Recorded device evidence

AUTOMATED IN VITRO QUANTITATIVE ASSAY FOR THE MEASUREMENT OF ALLERGEN SPECIFIC IGE ANTIBODIES (K122197): indications, design and recorded evidence

The acquired K122197 file contains product-specific indications and users, design and operating principle, performance evidence actually described sections. Compare these dated manufacturer statements with your own indication and design before commissioning evidence work. They describe this submission; they do not prescribe your testing, validate performance independently or establish a suitable predicate.

Evidence retrieved 2026-10-07. Source versions and topic-specific limits are listed below.

Computed exact-code research

This decision beside its recorded product-code cohort

The 2021–2025 complete-year cohort contains 5 selected decisions under primary code DHB. 5 have valid reported receipt/decision pairs; 0 pairs are missing or invalid.

No quartiles are displayed: this complete-year cohort has fewer than 20 valid pairs.

The table shows the named decision and up to four latest exact-code research records through 2026-09-27. It can include partial-year records outside the complete-year cohort. The quartiles above use the full stated cohort, not this displayed selection.

Research recordRecorded deviceReceipt → decisionCalendar elapsed daysRecorded submission type
K122197 ↗ · this pageAUTOMATED IN VITRO QUANTITATIVE ASSAY FOR THE MEASUREMENT OF ALLERGEN SPECIFIC IGE ANTIBODIES2012-07-24 → 2013-08-28400Traditional
K260331 ↗IMMULITE 2000 3gAllergy Specific IgE Vantage; IMMULITE 2000 Systems Peanut Allergen (F13)2026-02-02 → 2026-09-04214Traditional
K261027 ↗NOVEOS Specific IgE (sIgE); Capture Reagent F014, Soybean (Glycine max); Capture Reagent F017, Hazelnut (Corylus avellana); Capture Reagent F352, Ara h 8 PR-10, Peanut; Capture Reagent F423, Ara h 2, Peanut; Capture Reagent F447, Ara h 6, Peanut2026-03-30 → 2026-07-24116Traditional
K260591 ↗NOVEOS Specific IgE (sIgE);Capture Reagent F010, Sesame Seed (Sesamum indicum);Capture Reagent F020, Almond (Amygdalus communis);Capture Reagent F078, Bos d 8 Casein, Milk; Capture Reagent F080, Lobster (Homarus gammarus);Capture Reagent F422, Ara h 1, Peanut2026-02-23 → 2026-07-21148Traditional
K260280 ↗NOVEOS Specific IgE (sIgE); Capture Reagent F004, Wheat (Triticum aestivum); Capture Reagent F023, Crab (Callinectes spp.); Capture Reagent F079, Gluten, Wheat; Capture Reagent F202, Cashew Nut (Anacardium occidentale); Capture Reagent F233, Gal d 1 Ovomucoid Egg2026-01-29 → 2026-06-18140Traditional

Use this comparison: select a record to investigate, read its actual indications and design, and document differences. A shared code or elapsed period cannot establish its relevance to your device.

Calendar elapsed days are not active FDA review time, a promised schedule or a success probability. The selection includes only the stated recorded decisions, not all applications. Latest records can postdate the named historical decision and are contextual research, not its predicates. Shared codes, summaries and observed records do not prove equivalence, current market availability, buyer applicability or predicate suitability.

Calculation, selection and source versions

Reuse the complete-endpoint exact-primary-code, documented SE-decision cohort and its stated cutoff/window. Retain its type-7 quartiles only when at least 20 valid date pairs are present. Independently subtract the named official record’s receipt date from its decision date; missing or negative pairs remain unknown. Show up to four latest exact-code research records, excluding the named ID. Parent analysis hash, source snapshots and calculation versions are retained.

Calculation: fda-named-decision-cohort-context-1; cutoff 2026-09-27; 0 parent records excluded; units record counts; calendar elapsed days.

Source snapshots: 5a86994ba49a37e71e09be96803fd51981c6c43eaa96caab41aea2b188bfe002.

Read beyond the decision row

Recorded evidence and differences to investigate

The summary is manufacturer-submitted context hosted by FDA. Negative/no-study statements are preserved. Evidence themes are not binding legal requirements.

Short opening excerpts identify the source sections. Read the linked original for the full study context, negative statements, tables and limitations. Public quotations are limited to 120 words per acquired summary; the internal evidence packet retains exact section ranges for review.

Indications and users

K122197 · PDF page 6 ↗ Source 2

ImmunoCAP             Specific    IgE         is      an     in vitro      quantitative      assay  for      the     measurement         of
allergen          specific    IgE         in human       serum        or     plasma       (EDTA         or        Na-Heparin).

The excerpt is shortened at a complete statement. Read the complete section in the original PDF before interpreting the evidence.

Compare with your product: Compare the recorded indication, population, body site and use environment with your proposed label. Record each change instead of assuming the primary code settles intended use.

Design and operating principle

K122197 · PDF page 2 ↗ Source 3

Reagents
1mmunoCAP             Specific           IgE     reagents           are      modular     in      concept         and        are      available        individually.
For         a complete            listing     of reagents           needed     to          perform       the      Phadia           IimmunoCA-P          Specific             IgE
assay,      please            consult      the      ImmunoCAP        Specific            IgE     Conjugate          Directions        for       Use.

The excerpt is shortened at a complete statement. Read the complete section in the original PDF before interpreting the evidence.

Compare with your product: Compare physical design, materials, energy, accessories and operating principle with your design. Ask which documented differences change the evidence scope.

Performance evidence actually described

K122197 · PDF page 3 ↗ Source 4

The       new            ImmunoCAP      Allergen             Components        were    compared       with         the      extract       based
predicate             devices       with    the      use    of clinical            samples,         as      well          as       samples         from        healthy,       non-
atopic         donors.

The excerpt is shortened at a complete statement. Read the complete section in the original PDF before interpreting the evidence.

Compare with your product: The source labels this section as performance data. Determine which described evidence is bench, software, biological or clinical from the actual narrative and original tables; the section label alone does not settle that distinction or prescribe your testing.

Extraction selection and limits

Select observed whole-line section headings or explicit colon-delimited inline labels on readable PDF pages, including the explicitly documented heading-spacing variants in this parser version. Preserve the original heading, character ranges and layout; do not repair excerpt text. Exclude letter boilerplate and uncertain pages. Stop at observed table headings; do not infer table columns or scalar results from layout text. Multi-column or suspicious split-numeric excerpts are excluded until reviewed alternate extraction is available. Original layout records remain retained; any alternate text has its own extractor-version locator and requires original-page review. For each dimension, prefer usable versioned alternate text where available, selecting its longest usable excerpt; otherwise select the longest usable original-layout excerpt. Ties preserve source order. Bounded to 64 PDF pages and 3,500 characters per section. This is a selection, not a complete dossier analysis.

Excluded extraction items: {}.

Known facts and deciding inputs

Known context: US. Confirm the organisation’s role, relevant activities and markets against the cited criteria.

Source factRecorded valueWhat to check
510(k) identifierK122197 [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Generic device categoryAUTOMATED IN VITRO QUANTITATIVE ASSAY FOR THE MEASUREMENT OF ALLERGEN SPECIFIC IGE ANTIBODIES [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Recorded applicantPhadia US, Inc. [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
FDA product codeDHB [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Decision date2013-08-28 [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Recorded decision codeSESE [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Submission typeTraditional [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Receipt date2012-07-24 [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.

Prepare a differences and evidence worksheet

Use this checklist to gather your business or product details before speaking with a specialist. The items below explain what to record and suggest useful supporting documents. You can add your own answers in the editable project brief.

  1. Indications and users — what differs in our product?

    Compare the recorded indication, population, body site and use environment with your proposed label. Record each change instead of assuming the primary code settles intended use.

    Useful evidence: Our proposed indication, user/population and use environment beside this exact recorded indication.

  2. Design and operating principle — what differs in our product?

    Compare physical design, materials, energy, accessories and operating principle with your design. Ask which documented differences change the evidence scope.

    Useful evidence: Design description, materials/components, accessory list and a differences matrix.

  3. Performance evidence actually described — what differs in our product?

    The source labels this section as performance data. Determine which described evidence is bench, software, biological or clinical from the actual narrative and original tables; the section label alone does not settle that distinction or prescribe your testing.

    Useful evidence: The cited narrative and full tables, underlying protocols/results and a reviewed comparison with the proposed product.

Work packages and dependencies

Questions for providers

Sources and data dates

Read the official document in context. The audit details identify the precise locators and preserved versions used for this page.

FDA openFDA — 510(k) decision records ↗

2026-10-05 · retrieved 2026-10-06

Audit details: precise locators and snapshot identifiers

Source key D01 · snapshot 5a86994ba49a37e71e09be96803fd51981c6c43eaa96caab41aea2b188bfe002

  • [1] device-510k-0001-of-0001.json:results[76878] · record a6e3c6dca99c6417df7d0b3097ff8f594a22b4ee5d19d5ebba1955ddcfdf5a8a
  • [5] Complete results array / fda-decision-context:K122197 · record whole dataset partition

FDA 510(k) summary — K122197 ↗

Fri, 13 Sep 2013 16:37:43 GMT · retrieved 2026-10-07

Audit details: precise locators and snapshot identifiers

Source key D02 · snapshot effd3fd45e47a8126f76f526126423eac20ccac91cbb0a2ea285c1bea7136080

  • [2] PDF page 6 · record 354b8569ea1be8aecb7c439825fd1eb40851d3e1b498ed81206e42b089b61666
  • [3] PDF page 2 · record 145b94b31cc801b03e1ecaa3100277de09a1fd030875f22cd80de8ee564797f0
  • [4] PDF page 3 · record c6d2cd770f05394e0f48c42914daed7d142297ff984467465e2c54b33184e212

Prepare an editable project brief

Confirm the facts, scope and contact preference before sharing your project. Preparing this page sends no provider outreach.

Choose work packages to discuss

Compare FDA 510(k) Submission Services