0}------------------------------------------------
## JUN 21 1999
| JUN 21 1999 | | 510(k) Summary | K991454 |
|---------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------|---------|
| Submitter: | DAKO Corporation<br>6392 Via Real<br>Carpinteria, CA 93013<br>805-566-6655 | | |
| Contact: | Gretchen M. Murray, Ph.D. | | |
| Date Summary<br>Prepared: | April 19, 1999 | | |
| Device Name: | DAKO® IgG1/FITC, Clone DAK-G01, Code No. X0927; IgG1/RPE, Clone DAK-GO1 Code No. X0928; IgG1/RPE-CY5, Clone DAK-G01, Code No. X0955 | | |
| Device Classification: | Class II according to 21 CFR 864.5220, on the basis that monoclonal antibodies are accessories for automated differential cell counters. | | |
| Panel: | The device classification is under the Hematology and Pathology Devices panel, Division of Clinical Laboratory Devices. | | |
| Predicate Device: | Gentrak Genclone mouse IgG₁, 679.1MC | | |
| Device | Monoclonal Mouse IgG₁, DAK-GO1 FITC, RPE or RPE-CY5 conjugated are directed against Aspergillus niger glucose oxidase, an enzyme that is neither present nor inducible in mammalian tissues. Purified monoclonal mouse IgG1 is produced in tissue culture, dialyzed and conjugated with Fluorescein (FITC), R-phycoerythrin (RPE), or R-phycoerythrin (RPE) covalently coupled to cyanin 5 (Cy5). FITC CONJUGATED: One ml (1.0 ml) containing the conjugated antibody is supplied in 0.05M Tris-HCl buffer, pH 7.2, 15mM NaN₃, stabilized with 1% carrier protein. RPE and RPE-Cy5 CONJUGATED: One ml (1.0 ml) containing the conjugated antibody is supplied in 0.05M Tris-HCI buffer, pH 7.2, 15mM NaN₃, 0.1M NaCl stabilized with 1% carrier protein | | |
| Intended Use: | For In Vitro Diagnostic Use | | |
| | Monoclonal Mouse IgG₁, DAK-GO1 FITC, RPE or RPE-CY5 conjugated have been developed for use in flow cytometry for the peripheral blood. These reagents are intended to be used as negative control reagents for FITC, RPE or RPE-CY5 conjugated monoclonal antibodies of the IgG, heavy chain isotype in preparations of normal whole peripheral blood in routine immunophenotyping of lymphocytes. | | |
{1}------------------------------------------------
## Comparison of
Technological Characteristics
Reproducibility of ten replicates from peripheral blood of three donors were run on two flow cytometers from different manufacturers. Normal peripheral blood samples were used for measuring lymphocytes for levels of nonspecificity with Mouse IgG1, DAK-GO1 negative control reagents. Values are expressed as a percent of the total lymphocyte count.
| FACScan | Mean % IgG₁/FITC+ | ±1 SD | %CV | n |
|------------|-------------------|-------|------|----|
| Donor 1 | 0.80 | 0.25 | 0.31 | 10 |
| Donor 2 | 0.86 | 0.35 | 0.40 | 10 |
| Donor 3 | 0.61 | 0.23 | 0.37 | 10 |
| Profile II | Mean % IgG₁/FITC+ | ±1 SD | %CV | n |
| Donor 1 | 1.30 | 0.62 | 0.49 | 10 |
| Donor 2 | 1.06 | 0.32 | 0.30 | 10 |
| Donor 3 | 1.14 | 0.13 | 0.12 | 10 |
| FACScan | Mean % IgG₁/RPE+ | ±1 SD | %CV | n |
| Donor 1 | 0.70 | 0.27 | 0.38 | 10 |
| Donor 2 | 0.67 | 0.30 | 0.45 | 10 |
| Donor 3 | 0.76 | 0.27 | 0.36 | 10 |
| Profile II | Mean % IgG₁/RPE+ | ±1 SD | %CV | n |
| Donor 1 | 0.36 | 0.12 | 0.35 | 10 |
| Donor 2 | 0.33 | 0.17 | 0.52 | 10 |
| Donor 3 | 0.38 | 0.07 | 0.18 | 10 |
The reproducibility results indicate that there is little variability among replicate samples for the measurement of non-specificity of percent positive lymphocytes. There is some variability between flow cytometers as indicated by the differences in percentages of lymphocytes detected. No reproducibility testing was performed for IgG1/RPE-CY5. However, since the reagent is the same IgG1 antibody as the FITC conjugate and the RPE conjugate except for being conjugated with a different fluorochrome, it is expected that IgG,/RPE-Cy5, Code No. X0955 has the same consistent reproducibility as IgG,/FITC, Code No. X0927 and IgG,/RPE, Code No. X0928 when tested on lymphocytes.
{2}------------------------------------------------
Specificity of Monoclonal Mouse IgGy, DAK-GO1 FITC, RPE and RPE-CY5 conjugated has been verified by tests performed on five apparently healthy adult donors of various races at DAKO Corporation. Cell populations tested were RBC's, granulocytes, monocytes, lymphocytes and platelets. The results indicate that there is no specific antibody binding of Monoclonal Mouse IgG, DAK-GO1 FITC and RPE conjugated with any of the cell populations. However, the RPE-CY5 conjugate did have a significant amount of binding with monocytes (3.22%). This nonspecific binding can be excluded from the lymphocyte analysis region with proper gating on the lymphocytes.
#### DAKO Mouse IgGi/FITC, DAK-GO1 Specificity
| | %Positive Red<br>Blood Cells | % Positive<br>Granulocytes | % Positive<br>Monocytes | % Positive<br>Lymphocytes | % Positive<br>Platelets |
|--------------------------|------------------------------|----------------------------|-------------------------|---------------------------|-------------------------|
| Average (n=5)<br>(range) | 0.02<br>(0.0-0.1) | 0.74<br>(0.1-1.9) | 0.76<br>(0.2-1.5) | 0.22<br>(0.0-0.8) | 0.04<br>(0.0-0.1) |
#### DAKO Mouse IgG1/RPE, DAK-GO1 Specificity
| | %Positive Red<br>Blood Cells | % Positive<br>Granulocytes | % Positive<br>Monocytes | % Positive<br>Lymphocytes | % Positive<br>Platelets |
|--------------------------|------------------------------|----------------------------|-------------------------|---------------------------|-------------------------|
| Average (n=5)<br>(range) | 0.00<br>(0.0-0.0) | 0.08<br>(0.0-0.01) | 0.84<br>(0.4-2.0) | 0.04<br>(0.0-0.1) | 0.22<br>(0.0-0.7) |
#### DAKO Mouse IgG1/RPE-CY5, DAK-GO1 Specificity
| | %Positive Red<br>Blood Cells | % Positive<br>Granulocytes | % Positive<br>Monocytes | % Positive<br>Lymphocytes | % Positive<br>Platelets |
|--------------------------|------------------------------|----------------------------|-------------------------|---------------------------|-------------------------|
| Average (n=5)<br>(range) | 0.02<br>(0.0-0.1) | 0.16<br>(0.0-0.3) | 3.22<br>(0.0-11.9) | 0.12<br>(0.0-0.3) | 0.10<br>(0.0-0.4) |
Correlations of Mouse IgG,/FITC, DAK-GO1 and Mouse IgG,/RPE, DAK-GO1 to predicate reagents, Mouse IgG, /FITC, 679.1MC and Mouse IgG, /RPE, 679.1MC were determined by testing duplicate samples with each reagent on peripheral blood lymphocytes on normal, apparently healthy individuals at one laboratory. Linear regression analysis of the data gave the following equations and Pearson correlations.
Y(DAKO IgG1/FITC+ Lymphocytes) = . 28 + 1.39X(Gentrak IgG1/FITC + Lymphocytes)-R-= .4581 n = 36 Y(DAKO IgG1/RPE+ Lymphocytes) = . 05 + . 87X(Gentrak IgG1/RPE+ Lymphocytes); R = . 4429 n = 36
Normal levels of negative events were measured for each reagent at three geographically separate laboratories. The sample size(s) was 150 apparently healthy individuals. Normal means and ranges for each reagent were x, y, and z respectively. The regression analysis indicated that there was not a 1:1 linear correlation of the Mouse IgG,/FITC, DAK-GO1 reagent and Mouse IgG, /FITC, 679.1MC nor of Mouse IgG,/RPE, DAK-GO1 reagent and Mouse IgG, /RPE, 679.1MC. As expected with negative control reagents, the values are highly variable and less than one. This produced R-values that are more indicative of a random sample rather than a linear model. Linear regression analysis of a data set measuring negative events would be expected to show no correlation.
Linearity testing using human cell lines was not performed. There would be no specificity or sensitivity detected as the antibody is not directed against a human antigen.
{3}------------------------------------------------
Substantial Equivalence Comparison of DAKO's Substantial Equivalence Companson of Driko o
Mouse IgG,, DAK-GO1 to Gentrak Genclone Mouse IgG,, 679.1MC
# CONFIDENTIAL
| Attribute | DAKO | Gentrak Genclone |
|------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Clone: | Mouse IgG₁, DAK-GO1 | Mouse IgG₁, 679.1MC |
| Epitope | Glucose oxidase from<br>Aspergillus niger | Succinyl histamine bovine<br>serum albumin (SH-BSA) |
| Intended Use | Negative control reagents for<br>FITC, RPE or RPE-CY5<br>conjugated monoclonal<br>antibodies of the IgG, heavy<br>chain isotype in preparations<br>of normal whole peripheral<br>blood by flow cytometric<br>methods. | Negative control reagents for<br>FITC, or RPE conjugated<br>monoclonal antibodies of the<br>IgG, heavy chain isotype in<br>preparations of normal whole<br>peripheral blood by flow<br>cytometric methods. |
| Clinical Utility | Use with monoclonal<br>antibody test reagents of the<br>IgG, immunoglobulin isotype<br>in flow cytometric procedures<br>performed on normal donors. | Use with monoclonal<br>antibody test reagents of the<br>IgG, immunoglobulin isotype<br>in flow cytometric procedures<br>performed on normal donors. |
| Stability | Mouse IgG₁ /FITC - 3 years:<br>Mouse IgG₁ /RPE - 2 years:<br>Mouse IgG₁ /RPE-CY5 - 2<br>years: from time of<br>manufacture. | 2 years from time of<br>manufacture. |
| Specificity | No specific reaction to<br>lymphocytes, monocytes,<br>granulocytes, platelets or red<br>blood cells. | No specific reaction to<br>lymphocytes, monocytes,<br>granulocytes or red blood<br>cells. |
| Storage | 2-8°C, in the dark | 2-8°C |
{4}------------------------------------------------
| | DAK-GO1/<br>FITC | 679.1MC/<br>FITC | DAK-GO1/<br>RPE | 679.1MC/<br>RPE | DAK-GO1/<br>RPE-CY5 |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------|------------------|-------------------|-----------------|---------------------|
| Percent Positive Mouse IgG, Lymphocytes<br>Mean<br>(n=153 for DAKO) (n = 36 for Gentrak) | 0.59% | 0.16% | 0.24% | 0.13% | 1.59% |
| 95.0% Range Mouse IgG, Positive<br>Lymphocytes<br>(n=153 for DAKO) (n = 36 for Gentrak) | 0-5.34% | 0-0.3% | 0-1.28% | 0-0.4% | 0.06-3.06% |
| % CV<br>(n=153 for DAKO) (n = 36 for Gentrak) | 150.89% | 146.67% | 93.81% | 84.93% | 88.98% |
| Percent Positive Mouse IgG, Lymphocytes<br>(by laboratory site) | | | | | |
| Site 1(n=53) | 0.79% | | 0.35% | | 3.6% |
| Site 2(n=50) | 0.47% | | 0.20% | | 0.53% |
| Site 3(n=50 for DAKO)<br>(n=36 for Gentrak) | 0.49% | 0.16% | 0.16% | 0.13% | 0.64% |
| 95.0% Range (by laboratory site) | | | | | |
| Site 1(n=53) | 0.06-5.34% | | 0.08-1.28% | | 0.34-3.06% |
| Site 2(n=50) | 0-1.65% | | 0-0.65% | | 0.06-1.87% |
| Site 3(n=50 for DAKO)<br>(n=36 for Gentrak) | 0.1-1.5% | 0-0.3% | 0-0.5% | 0-0.4% | 0.1-2.6% |
| % CV (by laboratory site) | | | | | |
| Site 1(n=53) | 174.15% | | 79.80% | | 74.59% |
| Site 2(n=50) | 86.50% | | 94.74% | | 85.13% |
| Site 3(n=50 for DAKO)<br>(n=36 for Gentrak) | 90.01% | 146.67% | 80.85% | 84.93% | 173.63% |
| Mean Channel Fluorescence<br>(by laboratory site) | | | | | |
| Mean | | | | | |
| Site 1(n=53) | 30.52 | | 81.23 | | 82.15 |
| Site 2(n = 50) | 172.79 | | 169.00 | 2.19 | 398.90 |
| Site 3(n=50 for DAKO)<br>(n = 36 for Gentrak) | 1.57 | 3.07 | 1.99 | | 1.56 |
| 95.0% Range (by laboratory site) | | | | | |
| Site 1 (n = 53) | 16.23 -<br>116.63 | | 20.13 -<br>307.12 | | 28.23 -<br>205.5 |
| Site 2(n=50) | 0 - 642.69 | | 0 - 888.83 | | 49.7 -<br>2111.49 |
| Site 3(n=50 for DAKO)<br>(n = 36 for Gentrak) | 0.87 - 3.22 | 0 - 16.15 | 0 - 7.146 | 0 - 12.48 | 0.72 - 3.70 |
| % CV (by laboratory site) | | | | | |
| Site 1 (n = 53) | 71.94% | | 114.43% | | 79.82% |
| Site 2(n = 50) | 119.30% | | 150.28% | 153.47% | 154.56% |
| Site 3(n=50 for DAKO)<br>(n = 36 for Gentrak) | 46.46% | 151.14% | 102.09% | | 54.25% |
## Testing Results for DAKO Mouse IgG,/FITC/RE/CY5, DAK-G01 and
esting Results for DAKO Mouse IgG,/FITC/RPE/CY5, C79, 1MC ts for DARO Mouse IgG,/FITC/RPE, 679.1MC
प
{5}------------------------------------------------
## Testing Results for DAKO Mouse IgG,/FITC, DAK-GO1 versus Gentrak Mouse IgG,/FITC, 679.1MC
·
| | DAK-GO1/<br>FITC | 679.1MC/<br>FITC |
|-------------------------------------------------------------|------------------|------------------|
| Percent Positive Mouse IgG, Lymphocytes<br>Mean<br>(n = 36) | 0.50% | 0.16% |
| 95.0% Range Mouse IgG₁ Positive<br>Lymphocytes<br>(n = 36) | 0.1-1.4% | 0-0.3% |
| % CV<br>(n = 36) | 95.62% | 146.67% |
| Mean Channel Fluorescence<br>Mean<br>(n = 36) | 1.51 | 3.07 |
| 95.0% Range (by laboratory site)<br>(n = 36) | 0.87-3.12 | 0 - 16.15 |
| % CV (by laboratory site)<br>(n = 36) | 41.88% | 151.14% |
## Testing Results for DAKO Mouse IgG,/RPE, DAK-GO1 versus Gentrak Mouse igG,/RPE, 679.1MC
| | DAK-GO1/<br>RPE | 679.1MC/<br>RPE |
|-------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|
| Percent Positive Mouse IgG₁ Lymphocytes<br>Mean<br>(n = 36) | 0.16% | 0.13% |
| 95.0% Range Mouse IgG₁ Positive<br>Lymphocytes<br>(n = 36) | 0-0.5% | 0-0.4% |
| % CV<br>(n = 36) | 88.13% | 84.93% |
| Mean Channel Fluorescence<br>Mean<br>(n = 36) | 1.77 | 2.19 |
| 95.0% Range (by laboratory site)<br>(n = 36) | 0-6.19 | 0-12.48 |
| % CV (by laboratory site)<br>(n = 36) | 98.97% | 153.47% |
{6}------------------------------------------------
Image /page/6/Picture/1 description: The image is a black and white logo for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The logo features a stylized eagle with three curved lines representing its body and wings. The text "DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES - USA" is arranged in a circular pattern around the eagle. The text is in all capital letters and is smaller than the eagle symbol.
## JUN 21 1999
Food and Drug Administration 2098 Gaither Road Rockville MD 20850
Gretchen M. Murray, Ph.D. Regulatory Affairs Manager DAKO Corporation 6392 Via Real Carpinteria, California 93013
K991454 Re:
> Trade Name: Monoclonal Mouse IgG, Clone DAK-GO1, FITC, RPE or RPE-CY5 Conjugated Regulatory Class: II Product Code: GKZ Dated: April 22, 1999 Received: April 26, 1999
Dear Dr. Murray:
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 legally marketed predicate 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 requirements, as set forth in the Quality System Regulation (OS) 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 (301) 443-6597, or at its internet address "http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/dsma/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 1 of of l
510(k) **Number (if known):** K991454
Device Name: Monoclonal Mouse IgG; Clone DAK-GO1, FITC Conjugated Monoclonal Mouse IgG1 Clone DAK-GO1, RPE Conjugated Monoclonal Mouse IgG1 Clone DAK-GO1, RPE-CY5 Conjugated
Indications For Use:
Mouse IgG1, clone DAK-GO1 Negative Control Reagents are fluorescent conjugated (fluorescein isothiocyanate isomer 1 (FITC), R-Phycoerythrin (RPE), or R-Phycoerythrin-Cyanin 5 (RPE-CY5)) monoclonal antibodies that have been developed for use as negative control reagents for FITC, RPE or RPE-CY5 conjugated monoclonal antibodies of the IgG, heavy chain isotype in preparations of normal whole peripheral blood by flow cytometric methods. Negative control reagents are one component of the suggested controls for monoclonal antibody (MAb) combinations for routine immunophenotyping of lymphocytes in peripheral blood.
(PLEASE DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE-CONTINUE ON ANOTHER PAGE IF NEEDED)
Concurrence of CDRH, Office of Device Evaluation (ODE)

| (Division Sign-Off) | |
|-----------------------------------------|---------|
| Division of Clinical Laboratory Devices | |
| 510(k) Number | K991454 |
Prescription Use V (Per 21 CFR 801.109) OR
Over-The-Counter Use (Per 21 CRF 801.110)
IVD Use (Per 21 CFR 801.119)
(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.