Who is the manufacturer of Dosis SAM?

Dosis, Inc. filed the 510(k) submission for Dosis SAM (K180410).

What is the FDA product code for Dosis SAM?

MQS. It is classified under 21 CFR 876.5820 as a Class 2 device in the Gastroenterology, Urology panel.

What is the regulatory pathway for Dosis SAM?

510(k) clearance (submission type: Traditional).

Who can help prepare an FDA 510(k) submission like Dosis SAM?

Innolitics — a medical-device software consultancy — provides regulatory and engineering support for FDA 510(k) submissions. See https://innolitics.com/services/510ks/ or contact https://innolitics.com/contact.

Dosis SAM

K180410 · Dosis, Inc. · MQS · Jan 16, 2019 · Gastroenterology, Urology

Device Facts

Record ID	K180410
Device Name	Dosis SAM
Applicant	Dosis, Inc.
Product Code	MQS · Gastroenterology, Urology
Decision Date	Jan 16, 2019
Decision	SESE
Submission Type	Traditional
Regulation	21 CFR 876.5820
Device Class	Class 2
Attributes	Software as a Medical Device

Intended Use

SAM is a web application used to obtain, track and trend patient data pertaining to the management of anemia, and to provide a schedule of erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) dosage recommendations to help achieve and maintain target hemoglobin (Hgb) levels in hemodialysis patients. The device is intended to help clinicians manage chronic anemia. The device is not a substitute for, but rather intended to assist, clinical judgment. The ESA dosing regimen options calculated by this device are intended to inform the optimization of the dosage of ESAs in accordance with their approved labeling in conjunction with clinical history, symptoms, and other diagnostic measurements, as well as the clinicians' judgment. No medical decision should be based solely on the patient Hgb response to dosing regimen options calculated by this device.

Device Story

SAM is a web-based software application for anemia management in hemodialysis patients. It ingests patient data (Hgb levels, ESA dosages) from electronic medical records (EMR). The device uses an individualized dose-response model to estimate patient Hgb response to ESAs and generates recommended dosing schedules. It operates via a closed-loop control methodology to adjust for dosing/measurement errors. Clinicians access the application via web browsers; the system provides reports and graphs to assist in clinical decision-making. The physician reviews recommendations and decides whether to follow or override them. The device aims to improve Hgb stability and optimize ESA utilization. It is intended for use by physicians, clinicians, and nurses in clinical settings.

Clinical Evidence

Evidence includes in silico simulation (2430 virtual patients, 26,730 simulations) and two clinical trials. Simulation showed SAM achieved higher percentage of Hgb in target range (10-12 g/dL) and lower Hgb variability compared to standard protocols. Clinical Trial 1 (n=62, 12-month randomized controlled trial) showed SAM had higher proportion of Hgb in target range (72.5% vs 61.9%, p=0.003) with no difference in composite safety events. Clinical Trial 2 (case-controlled/cross-sectional, 45-month follow-up) showed SAM maintained efficacy and safety comparable to the predicate device (PhySoft AMS™).

Technological Characteristics

Web-based software application; operates on remote HIPAA-compliant database servers; accessed via secure internet connections. Uses an individualized dose-response algorithm with closed-loop control. No local installation required. Software verification and validation conducted per FDA guidance (May 11, 2005).

Indications for Use

Indicated for hemodialysis patients with chronic anemia to assist clinicians in managing anemia and optimizing erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) dosage to achieve and maintain target hemoglobin levels.

Regulatory Classification

Identification

A hemodialysis system and accessories is a device that is used as an artificial kidney system for the treatment of patients with renal failure or toxemic conditions and that consists of an extracorporeal blood system, a conventional dialyzer, a dialysate delivery system, and accessories. Blood from a patient flows through the tubing of the extracorporeal blood system and accessories to the blood compartment of the dialyzer, then returns through further tubing of the extracorporeal blood system to the patient. The dialyzer has two compartments that are separated by a semipermeable membrane. While the blood is in the blood compartment, undesirable substances in the blood pass through the semipermeable membrane into the dialysate in the dialysate compartment. The dialysate delivery system controls and monitors the dialysate circulating through the dialysate compartment of the dialyzer.(1) The extracorporeal blood system and accessories consists of tubing, pumps, pressure monitors, air foam or bubble detectors, and alarms to keep blood moving safely from the blood access device and accessories for hemodialysis (§ 876.5540) to the blood compartment of the dialyzer and back to the patient. (2) The conventional dialyzer allows a transfer of water and solutes between the blood and the dialysate through the semipermeable membrane. The semipermeable membrane of the conventional dialyzer has a sufficiently low permeability to water that an ultrafiltration controller is not required to prevent excessive loss of water from the patient's blood. This conventional dialyzer does not include hemodialyzers with the disposable inserts (Kiil type) (§ 876.5830) or dialyzers of high permeability (§ 876.5860). (3) The dialysate delivery system consists of mechanisms that monitor and control the temperature, conductivity, flow rate, and pressure of the dialysate and circulates dialysate through the dialysate compartment of the dialyzer. The dialysate delivery system includes the dialysate concentrate for hemodialysis (liquid or powder) and alarms to indicate abnormal dialysate conditions. This dialysate delivery system does not include the sorbent regenerated dialysate delivery system for hemodialysis (§ 876.5600), the dialysate delivery system of the peritoneal dialysis system and accessories (§ 876.5630), or the controlled dialysate delivery system of the high permeability hemodialysis system § 876.5860). (4) Remote accessories to the hemodialysis system include the unpowered dialysis chair without a scale, the powered dialysis chair without a scale, the dialyzer holder set, dialysis tie gun and ties, and hemodialysis start/stop tray.

Predicate Devices

PhySoft AMS™ (K130579)

Related Devices

K130579 — PHYSOFT AMS · Physicians Software Systems, LLC · Dec 19, 2013
K232283 — PhySoftAMS® · Physician Software Systems, LLC · Dec 14, 2023
K093834 — CRIT-LINE ANEMIA MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE · Hema Metrics, LLC · Sep 29, 2010
K130460 — NXSTAGE DOSING CALCULATOR · Nxstage Medical, Inc. · Jul 11, 2013
K101344 — G+ SYSTEM · Glytec, LLC (Formally Known AS Glucotec, Inc.) · Jun 28, 2010

Submission Summary (Full Text)

{0}------------------------------------------------ Image /page/0/Picture/0 description: The image contains the logos of the Department of Health & Human Services and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The Department of Health & Human Services logo is on the left, and the FDA logo is on the right. The FDA logo is a blue square with the letters "FDA" in white, followed by the words "U.S. FOOD & DRUG ADMINISTRATION" in blue. January 16, 2019 Dosis, Inc. % E.J. Smith Consultant Smith Associates 1468 Harwell Ave. Crofton, MD 21114 Re: K180410 > Trade/Device Name: Smart Anemia Manager (SAM) Regulation Number: 21 CFR§ 876.5820 Regulation Name: Hemodialysis System and Accessories Regulatory Class: II Product Code: MQS Dated: December 7, 2018 Received: December 11, 2018 Dear E.J. Smith: We have reviewed your Section 510(k) premarket notification of intent to market the device referenced above and 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) that do not require approval of a premarket approval application (PMA). You may, therefore, market the device, subject to the general controls provisions of the Act. Although this letter refers to your product as a device, please be aware that some cleared products may instead be combination products. The 510(k) Premarket Notification Database located at https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpmn/pmn.cfm identifies combination product submissions. 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. Please note: CDRH does not evaluate information related to contract liability warranties. We remind you, however, that device labeling must be truthful and not misleading. If your device is classified (see above) into either class II (Special Controls) or class III (PMA), it may be subject to additional controls. Existing major regulations affecting your device can be found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Parts 800 to 898. In addition, FDA may publish further announcements concerning your device in the Federal Register. Please be advised that FDA's issuance of a substantial equivalence determination does not mean that FDA has made a determination that your device complies with other requirements of the Act or any Federal statutes and regulations administered by other Federal agencies. {1}------------------------------------------------ You must comply with all the Act's requirements. including, but not limited to: registration and listing (21 CFR Part 807); labeling (21 CFR Part 801); medical device reporting of medical device-related adverse events) (21 CFR 803) for devices or postmarketing safety reporting (21 CFR 4, Subpart B) for combination products (see https://www.fda.gov/CombinationProducts/GuidanceRegulatoryInformation/ucm597488.html; good manufacturing practice requirements as set forth in the quality systems (OS) regulation (21 CFR Part 820) for devices or current good manufacturing practices (21 CFR 4, Subpart A) for combination products; and, if applicable, the electronic product radiation control provisions (Sections 531-542 of the Act); 21 CFR 1000-1050. Also, please note the regulation entitled, "Misbranding by reference to premarket notification" (21 CFR Part 807.97). For questions regarding the reporting of adverse events under the MDR regulation (21 CFR Part 803). please go to http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/ReportaProblem/default.htm. For comprehensive regulatory information about mediation-emitting products, including information about labeling regulations, please see Device Advice (https://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/) and CDRH Learn (http://www.fda.gov/Training/CDRHLearn). Additionally, you may contact the Division of Industry and Consumer Education (DICE) to ask a question about a specific regulatory topic. See the DICE website (http://www.fda.gov/DICE) for more information or contact DICE by email (DICE@fda.hhs.gov) or phone (1-800-638-2041 or 301-796-7100). Sincerely, ## Carolyn Y. Neuland -S for Benjamin R. Fisher, Ph.D. Director Division of Reproductive, Gastro-Renal, and Urological Devices Office of Device Evaluation Center for Devices and Radiological Health Enclosure {2}------------------------------------------------ ## Indications for Use 510(k) Number (if known) K180410 Device Name Smart Anemia Manager (SAM) #### Indications for Use (Describe) SAM is a web application used to obtain, track and trend patient data pertaining to the management of anemia, and to provide a schedule of erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) dosage recommendations to help achieve and maintain target hemoglobin (Hgb) levels in hemodialysis patients. The device is intended to help clinicians manage chronic anemia. The device is not a substitute for, but rather intended to assist, clinical judgment. The ESA dosing regimen options calculated by this device are intended to inform the optimization of the dosage of ESAs in accordance with their approved labeling in conjunction with clinical history, symptoms, and other diagnostic measurements, as well as the clinicians' judgment. No medical decision should be based solely on the patient Hgb response to dosing regimen options calculated by this device. X Prescription Use (Part 21 CFR 801 Subpart D) Over-The-Counter Use (21 CFR 801 Subpart C) ## CONTINUE ON A SEPARATE PAGE IF NEEDED. This section applies only to requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. #### *DO NOT SEND YOUR COMPLETED FORM TO THE PRA STAFF EMAIL ADDRESS BELOW.* The burden time for this collection of information is estimated to average 79 hours per response, including the time to review instructions, search existing data sources, gather and maintain the data needed and complete and review the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this information collection, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to: > Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Office of Chief Information Officer Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) Staff PRAStaff@fda.hhs.gov "An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB number." {3}------------------------------------------------ ## 510(k) Summary | Company Name: Company Address: | Dosis, Inc. 353 Sacramento Street Suite 1811 San Francisco, CA 94111 | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Telephone: Contact Person: | 650 383 0186 Shivrat Chhabra | | Summary Preparation Date: | 01/14/2019 | | Device Description: Device Name: Common Name: Classification Name Regulatory Class: Product Code: C.F.R. Section: | Smart Anemia Manager (SAM) Anemia Software Management Hemodialysis System and Accessories Class II MQS 21 CFR 876.5820 | #### PREDICATE DEVICE: | Manufacturer | Product Name | 510(k) Number | |---------------------------------|--------------|---------------| | Physician Software Systems, LLC | PhySoft AMS™ | K130579 | #### DEVICE DESCRIPTION: SAM is a web application used to obtain, track and trend patient data pertaining to the management of anemia, and to provide a schedule of erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) dosage recommendations to help achieve and maintain target hemoglobin (Hgb) levels in hemodialysis patients. The device is intended to help clinicians manage chronic anemia. Healthcare professionals access SAM using a web-enabled application (for example, a web browser or a web-enabled electronic health record system) communicating with the SAM web application server. Patient information is obtained by SAM from healthcare provider Electronic Medical Records. No components of SAM are required to be installed at end user or healthcare provider locations. SAM estimates individual patient's Hgb response to ESAs. The results of this estimation are used to generate new patient-specific ESA dose recommendation to achieve target Hgb level specified by the physician. The ESA dose recommendation is reviewed by the physician, who after considering any additional relevant information about patient's condition, decides whether to follow or override the presented ESA dose recommendation. {4}------------------------------------------------ #### INDICATIONS FOR USE: SAM is a web application used to obtain, track and trend patient data pertaining to the management of anemia, and to provide a schedule of erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) dosage recommendations to help achieve and maintain target hemoglobin (Hgb) levels in hemodialysis patients. The device is intended to help clinicians manage chronic anemia. The device is not a substitute for, but rather intended to assist, clinical judgment. The ESA dosing regimen options calculated by this device are intended to inform the optimization of the dosage of ESAs in accordance with their approved labeling in conjunction with clinical history, symptoms, and other diagnostic measurements, as well as the clinicians' judgment. No medical decision should be based solely on the patient Hgb response to dosing regimen options calculated by this device. | | Dosis | Physicians Software System, LLC | Similarities and Difference | |----------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------| | Product Name | SAM | PhySoft AMS™ | | | Indications for Use Statement | SAM is a web application used to obtain, track and trend patient data pertaining to the management of anemia, and to provide a schedule of erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) dosage recommendations to help achieve and maintain target hemoglobin (Hgb) levels in hemodialysis patients. The device is intended to help clinicians manage chronic anemia. The device is not a substitute for, but rather intended to assist, clinical judgment. The ESA dosing regimen options calculated by this device are intended to inform the optimization of the dosage of ESAs in accordance with their approved labeling in conjunction with clinical history, symptoms, and other diagnostic measurements, as well as the clinicians' judgment. No medical decision should be | PhySoft AMS™ is a web application used to obtain, track and trend patient data pertaining to the management of anemia, and to provide a schedule of erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) dosage recommendations to help achieve and maintain target hemoglobin levels in dialysis patients. PhySoft AMS™ is intended to help physicians, nurses, clinicians and anemia managers manage anemia in adult stage 5 chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. The PhySoft AMS™ is not a substitute for, but rather intended to assist, clinical judgment. The ESA dosing regimen options calculated by this device are intended to be used by qualified and trained medical personnel to inform the optimization of the dosage of ESAs in accordance with their approved labeling in conjunction with clinical history, symptoms, and other diagnostic measurements as | Same | ## SUBSTANTIALLY EQUIVALENCE DISCUSSION: {5}------------------------------------------------ # K180410 Page 3 of 9 | based solely on the patient Hgb response to dosing regimen options calculated by this device. | well as the medical professional's clinical judgment. No medical decision should be based solely on the patient Hgb response to dosing regimen options calculated by this device. | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| |--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | Parameters | Dosis | Physicians Software System, LLC | Similarities and Differences | |--------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 510(k) Number: | | K130579 | | | Product Code | MQS | MQS | Same | | Regulation Number | 21 CFR 876.5820 | 21 CFR 876.5820 | Same | | Principle of Operation | Track and trend Hgb and ESA dosages which can be used to determine future ESA dosages | Track and trend Hgb and ESA dosages which can be used to determine future ESA dosages | Same | | Technology | Application used to trend patient data collected during each dialysis treatment | Application used to trend patient data collected during each dialysis treatment | Same | | Patient Demographics | Adult stage 5 chronic kidney disease patients | Adult stage 5 chronic kidney disease patients | Same | | Intended User | Physician/Clinicians/Nurses | Physician/Clinicians/Nurses | Same | | Data Storage | Data is stored electronically | Data is stored electronically | Same | | Data Management | Generates reports and graphs to assist anemia management | Generates reports and graphs to assist anemia management | Same | | Safeguards/Alerts | System flags patients who exceed limits | System flags patients who exceed limits | Same | | Technological Characteristics | | | | | Parameters | Dosis | Physicians Software System, LLC | Similarities and Differences | | 510(k) Number: Product Code | MQS | K130579 MQS | Same | | Regulation Number | 21 CFR 876.5820 | 21 CFR 876.5820 | Same | | Principle of Operation | Track and trend Hgb and ESA dosages which can be used to determine future ESA dosages | Track and trend Hgb and ESA dosages which can be used to determine future ESA dosages | Same | | Technology | Application used to trend patient data collected during each dialysis treatment | Application used to trend patient data collected during each dialysis treatment | Same | | Patient Demographics | Adult stage 5 chronic kidney disease patients | Adult stage 5 chronic kidney disease patients | Same | | Intended User | Physician/Clinicians/Nurses | Physician/Clinicians/Nurses | Same | | Data Storage | Data is stored electronically | Data is stored electronically | Same | | Data Management | Generates reports and graphs to assist anemia management | Generates reports and graphs to assist anemia management | Same | | Technology/Algorithm | Uses individualized dose response model to compute patient dose response. | Uses individualized dose response model to compute patient dose response. | Same | | | Account for effects of last ESA dose. | Account for effects of multiple prior ESA dosages. | In SAM effect of multiple prior ESA dose is embedded in Hgb trend. | | | Estimates ongoing dosing schedules to achieve target Hgb levels using close-loop approach. | Estimates ongoing dosing schedules to achieve target Hgb levels using open-loop approach. | In SAM close-loop allows for potential mismatch | | Technological Characteristics | | | | | Parameters | Dosis | Physicians Software System, LLC | Similarities and Differences between model and patient. | | Data Entry | Patient data is transferred electronically from existing healthcare provider information systems. | Patient data is transferred electronically from existing healthcare provider information systems. | Same | | Data Storage | Data is stored electronically in a remote database server | Data is stored electronically on local or remote database server | SAM does not store data locally | | Data Network Access | Data is accessed over secure internet connections. | Data is accessed over secure internet connections. | Same | | Safeguards/Alerts | System flags patients who exceed limits | System flags patients who do not respond as predicted and may have undetected health issues that do not fit the most probable model. | SAM does not flag undetected health issues. | | Minimum Data Requirement | | Evaluates patient readiness for application of algorithm to model ESA dose-Hgb response (sufficient history of Hgb and ESA dosing). | SAM does not have a minimum dosing history requirement only requires a single HgB measurement. | {6}------------------------------------------------ {7}------------------------------------------------ ## Discussion of Similarities and Differences: ## Similarities - . SAM has the same indications for use, principle of operation, technology, patient demographics, intended users, data storage, data management, safe guards and alerts, technology/algorithm, data entry, and data network access and raises no new issues of safety and effectiveness, as a result of this submission. - . SAM has a similar algorithm as the predicate device. Both software systems were verified and validated using the recommendations found in FDA's Guidance for the Content of Premarket Submissions for Software Contained in Medical Devices, {8}------------------------------------------------ Document issued on: May 11, 2005 and the results raises no new issues of safety and effectiveness. ## Differences - The combination of past ESA doses will impact future HgB concentrations and SAM uses the most recent ESA dose as a predictor of future HgB. Additional information on past ESA dose is present in HgB trend. Both methods use past ESA dose in different ways for the same end result. - . SAM uses close loop control and therefore can better acknowledge and adjust for errors in drug dosing and the measurement of HgB. This should lead to at least similar accuracy compared to the predicate and is a superior method when compared to open loop control. - . SAM only stores data on a remote HIPPA compliant server and avoids the potential problem with local data storage and potential data incursion. There is no effect on predictive performance due to data storage methods. - SAM and the predicate both identify when the observed HgB is different from the prediction. SAM uses this information in the close loop control methodology to improve the prediction in the future. The predicate only flags the individual as not responding as expected and might be able to suggest the cause but does not adjust the prediction to account for this error like a close loop control method. The impact should not be substantially different between methods except that close loop control can potentially lead to improved future predictions. - . SAM does not have a minimum data requirement to estimate patient response and can make recommendations based on a single HgB measurement. This difference will allow SAM to make recommendations in patients that the predicate cannot. ## Non-clinical Performance Tests ## Simulation Testing The performance of the SAM software was tested through simulation and comparison to anemia management using usual practice in the form of an anemia management protocol in use at 2 large dialysis providers. ## Purpose Demonstrate the efficacy and safety of the SAM software in the dosing of erythropoietin (ESA) for the treatment of anemia in a simulated patient population compare to usual care. ## Subjects Anemic subjects were simulated based on their response to an ESA using the concepts published on the pharmacodynamics of erythropoietin (Uehlinger et al. Clin Pharmacol {9}------------------------------------------------ Ther 51:76-89, 1992). Subject had a broad range of responsiveness that encompassed that observed in the target population. ## Study Design In silico three way cross over simulation. ## Outcome Variables ## Methods A pool of 2430 patients were created based on a range of ESA response measures and red blood cell life spans essentially generating a cohort of test subjects that range to hyper to hypo responsive to ESA. ESA dosing was then simulated to achieve steady state hemoglobin concentrations using the SAM software or conventional therapy using an anemia management protocol 1 or 2 (AMP1 or AMP2). Noise was introduced into the system to simulate the uncertainty in the measurement of hemoglobin between 0.0 and 1.0 g/dL. We recorded the mean achieve hemoglobin, time to steady state, hemoglobin variability, percent in target range, and mean ESA/week. A total of 26,730 simulations were run for each protocol. Target range was a hemoglobin between 10.0 and 12.0 g/dL. The goal was to demonstrate non-inferiority to AMP 1 and 2 in mean hemoglobin, percent in target range and hemoglobin standard deviation. ## Results The results of the simulations are shown in the following tables: | | Time to Target (weeks) | | | Mean Hgb (g/dL) | | | Hgb Standard Deviation (g/dL) | | | |-----------------|------------------------|------|------|-----------------|------|-----------|----------------------------------|------|-----------| | Noise (g/dL) | AMP1 | AMP2 | SAM | AMP1 | AMP2 | Dosis SAM | AMP1 | AMP2 | Dosis SAM | | 0.0 | 5.2 | 4.5 | 12.6 | 11.2 | 12.3 | 10.9 | 0.5 | 1.4 | 0.2 | | 0.1 | 5.4 | 4.5 | 12.4 | 11.2 | 12.3 | 10.9 | 0.6 | 1.4 | 0.3 | | 0.2 | 5.3 | 4.6 | 11.9 | 11.1 | 12.3 | 10.9 | 0.6 | 1.5 | 0.4 | | 0.3 | 5.3 | 4.8 | 11.6 | 11.1 | 12.4 | 10.9 | 0.7 | 1.6 | 0.4 | | 0.4 | 5.5 | 4.5 | 11.0 | 11.1 | 12.4 | 10.9 | 0.8 | 1.7 | 0.5 | | 0.5 | 5.5 | 4.7 | 10.2 | 11.0 | 12.4 | 10.9 | 0.9 | 1.8 | 0.6 | | 0.6 | 5.5 | 4.5 | 9.8 | 11.0 | 12.4 | 10.9 | 1.0 | 1.8 | 0.7 | | 0.7 | 5.2 | 4.8 | 9.5 | 11.0 | 12.5 | 10.8 | 1.1 | 1.9 | 0.9 | | 0.8 | 5.2 | 4.7 | 8.9 | 11.0 | 12.6 | 10.8 | 1.2 | 2.0 | 0.9 | | 0.9 | 5.7 | 4.7 | 8.3 | 11.0 | 12.7 | 10.8 | 1.3 | 2.1 | 1.1 | | 1.0 | 5.7 | 4.5 | 7.7 | 11.0 | 12.7 | 10.8 | 1.4 | 2.2 | 1.2 | Time to target, Mean achieved Hgb, and Standard Deviation for AMP1, AMP2, and SAM The approaches resulted in differences in respect to time to target with SAM taking longer to reach the target Hgb. The mean Hgb achieved was similar between SAM and AMP1, but AMP2 routinely exceeded the target Hgb range of 10 to 12 g/dL. SAM had lower Hgb variability. The impact of these observations can be seen in the next table {10}------------------------------------------------ | Noise (g/dL) | Percent Hgb 10 to 12 | | | ESA Dose (units) | | | |-----------------|----------------------|------|------|------------------|-------|-----------| | | AMP1 | AMP2 | SAM | AMP1 | AMP2 | Dosis SAM | | 0.0 | 67.7 | 50.1 | 74.1 | 11217 | 11554 | 7356 | | 0.1 | 67.2 | 50.6 | 74.0 | 11186 | 11575 | 7352 | | 0.2 | 65.5 | 49.3 | 73.9 | 11116 | 11759 | 7344 | | 0.3 | 61.4 | 47.5 | 72.7 | 10869 | 11834 | 7337 | | 0.4 | 57.6 | 46.1 | 70.6 | 10709 | 11910 | 7338 | | 0.5 | 53.5 | 44.1 | 66.8 | 10455 | 12013 | 7307 | | 0.6 | 51.0 | 41.7 | 62.7 | 10282 | 12147 | 7289 | | 0.7 | 47.4 | 38.1 | 58.2 | 10252 | 12560 | 7277 | | 0.8 | 45.4 | 36.7 | 55.8 | 10218 | 12651 | 7239 | | 0.9 | 42.9 | 34.7 | 51.0 | 10131 | 12925 | 7232 | | 1.0 | 40.2 | 33.2 | 48.0 | 9852 | 13074 | 7167 | comparing the percent of Hgb concentrations within the target range of 10 to 12 g/dL and the amount of ESA used to achieve this result. SAM resulted in a greater percent of Hgb observations within the target range and a lower utilization of ESA. ## Other Testing - . ISO 14971 Second edition 2007-03-01, Medical devices - Application of risk management to medical devices. - . Software Verification and Validation were conducted based on the use of Guidance for the Content of Premarket Submissions for Software Contained in Medical Devices, Document issued on: May 11, 2005 ## Clinical Studies ## Executive Summary SAM software was tested in 2 clinical trials. The first trial was a randomized, controlled, double blind trial against standard of care conducted in 62 subjects over a 12 month period. 52 subject completed the study. The proportion of hemoglobin concentrations within the target range was greater for SAM (72.5%) than control (61.9%) (p=0.003). There was no difference in a Composite Safety Event (CSE) as a combination of All-Cause Mortality (ACM), Myocardial Infarction (MI), Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA), and (exacerbation of) Congestive Heart Failure (CHF). The second trial was a combination of a case controlled and cross sectional study. Efficacy was maintained over the 45 month long term follow up where hemoglobin concentrations within the target range ranged from 76.8% to 86.3% for SAM compared to 73.5% to 89.1% for PhySoft AMS™. Safety was maintained over the 45 month long term follow up where hemoglobin concentrations above 12.9 g/dL ranged from 1.5% to 8.7% for SAM compared to 5.9% to 9.4% for PhySoft AMS™. No statistical difference was observed between SAM and PhySoft AMS™ performance. {11}------------------------------------------------ ## Conclusion Smart Anemia Manager (SAM) is substantially equivalent in Indications for Use, principle of operation and technological characteristics to the predicate device. SAM is substantially equivalent in clinical performance as demonstrated in comparison of published performance measures with the predicate device. Dosis. Inc.'s software validation and verification has demonstrated the safety and effectiveness of the SAM software in anemia management for hemodialysis patients and it is the conclusion of Dosis, Inc., that the SAM raises no new questions of safety and effectiveness and is substantially equivalent to the predicate device.