Cleared Traditional

QM300 HAPTOGLOBIN ANTIBODY PACK (K872717) - FDA 510(k) Clearance

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

K872717 · Kallestad Diag, A Div. of Erbamont, Inc. · Immunology device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Jul 1987
Decision
11d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K872717 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the QM300 HAPTOGLOBIN ANTIBODY PACK. Classified as Haptoglobin, Antigen, Antiserum, Control (product code DAD), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Kallestad Diag, A Div. of Erbamont, Inc. (Chaska, US). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on July 21, 1987 after a review of 11 days - a notably fast clearance cycle.

This device falls under the Immunology FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 866.5460 - 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 Kallestad Diag, A Div. of Erbamont, Inc. devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K872717 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received July 10, 1987
Decision Date July 21, 1987
Days to Decision 11 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Immunology (IM)
Summary -
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
93d faster than avg
Panel avg: 104d · This submission: 11d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code DAD Haptoglobin, Antigen, Antiserum, Control
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 866.5460
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.