FDA record research

Tyrosine Phosphatase (Ia-2) Autoantibody Assay (OIF) — FDA decisions, comparisons and evidence

The 2021–2025 analysis contains 1 selected substantially-equivalent FDA decisions under primary product code OIF. Use it to compare documented submissions and evidence with your product. A separate 2026 update contains 0 decisions through 2026-09-27. The latest selected decision across the acquired endpoint is dated 2023-08-24. Neither set establishes a suitable predicate or the route for your device. The complete-year window has 1 decisions; the separate all-observed-date count is 3. These denominators describe different date ranges.

Evidence retrieved 2026-10-06. Source versions and topic-specific limits are listed below.

Recorded scope and its declared regulatory reference

An exact FDA-record regulation_number match to one acquired Title 21 section. Records with the same normalized scope definition, class, regulation and recorded submission/GMP flags are grouped. Sparse definitions and generic exemption boilerplate do not qualify. No text-similarity equivalence or legal applicability is inferred.

What scope does the FDA record describe?

The device is used for the semi-quantitative determination of autoantibodies against tyrosine phosphatase (IA-2) in human serum as an aid in the diagnosis of Type 1 diabetes mellitus (autoimmune mediated diabetes).

Compare the proposed indication, user, anatomy, technology and operating principle with this actual scope; record differences and unresolved facts.

Cited source

Which current section does the record cite?

§ 866.5660 Multiple autoantibodies immunological test system. (a) Identification. A multiple autoantibodies immunological test system is a device that consists of the reagents used to measure by immunochemical techniques the autoantibodies (antibodies produced against the body's own tissues) in serum and other body fluids. Measurement of multiple autoantibodies aids in the diagnosis of autoimmune disorders (disease produced when the body's own tissues are injured by autoantibodies). (b) Classification. Class II (performance standards).

Read the identification, classification, conditions and referenced limitations in the cited section. A numeric reference match is not a buyer classification or exemption determination.

Cited source

Historical FDA comparison

2021–2025: five complete calendar years

Primary code OIF

All statistics in this section use decisions dated 2021-01-01 to 2025-12-31. The partial 2026 update below is excluded from these distributions.

1Selected decisions in these five years
WithheldMedian receipt-to-decision calendar days
1Valid date pairs in the distribution

There are 1 valid recent date pairs. Distribution summaries require at least 20; older records are not substituted for a current benchmark.

20210
20220
20231
20240
20250

Statistical source: FDA openFDA 510(k) decision dataset. Partition 1 Download the identified records and dates (CSV).

Filters, exclusions and reproducible calculation

Deduplicate by official submission ID across the complete current manifest partitions. Select exact primary product code, K-number format and the stated SE decision codes with valid dates. Recent distributions use the five complete calendar years preceding the latest valid endpoint decision year. Partial-year counts compare equal January-to-cutoff periods. Quartiles use linear interpolation at (n-1)*p and are withheld below 20 valid date pairs. The analysis n describes only its declared complete-year window; selected_se_n separately counts all selected recorded dates through the cutoff.

3 selected records across all observed dates; 0 other/invalid identifier or decision-date records excluded. 0 missing or invalid date pairs in the five-year window.

Date fields: date_received → decision_date. Quantiles: Hyndman–Fan type 7: linear interpolation at (n − 1) × p; displayed to one decimal; n ≥ 20 valid pairs.

Receipt-to-decision calendar elapsed time includes time outside active FDA review; it is not FDA review time, a promised project timeline or an estimate of future clearance. This selected recorded cohort does not include all applications or establish a success probability, predicate suitability, market size, current market availability or legal authorization for another product.

Calculation fda-buyer-research-3 · database cutoff 2026-09-27. CSV rows identify each official K-number, cohort, date pair, exclusion reason and source version.

Separate partial-year update

2026 decisions through 2026-09-27

0 selected decisions from 2026-01-01 to 2026-09-27. The equivalent previous-year period contains 0 decisions through 2025-09-27. These counts describe the records; they are not market growth or submission success rates.

Named records to investigate

Latest decisions across the database

These dated records may come from 2026 or earlier years. They are a separate investigation list, not the five-year statistical cohort. Compare the actual indications and technology before considering a record as a comparator.

Official record / deviceRecorded applicantDecisionRecorded typeCalendar days
K220085 ↗KRONUS IA-2 Autoantibody (IA-2Ab) ELISA KitKronus, Inc.2023-08-24Traditional590
K171731 ↗KRONUS IA-2 Autoantibody (IA-2Ab) ELISA KitKronus, Inc.2018-01-19Traditional221
K073590 ↗KRONUS IA-2 AUTOANTIBODY RIA ASSAY KITKronus Market Development Associates, Inc.2008-04-10Traditional112

Recorded classification context

Known context: US. Match the intended use and design with the recorded category before treating it as applicable.

Source factRecorded value
FDA product codeOIF [1]
Generic device categoryTyrosine Phosphatase (Ia-2) Autoantibody Assay [1]
Recorded scopeThe device is used for the semi-quantitative determination of autoantibodies against tyrosine phosphatase (IA-2) in human serum as an aid in the diagnosis of Type 1 diabetes mellitus (autoimmune mediated diabetes). [1]
Recorded class2 [1]
Regulation866.5660 [1]
Medical specialtyImmunology [1]

Build a comparison that explains the differences

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. Which specific part of the recorded scope fits or differs?

    Put your proposed label and design beside the quoted definition. Record matching facts, differences and missing facts separately; naming the category alone cannot resolve scope.

    Useful evidence: Proposed indication/design and a definition-to-product comparison with source locators.

  2. Have the cited section and its limitations been reviewed?

    Record the applicable paragraph, conditions and cross-referenced limitations after specialist review. Keep a claimed exemption separate from actual establishment, listing and quality-system responsibilities.

    Useful evidence: Dated classification/route rationale and the current provisions relied on, with unresolved conditions.

  3. Compare your intended use with a named decision

    Choose a named record above. Put your proposed claim beside its actual indications-for-use statement. Record different patients, users, anatomy, settings and output claims; do not treat a shared code as proof of equivalence.

    Useful evidence: Your draft indications for use + the selected official summary and its exact page.

  4. Explain the technology and evidence differences

    For each comparison, record the different materials, hardware, software functions and operating conditions. Link each difference to existing evidence or an unresolved evaluation task.

    Useful evidence: A three-column matrix: comparator fact / your design fact / evidence or unresolved gap.

  5. Prepare a scope-based schedule without a sparse timing benchmark

    This recent cohort has fewer than 20 valid date pairs, so it supplies no median or percentile benchmark. Ask for a schedule based on actual preparation, evidence gaps, interactions and response assumptions; keep any historical decision context separately dated.

    Useful evidence: Document/test readiness, unresolved route/evidence tasks and the assumptions behind the specialist’s proposed sequence.

Work packages and dependencies

What needs to happen first

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 — device classification records ↗

2026-10-05 · retrieved 2026-10-06

Audit details: precise locators and snapshot identifiers

Source key D01 · snapshot 936de5f5d47b9293b702fc32512a79173969fb788c74a63d9b91abe73f3b86a5

  • [1] device-classification-0001-of-0001.json:results[2584] · record ce38851645bf4c27b9ce1f4db1e3e687d5064427f96176afeba16f4251aba869

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

Find FDA US Agent Services | Compare & Get Quotes · FDA QMSR Transition & Inspection Readiness (ISO 13485 Alignment)