The customer reported falsely elevated architect total psa results on one known prostate cancer patient.The results provided were in (b)(6) 2018 = 16, hormone therapy started in (b)(6) 2020 with the following results: (b)(6) =0.96; (b)(6) =0.195; (b)(6) = 0.168, (b)(6) = 6.There was no reported impact to patient management.
|
The complaint investigation for potential false elevated total psa results included a search for similar complaints, review of complaint text, trending data, labelling, and device history records review.Return testing was not completed as returns were not available.Performance of reagent lot 13678fn00 was evaluated using worldwide data from abbottlink.The patient data was analyzed and compared to an established control limit.This evaluation indicated that the patient median result for lot 13678fn00 is within the established control limits, therefore, no unusual reagent lot performance was identified.Lot and trending review did not identify an increase in complaint activity for 13678fn00 for the issue and no related trend for the issue for the product.Device history record review of lot 13678fn00 did not show any potential non-conformances, or deviations.Labelling was reviewed and found to adequately address the issue.Per product labelling serum psa concentrations should not be interpreted as absolute evidence for the presence or absence of prostate cancer.The psa value should be used in conjunction with information available from clinical evaluation and other diagnostic procedures such as dre.Based on the investigation, no systemic issue or deficiency of the architect total psa assay, lot number 13678fn00 was identified.
|