713 844
considering the appropriate clinical scenario and using a
well-fitting risk assessment tool could provide mortality
predictions superior to government life tables in this
population. Single center design is a limitation of this study.
External validation would be desirable.
In conclusion, this study illustrated that stricter selection
may neutralize the prognostic significance of several
common diseases in men selected for radical prostatectomy
aged 70 yr or older, whereas other parameters (peripheral
vascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, ASA class 3,
current smoking, and lower or unknown level of education)
sustained their meaningfulness. Knowing these parameters
may be helpful in tailoring individual treatment strategies
in elderly patients with early prostate cancer.
Author contributions
: Michael Froehner had full access to all the data in the
study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy
of the data analysis.
Study concept and design:
Froehner.
Acquisition of data:
Froehner, Hu¨ bler.
Analysis and interpretation of data:
Koch, Wirth, Zastrow, Froehner.
Drafting of the manuscript:
Froehner, Koch, Hu¨ bler, Zastrow, Wirth.
Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content:
Froehner, Koch, Hu¨ bler, Zastrow, Wirth.
Statistical analysis:
Koch, Froehner.
Obtaining funding:
None.
Administrative, technical, or material support:
Wirth.
Supervision:
Wirth.
Other:
None.
Financial disclosures:
Michael Froehner certifies that all conflicts of
interest, including specific financial interests and relationships and
affiliations relevant to the subject matter or materials discussed in the
manuscript (eg, employment/affiliation, grants or funding, consultan-
cies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties,
or patents filed, received, or pending), are the following: None.
Funding/Support and role of the sponsor:
None.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data associated with this article can be
found, in the online version, at
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. eururo.2016.10.022.
References
[1]
Sammon JD, Abdollah F, D’Amico A, et al. Predicting life expectancy in men diagnosed with prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2015;68:756–65.
[2]
Shumway DA, Hamstra DA. Ageism in the undertreatment of high- risk prostate cancer: how long will clinical practice patterns resist the weight of evidence? J Clin Oncol 2015;33:676–8.
[3]
Alibhai SM, Krahn MD, Cohen MM, Fleshner NE, Tomlinson GA, Naglie G. Is there age bias in the treatment of localized prostate carcinoma? Cancer 2004;100:72–81.[4]
Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol 2017;71:618–29.
[5]
Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: devel- opment and validation. J Chron Dis 1987;40:373–83.[6]
Martin NE, Massey L, Stowell C, et al. Defining a standard set of patient-centered outcomes for men with localized prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2015;67:460–77.
[7]
Lee SJ, Lindquist K, Segal MR, Covinsky KE. Development and validation of a prognostic index for 4-year mortality in older adults. JAMA 2006;295:801–8.
[8]
Daskivich TJ, Kwan L, Dash A, Saigal C, Litwin MS. An age adjusted comorbidity index to predict long-term, other cause mortality in men with prostate cancer. J Urol 2015;194:73–8.
[9]
Daskivich TJ, Kwan L, Dash A, Greenfield S, Litwin MS. Weighted versus unweighted Charlson score to predict long-term other-cause mortality in men with early-stage prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2014;66:1002–9.
[10]
Froehner M, Koch R, Hu¨ bler M, Wirth MP. Validation of an age- adjusted prostate cancer specific comorbidity index. Eur Urol 2016;69:764–6.E U R O P E A N U R O L O G Y 7 1 ( 2 0 1 7 ) 7 1 0 – 7 1 3
713