Cleared Traditional

K001393 - THE APTUS, AUTOMATED APPLICATION OF THE GLIADIN IGA ELISA TEST SYSTEM. AN ENZYME LINKED IMMUNOSORBENT ASSAY, ELISA FOR (FDA 510(k) Clearance)

Class II Immunology device cleared through predicate-based substantial equivalence - typically does not require clinical trials.

Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Jun 2000
Decision
35d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K001393 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the THE APTUS, AUTOMATED APPLICATION OF THE GLIADIN IGA ELISA TEST SYSTEM. AN ENZ.... Classified as Antibodies, Gliadin (product code MST), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Zeus Scientific, Inc. (Branchburg, US). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on June 7, 2000 after a review of 35 days - a notably fast clearance cycle.

This device falls under the Immunology FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 866.5750 - the FDA immunology device framework. The Traditional 510(k) pathway establishes clearance through substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device, without requiring clinical trial data.

Device pattern: Fast-track predicate clearance. Standard predicate reliance. The short review cycle indicates strong predicate alignment - the FDA found sufficient equivalence without extended technical review.

View all Zeus Scientific, Inc. devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K001393 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received May 03, 2000
Decision Date June 07, 2000
Days to Decision 35 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Immunology (IM)
Summary Statement
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
69d faster than avg
Panel avg: 104d · This submission: 35d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code MST Antibodies, Gliadin
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 866.5750
What this classification means

Class II devices require demonstration of substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device. This pathway does not require clinical trials - it relies on engineering equivalence and performance data. Most Immunology devices follow this clearance model.