Cosimo De Nunzio1, Riccardo Lombardo2, Giorgia Tema3, Fabiana Cancrini4, Giorgio Ivan Russo5, Rodrigo Chacon6, Eduard Garcia-Cruz7, Maria Jose Ribal8, Giuseppe Morgia9, Antonio Alcaraz10, Andrea Tubaro11. 1. Department of Urology, Ospedale Sant' Andrea, Rome, Italy. Electronic address: cosimodenunzio@virgilio.it. 2. Department of Urology, Ospedale Sant' Andrea, Rome, Italy. Electronic address: rlombardo@me.com. 3. Department of Urology, Ospedale Sant' Andrea, Rome, Italy. Electronic address: giorgiat88@hotmail.it. 4. Department of Urology, Ospedale Sant' Andrea, Rome, Italy. Electronic address: fabiana.cancrini@gmail.com. 5. Urology Section, Department of Urology, University of Catania, Catania, Italy. Electronic address: giorgioivan1987@gmail.com. 6. Department of Urology, Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: rodrigochaconc@gmail.com. 7. Department of Urology, Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: eduard.garcia.cruz@gmail.com. 8. Department of Urology, Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: mjribal@clinic.cat. 9. Urology Section, Department of Urology, University of Catania, Catania, Italy. Electronic address: gmorgia@policlinico.unict.it. 10. Department of Urology, Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: aalcaraz@clinic.ub.es. 11. Department of Urology, Ospedale Sant' Andrea, Rome, Italy. Electronic address: tubaro@mac.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the performance of two mobile phone apps-the Rotterdam prostate cancer risk app and the Coral app-in a cohort of patients undergoing prostate biopsies. METHODS: A consecutive series of men undergoing prostate biopsies were enrolled in two centers. Indications for prostate biopsy included abnormal prostate-specific antigen levels (PSA >4 ng/mL) and/or an abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE). Prostate cancer risk and high-grade prostate cancer risk were assessed using the Rotterdam prostate cancer risk app (iOS) and the Coral app (iOS). The usability of the apps was also assessed and compared using the Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire (PSSUQ) developed by IBM. RESULTS: Overall, 1682 patients with a median age of 68 (62-73) years were enrolled. The Rotterdam app outperformed the Coral app in the prediction of prostate cancer (AUC: 0.70 versus 0.631, p = 0.001) and of high-grade prostate cancer (0.75 versus 0.69, p = 0.001) (Fig. 1). PSSUQ data revealed that both Rotterdam and Coral applications were comparable in terms of usefulness (87% versus 83%, p = 0.708), information quality (74% versus 72%, p = 0.349), interface quality (79% versus 74%, p = 0.216) and satisfaction (76% versus 76%, p = 0.935), respectively. In terms of preferences, 26/50 (54%) preferred the Rotterdam app, while 24/50 (46%) preferred the Coral app. CONCLUSION: In our experience the Rotterdam App outperformed the Coral App for the prediction of prostate cancer or high-grade cancer diagnosis. In particular we confirmed, using the Rotterdam app, that only one out of ten patients with a low Rotterdam score will harbor high-grade prostate cancer on biopsy.
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the performance of two mobile phone apps-the Rotterdam prostate cancer risk app and the Coral app-in a cohort of patients undergoing prostate biopsies. METHODS: A consecutive series of men undergoing prostate biopsies were enrolled in two centers. Indications for prostate biopsy included abnormal prostate-specific antigen levels (PSA >4 ng/mL) and/or an abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE). Prostate cancer risk and high-grade prostate cancer risk were assessed using the Rotterdam prostate cancer risk app (iOS) and the Coral app (iOS). The usability of the apps was also assessed and compared using the Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire (PSSUQ) developed by IBM. RESULTS: Overall, 1682 patients with a median age of 68 (62-73) years were enrolled. The Rotterdam app outperformed the Coral app in the prediction of prostate cancer (AUC: 0.70 versus 0.631, p = 0.001) and of high-grade prostate cancer (0.75 versus 0.69, p = 0.001) (Fig. 1). PSSUQ data revealed that both Rotterdam and Coral applications were comparable in terms of usefulness (87% versus 83%, p = 0.708), information quality (74% versus 72%, p = 0.349), interface quality (79% versus 74%, p = 0.216) and satisfaction (76% versus 76%, p = 0.935), respectively. In terms of preferences, 26/50 (54%) preferred the Rotterdam app, while 24/50 (46%) preferred the Coral app. CONCLUSION: In our experience the Rotterdam App outperformed the Coral App for the prediction of prostate cancer or high-grade cancer diagnosis. In particular we confirmed, using the Rotterdam app, that only one out of ten patients with a low Rotterdam score will harbor high-grade prostate cancer on biopsy.
Authors: Shlomi Tapiero; Renai Yoon; Francis Jefferson; John Sung; Luke Limfueco; Courtney Cottone; Sherry Lu; Roshan M Patel; Jaime Landman; Ralph V Clayman Journal: World J Urol Date: 2019-10-09 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Guglielmo Mantica; Rafaela Malinaric; Federico Dotta; Irene Paraboschi; Giovanni Guano; Silvia Rebuffo; Massimo Garriboli; Nazareno Suardi; André Van der Merwe; Carlo Terrone Journal: Cent European J Urol Date: 2020-08-07
Authors: Alexandra von Au; Stephanie Wallwiener; Lina Maria Matthies; Benjamin Friedrich; Sabine Keim; Markus Wallwiener; Christl Reisenauer; Sarah Brugger Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2021-03-11 Impact factor: 1.932
Authors: Cosimo De Nunzio; Jamil Ghahhari; Riccardo Lombardo; Giorgio Ivan Russo; Ana Albano; Antonio Franco; Valeria Baldassarri; Antonio Nacchia; Juan Lopez; Pilar Luque; Maria Jose Ribal; Antonio Alcaraz; Andrea Tubaro Journal: World J Urol Date: 2021-06-26 Impact factor: 4.226