Cleared Traditional

K983281 - APOB (FDA 510(k) Clearance)

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

K983281 · Abbott Laboratories · Immunology device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Jan 1999
Decision
130d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K983281 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the APOB. Classified as Lipoprotein, Low-density, Antigen, Antiserum, Control (product code DFC), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Abbott Laboratories (Irving, US). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on January 26, 1999 after a review of 130 days - within the typical 510(k) review window.

This device falls under the Immunology FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 866.5600 - 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 Abbott Laboratories devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K983281 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received September 18, 1998
Decision Date January 26, 1999
Days to Decision 130 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
26d slower than avg
Panel avg: 104d · This submission: 130d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code DFC Lipoprotein, Low-density, Antigen, Antiserum, Control
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 866.5600
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.