CALCIUM ADVANCE ASSAY, MODEL 145-20, 145-25, 145-20-91
Applicant
Diagnostic Chemicals , Ltd.
Product Code
CJY · Clinical Chemistry
Decision Date
Nov 10, 2005
Decision
SESE
Submission Type
Traditional
Regulation
21 CFR 862.1145
Device Class
Class 2
Indications for Use
For the quantitative determination of Total Calcium in serum, plasma (Lithium Heparin) and urine. For IN VITRO diagnostic use. Identification. A calcium test system is a device intended to measure total calcium in serum, plasma (Lithium Heparin) and urine. Calcium measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of hypercalcemia as a result from hyperparathyroidism, hypervitaminosisD, multiple myeloma and some neoplastic diseases of the bones. It is also used in the diagnosis and treatment of hypocalcemia as a result from hypoparathyroidism, steatorreah, nephritis and pancreatitis
Device Story
Calcium-ADVANCE Assay is a spectrophotometric reagent for total calcium measurement in serum, plasma, and urine. Reagent contains Phosphonazo III, buffer (pH 5.5), stabilizers, and preservative. Principle: Phosphonazo III reacts with calcium to form a blue-purple complex with maximum absorbance at 600 nm; absorbance is proportional to calcium concentration. Used in clinical chemistry settings; operated by laboratory personnel. Output is quantitative calcium concentration (mg/dL). Results assist clinicians in diagnosing and managing calcium-related metabolic disorders. Assay is incompatible with calcium-complexing anticoagulants (citric acid, oxalates, EDTA, NaF).
Clinical Evidence
No clinical data provided; bench testing only.
Technological Characteristics
Spectrophotometric assay. Reagent: 60 μmol/L Phosphonazo III, buffer (pH 5.5 at 25°C), stabilizers, preservative. Measurement principle: colorimetric complex formation (600 nm). Linear range: 0.2–20 mg/dL. Storage: 18-26°C. Complies with CLSI guidelines EP05-A2, EP06-A, EP07-A, EP09-A2, and EP17-A.
Indications for Use
Indicated for quantitative determination of total calcium in serum, plasma (Lithium Heparin), and urine for in vitro diagnostic use. Used in diagnosis and treatment of hypercalcemia (hyperparathyroidism, hypervitaminosis D, multiple myeloma, bone neoplasms) and hypocalcemia (hypoparathyroidism, steatorrhea, nephritis, pancreatitis).
Regulatory Classification
Identification
A calcium test system is a device intended to measure the total calcium level in serum. Calcium measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of parathyroid disease, a variety of bone diseases, chronic renal disease and tetany (intermittent muscular contractions or spasms).
Submission Summary (Full Text)
{0}
1
510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION
DECISION SUMMARY
ASSAY ONLY TEMPLATE
A. 510(k) Number:
k051757
B. Purpose for Submission:
Clearance to market a new Calcium Assay, Calcium-ADVANCE Assay, by Diagnostic Chemicals Ltd.
C. Measurand:
Total Calcium (Ca)
D. Type of Test:
Spectrophotometric
E. Applicant:
Diagnostic Chemicals Limited
F. Proprietary and Established Names:
Calcium-ADVANCE Assay
G. Regulatory Information:
1. Regulation section:
21 CFR §862.1145 - Calcium test system.
2. Classification:
Class II
3. Product code:
CJY
{1}
4. Panel:
(75) Chemistry
H. Intended Use:
1. Intended use(s):
A calcium test system is a device intended to measure total calcium in serum, plasma (Lithium Heparin), and urine. Calcium measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of hypercalcemia as a result from hyperparathyroidism, hypervitaminosisD, multiple myeloma, and some neoplastic diseases of the bones. It is also used in the diagnosis and treatment of hypocalcemia as a result from hypoparathyroidism, steatorreah, nephrosis, nephritis, and pancreatitis.
2. Indication(s) for use:
"The Calcium-ADVANCE system is intended for the IN VITRO quantitative determination of total calcium in serum, plasma (Lithium Heparin), and urine. Calcium measurements are used in the diagnosis and treatment of hypercalcemia resulting from hyperparathyroidism, hypervitaminosisD, multiple myeloma, and some neoplastic diseases of the bones. It is also used in the diagnosis and treatment of hypocalcemia due to hypoparathyroidism, steatorreah, nephrosis, nephritis, and pancreatitis."
3. Special conditions for use statement(s):
For Prescription Use only.
4. Special instrument requirements:
None.
I. Device Description:
The Calcium-ADVANCE™ Reagent consists of a solution containing a buffer (pH 5.5 at 25°C), 60 μmol/L Phosphonazo III, stabilizers, and a preservative.
J. Substantial Equivalence Information:
1. Predicate device name(s):
Cobas Ready Calcium Reagent
{2}
2. Predicate 510(k) number(s):
k896224
3. Comparison with predicate:
| Similarities | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | Predicate |
| Intended Use | IN VITRO quantitative determination of total calcium | IN VITRO quantitative determination of total calcium |
| Measurement Method | Spectrophotometric | Spectrophotometric |
| Sample Material | Serum, Urine, Plasma (Li-Heparin) | Serum, Urine, Plasma (Li-Heparin) |
| Format | Liquid, ready-to-use | Liquid, ready-to-use |
| Differences | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Item | Device | Predicate |
| Chromophore | Phosphonazo III | o-cresolphthalein complexone |
| pH | pH = 5.5 | pH = 10.6 |
| Storage Temperature | 18-26°C | 18-25°C |
| Linear Range | 0.2 – 20 mg/dL Ca | 0.2 – 16.8 mg/dL Ca |
## K. Standard/Guidance Document Referenced (if applicable):
CLSI EP05-A2: Evaluation of Precision Performance of Clinical Chemistry Devices; Approved Guideline-Second Edition
CLSI EP06-A: Evaluation of the Linearity of Quantitative Analytical Methods; Approved Guideline
CLSI EP07-A: Interference Testing in Clinical Chemistry; Proposed Guideline
CLSI EP09-A2: Method Comparison and Bias Estimation Using Patient Samples; Approved Guideline - Second Edition
CLSI EP17-A: Protocols for Determination of Limits of Detection and Limits of Quantitation; Approved Guideline
## L. Test Principle:
Phosphonazo III reacts with calcium in solution to form a blue-purple complex. The color developed has a maximum absorbance at 600 nm and is proportional to the
{3}
calcium concentration in the sample:
Phosphonazo III + Ca⁺² → Ca-Phosphonazo Complex (blue-purple)
## M. Performance Characteristics (if/when applicable):
### 1. Analytical performance:
#### a. Precision/Reproducibility:
Within run precision was assessed by measuring two levels of commercially available control sera, two levels of commercially available urine controls, and two concentrations of laboratory-prepared plasma. Each material was assayed 20 times:
| Matrix | Conc. Level (mg/dL) | Standard Deviation (mg/dL) | CV(%) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Serum Control | 9.0 | 0.05 | 0.5% |
| | 11.9 | 0.06 | 0.5% |
| Urine Control | 5.3 | 0.07 | 1.3% |
| | 11.3 | 0.11 | 1.0% |
| Plasma | 8.9 | 0.06 | 0.6% |
| | 14.8 | 0.12 | 0.8% |
Between run precision was assessed by measuring two samples per run, two runs per day for twenty days for each matrix material:
| Matrix | Conc. Level (mg/dL) | Standard Deviation (mg/dL) | CV(%) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Serum Control | 9.0 | 0.11 | 1.2% |
| | 12.1 | 0.17 | 1.4% |
| Urine Control | 5.3 | 0.08 | 1.6% |
| | 11.4 | 0.18 | 1.6% |
| Plasma | 8.7 | 0.1 | 1.1% |
| | 14.3 | 0.15 | 1.1% |
#### b. Linearity/assay reportable range:
The linear range for this assay is 0.2 – 20 mg/dL Ca.
The lower limit of the assay range was established following EP17-A. The company opted to apply a requirement of 3 standard deviations above their blank value as their lower limit of detection. This criterion corresponded to a concentration of 0.2 mg/dL total Ca.
{4}
To determine the upper limit of the linear range of this assay, the company used an Allowable Total Error of 1.0 mg/dL Ca, the HCFA limit for proficiency testing, and a systematic error budget of 33%. This gave an Allowable Systematic Error of 0.3 mg/dL. The residuals were calculated as the difference between the mean measured value and the estimated value obtained by linear regression. If the absolute value of the residual was less than the Allowable Systematic Error, the sample was considered to be within the linear range of the assay. The results of this analysis supported a linear range in excess of 20 mg/dL. The company rounded down to 20 mg/dL Ca as the upper limit of this assay.
For samples with concentrations above 20 mg/dL, the company recommends diluting the samples with saline.
c. Traceability, Stability, Expected values (controls, calibrators, or methods):
The stability (shelf life) of the reagent was determined from accelerated aging studies. Aging of the product at 37 °C for 7 days induced a 2.5% variance in the performance of the product. Aging of the product at 37 °C for 7 days, followed by subsequent storage at 50 °C for 7 days, induced at 2.7% variance in the performance of the product. These observations support the claimed shelf life of two years.
d. Detection limit:
The lower limit of the assay range was established following EP17-A. The company opted to apply a requirement of 3 standard deviations above their blank value as their lower limit of detection. This criterion corresponded to a concentration of 0.2 mg/dL total Ca.
e. Analytical specificity:
Interference studies were conducted according to CLSI EP07-A: Interference Testing in Clinical Chemistry; Proposed Guideline. Each potential interferent was tested once. At the concentrations in the table below the interferents induced less than a 10% variation in total Ca in urine, serum, and plasma samples in the clinically relevant concentration range.
| Interfering Species | Concentration (mg/dL) |
| --- | --- |
| Lipemia | 1000 mg/dL |
| Bilirubin | 40 mg/dL |
| Hemoglobin | 1000 mg/dL |
| Ascorbic Acid | 3000 mg/dL |
{5}
In addition, the company tested potential cation interference in serum, finding the cations in the table below would induce less than a $10\%$ variation in total Ca for measurements made on samples in the clinically relevant concentration range:
| Interfering Species | Concentration (mg/dL) |
| --- | --- |
| Cu+2 | 6.4 |
| Mn+2 | 0.55 |
| Mg+2 | 12.6 |
| Sr+2 | 43.8 |
| Zn+2 | 0.65 |
| MRI contrast agents | |
| Gadodiamide (Gd-DTPA-BMA) | 14.4 |
| Gadoversetamide (MP-1177) | 16.5 |
Finally, the company demonstrated that the assay was linear in the presence of $6\mathrm{g / dL}$ Albumin following the procedure outlined in the "Linearity/assay reportable range", above.
The company determined that anti-coagulants that complex calcium - citric acid, oxalates, EDTA, and NaF - would interfere with this assay. These agents should not be used on samples intended for measurement with this device.
f. Assay cut-off:
Not applicable to this type of device.
# 2. Comparison studies:
a. Method comparison with predicate device:
The company followed CLSI EP09-A2: "Method Comparison and Bias Estimation Using Patient Samples; Approved Guideline" in demonstrating their equivalence to their predicate.
In a comparison of the submitted device to the predicate using 125 clinical serum samples spanning the concentration range of the assay, the company showed:
| Regression Analysis | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Deming | Regular Least Squares |
| Slope | 1.017 (1.008 – 1.025) | 1.015 (1.006-1.023) |
| Intercept | -0.050(-0.071 - -0.029) | -0.045 (-0.066 - -0.024) |
| Standard Error Estimate | 0.025 | 0.025 |
{6}
where the 95% confidence intervals are noted in parenthesis.
In a comparison of the submitted device to the predicate using 44 plasma samples obtained from patients, the company showed:
| Regression Analysis | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Deming | Regular Least Squares |
| Slope | 0.971 (0.961 – 0.982) | 0.971 (0.961-0.981) |
| Intercept | -0.001(-0.023 - 0.022) | 0.000 (-0.022 - 0.023) |
| Standard Error Estimate | 0.015 | 0.015 |
where the 95% confidence intervals are noted in parenthesis.
In a comparison of the submitted device to the predicate using 60 urine samples obtained from patients, the company showed:
| Regression Analysis | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Deming | Regular Least Squares |
| Slope | 0.958 (0.946 – 0.971) | 0.957 (0.945-0.970) |
| Intercept | 0.343(0.189 - 0.496) | 0.355 (0.201 - 0.508) |
| Standard Error Estimate | 0.273 | 0.273 |
where the 95% confidence intervals are noted in parenthesis.
b. Matrix comparison:
Not applicable to this type of device.
3. Clinical studies:
a. Clinical Sensitivity:
Clinical studies are typically not required for this type of device.
b. Clinical specificity:
Clinical studies are typically not required for this type of device.
c. Other clinical supportive data (when a. and b. are not applicable):
Not applicable.
4. Clinical cut-off:
Not applicable
{7}
8
5. Expected values/Reference range:
Serum¹
Premature Infants 6.0-10.0 mg/dL
Full-term infants 7.3-12.0 mg/dL
Child, 1 to 2 years 10.0-12.0 mg/dL
Adults 8.0-10.5 mg/dL
Plasma²
Adults 8.6-10.3 mg/dL
Urine⁺,¹
Men < 275 mg/24 hr
Women < 250 mg/24 hr
*total output of calcium over a 24 hour period
¹ Kaplan, Lawrence A. and Pesce, Amadeo J., (Ed), Clinical Chemistry: Theory, Analysis, Correlation. Mosby-Year Book, Inc., St. Louis (1996).
² Burtis, C. A. and Ashwood, E. R. (Eds.) Tietz Textbook of Clinical Chemistry, W.B. Sounders Co., Philadelphia (1999)
N. Proposed Labeling:
The labeling is sufficient and it satisfies the requirements of 21 CFR Part 809.10.
O. Conclusion:
The submitted information in this premarket notification is complete and supports a substantial equivalence decision.
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.