Cleared Traditional

DIASTAT ANTI-B2 GLYCOPROTEIN 1 IGM, MODEL FBGP 100M (K031177) - 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 2003
Decision
66d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K031177 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the DIASTAT ANTI-B2 GLYCOPROTEIN 1 IGM, MODEL FBGP 100M. Classified as System,test,antibodies,b2 - Glycoprotein I (b2 - Gpi) (product code MSV), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Axis-Shield Diagnostics, Ltd. (Dundee, GB). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on June 19, 2003 after a review of 66 days - a notably fast clearance cycle.

This device falls under the Immunology FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 866.5660 - 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 Axis-Shield Diagnostics, Ltd. devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K031177 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received April 14, 2003
Decision Date June 19, 2003
Days to Decision 66 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
38d faster than avg
Panel avg: 104d · This submission: 66d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code MSV System,test,antibodies,b2 - Glycoprotein I (b2 - Gpi)
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 866.5660
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.