Date of report (b)(6) 2014; date of receipt by manufacturer may 21, 2014; follow up report 1; additional information / device evaluation; device evaluated by manufacturer yes; result code device performed according to specification, conclusion code no failure detected and product within specifications.The complaint alleged that result discrepancies were generated for one patient sample with the cobas ampliscreen (cas) (b)(6) v1.5 test when compared with eia results using ortho and prism platforms.The cas (b)(6) test generated non-reactive results in two runs and the eia testing with both platforms generated reactive results.The donor sample was rejected and not released for donation.Although requested, no sample was available for further investigation; without investigating the complaint sample, the root cause for the discrepant results cannot be identified.The discrepant results in this complaint may be explained by the presence of a low (b)(6) viral titer, differences in the assays' window periods of detection (cas vs eia) and/or differences in the target regions of the various tests used.Retain testing of cas complaint batch generated valid acceptable results.No false non-reactive results were generated during testing.All results met qc release validation and acceptance criteria.These results confirm the complaint kit batch is performing as intended.(b)(4).
|