K-numberK241868
Device namexR IVD
ApplicantTempus AI, Inc.
Product codePZM
Device classClass II
Decision dateSep 19, 2025
DecisionSubstantially Equivalent
Regulation866.6080
AI Summary extracted from FDA summary PDF · never regenerated
Intended use

The Tempus xR IVD is a next-generation sequencing-based in vitro diagnostic device that detects gene rearrangements (specifically in RET and BRAF genes) in RNA extracted from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor tissue specimens. It is intended for use by qualified healthcare professionals to provide tumor profiling information for patients with previously diagnosed solid malignant neoplasms, in accordance with professional oncology guidelines, and results are not intended to be prescriptive for specific therapeutic use.

Technological characteristics

xR IVD uses RNA (versus DNA in the predicate MSK-IMPACT), the Illumina NovaSeq 6000 sequencer (versus HiSeq 2500), and detects translocations in two genes only (RET and BRAF) rather than a broad multi-gene panel with SNVs and indels. Both use hybrid-capture next-generation sequencing, report results in two clinical significance levels, employ controls and quality thresholds, and target FFPE tumor specimens from previously diagnosed cancer patients for prescription use only.

Test standards cited

ISO 13485:2016 (QMS), ISO 14971:2019 (risk management), ISO 15223-1:2021 and ISO 20417:2021 (labeling), IEC 62366-1:2015 (usability), IEC 62304:2006+A1:2015 (software lifecycle), CLSI EP17-A2 (limit of detection), AAMI TIR 45:2012 (agile software development), FDA guidance on cybersecurity (2023-09 and 2016-12).

Substantial equivalence argument

Both devices are qualitative NGS-based tumor profiling tests using hybrid-capture methodology on FFPE tissue to detect genomic alterations in cancer patients, with results reported in two clinical significance categories and intended use by qualified professionals per guidelines. Although xR IVD differs in specimen type (RNA vs. DNA), instrument (NovaSeq vs. HiSeq), alteration types (translocations only vs. broad panel), and scale, these differences do not raise distinct safety or effectiveness issues because both employ equivalent quality control metrics, cut-offs appropriate to their respective nucleic acid type, and comparable precision, sensitivity, and specificity performance demonstrated across multiple tumor types.

Extracted by AI from the official FDA summary PDF →
Source

View the full FDA submission: accessdata.fda.gov

Researching this as a predicate?
Want a transparent AI-ranking score, AI-discovered related predicates, ongoing safety and warning-letter monitoring, full predicate chain lineage, and a drafted SE rationale — all saved to your own project? That's what an account adds.
Start free trial →

Everything you need for a 510(k) submission. Nothing you don't.

14-day free trial. No setup. Cancel anytime.

Start free trial →
Building an AI or ML-enabled device? Predicate search, PCCP tracking, and AI-specific FDA intelligence — built exclusively for AI/ML devices. Try AIFDA Intel →