‘Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator’ mobile applications (Apps): a systematic review and scoring using the validated user version of the Mobile Application Rating Scale (uMARS)
- 279 Downloads
The use of mobile phone applications (Apps) has modernised the conventional practice of medicine. The diagnostic ability of the current Apps in prostate specific antigen monitoring, and its diagnostic ability within prostate cancer (PCa) risk calculators have not yet been appraised. We aimed to review, rate and assess the everyday functionality, and utility of all the currently available PCa risk calculator Apps.
A systematic search on iTunes, Google Play Store, Blackberry World and Windows Apps Store, was performed on 23/11/2017, using the search term ‘prostate cancer risk calculator’. After applying the exclusion criteria, each App was individually assessed and rated using pre-set criteria and grading was performed using the validated uMARS scale.
In total, 83 Apps were retrieved. After applying our exclusion criteria, only 9 Apps were relevant, with 2 duplicated, and the remaining 7 were suitable for critical review. Data sizes ranged from 414 kb to 10.1 Mb. The cost of the Apps ranged from South African rand (ZAR) 0.00 to ZAR 29.99. The overall mean category uMARS scores ranged from 2.8/5 to 4.5/5. Apps such as Rotterdam Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator, Coral—Prostate Cancer Nomogram Calculator and CPC Risk Calculator, performed the best.
The current PCa risk calculator mobile Apps available may be beneficial in counselling the concerned at risk patient. These Apps have potential to assist both the patient and the urologist alike. The PCa risk calculator App ‘predictability’ may be further enhanced by the incorporation of newly validated risk factors and predictors for PCa.
KeywordsProstate cancer Risk calculators Mobile applications (Apps) uMARS Grading Scoring
The authors are grateful to Mrs. Anna Welman, Department of Surgery, Helen Joseph Hospital, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, for her secretarial support in the drafting of this manuscript.
AA: study inception, project development, grading-tool selection, grading, outline and structure, manuscript writing, editing, collaboration, submission, correspondence JCH: data collation, grading, manuscript writing/editing, MP: manuscript writing/editing, DB: manuscript writing/editing, NL: manuscript writing/editing.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
A. Adam is not a recipient of a research scholarship.
- 2.Roobol MJ, Verbeek JF, van der Kwast T, Kümmerlin IP, Kweldam CF, van Leenders GJ (2017) Improving the Rotterdam European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer risk calculator for initial prostate biopsy by incorporating the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology Gleason grading and cribriform growth. Eur Urol 72(1):45–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2017.01.033 (Epub 2017 Feb 2) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 3.Foley R, Maweni R, Gorman L, Murphy K, Lundon D, Durkan G et al (2016) European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) risk calculators significantly outperform the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial (PCPT) 2.0 in the prediction of prostate cancer: a multi-institutional study. BJU Int 118:706–713CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 5.Jeong CW, Lee S, Jung J, Ki Lee B, Jeong S, Hong S et al (2014) Mobile application-base Seoul National University Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator: development, validation, and comparative analysis with two western risk calculators in Korean men. PLoS ONE 9(4):e94441. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0094441 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 8.The European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). http://www.erspc.org/. Accessed 20 Aug 2017
- 10.Nardozza Junior A, Fihlo M, Borges dos Reis R (2006) Antigeno Prostatico Especificio. In: Urologica fundamental, edition, 1st edn, pp 190–194Google Scholar
- 11.Karakiewicz PI, Benayoun S, Kattan MW, Perrotte P, Valiquette LU, Scardino PT et al (2005) Development and validation of a nomogram predicting the outcome of prostate biopsy based on patient age, digital rectal examination and serum prostate specific antigen. J Urol 173(6):1930–1934CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 12.Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator version (PCPT) 2.0. http://myprostatecancerrisk.com/. Accessed 20 Aug 2017
- 13.Røder MA, Berg KD, Loft MD, Thomsen FB, Ferrari M, Kurbegovic S, Rytgaard HC, Gruschy L, Brasso K, Gerds TA, Kjær A (2016) The CPC risk calculator: a new app to predict prostate-specific antigen recurrence during follow-up after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol Focus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2016.11.014 (Epub ahead of print) Google Scholar
- 14.Yuri P, Wangge G, Abshari F, Satjakoesoemah AI, Perdana NR, Wijaya CD et al (2015) Indonesian prostate cancer risk calculator (IPCRC): an application for predicting prostate cancer risk (a multicenter study). Acta Med Indones 47(95):e103Google Scholar
- 15.Bender JL, Yue RYK, To MJ, Deacken L, Jadad AR (2013) A lot of action, but not in the right direction: systematic review and content analysis of smartphone applications for the prevention, detection, and management of cancer. J Med Internet Res 15(12):e287. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2661 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 22.MacInnis RJ, English DR, Gertig DM, Hopper JL, Giles GG (2003) Body size and composition and prostate cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 12(12):1417–1421Google Scholar