Cleared Traditional

K172195 - HYDRASHIFT 2/4 daratumumab, daratumumab Control (FDA 510(k) Clearance)

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

K172195 · Sebia · Immunology device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Jan 2018
Decision
174d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K172195 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the HYDRASHIFT 2/4 daratumumab, daratumumab Control. Classified as Immunoelectrophoretic, Immunoglobulins, (g, A, M) (product code CFF), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Sebia (Norcross, US). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on January 11, 2018 after a review of 174 days - an extended review cycle.

This device falls under the Immunology FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 866.5510 - 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: Standard predicate-based submission. Standard predicate reliance. This clearance follows a standard predicate-based equivalence path within the Immunology review framework, consistent with the majority of Class II 510(k) submissions.

View all Sebia devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K172195 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received July 21, 2017
Decision Date January 11, 2018
Days to Decision 174 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Immunology (IM)
Summary Summary PDF
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
70d slower than avg
Panel avg: 104d · This submission: 174d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code CFF Immunoelectrophoretic, Immunoglobulins, (g, A, M)
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 866.5510
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.