Background: The Deyo/Charlson co-morbidity index (CCI) and Klabunde co-morbidity index (KCI) co-morbidity indexes represent outdated indexes when the endpoint of complications after radical prostatectomy (RP) is considered. A novel group of co-morbidities derived from International Classification of Diseases-9 diagnostic codes in a contemporary RP database could provide better accuracy. Research Design, Subjects and Measures: We relied on 20,484 patients with clinically localized non-metastatic prostate cancer treated with RP between 2000 and 2009 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked database. We examined 2 endpoints, namely, 90-day medical complication rate and 90-day surgical complication rate after RP. Simulated annealing (SA) was used to develop a novel co-morbidity index. Finally, the newly identified groups of co-morbid conditions were compared with the CCI and Klabunde indexes. Results: Our SA identified 10 and 7 individual co-morbid conditions able to predict 90-day medical and surgical complications respectively. This novel model showed improved predictive accuracy over CCI and KCI for the 2 endpoints considered (respectively: 59.4 vs. 58.1 and 58.0% for medical complications, 58.0 vs. 56.8 and 56.7% for surgical complications). Conclusions: The newly defined groupings of co-morbid conditions resulted in better ability to predict the 2 endpoints of interest compared to CCI and KCI. However, the gain was marginal. This implies that better tools should be defined to more accurately predict these outcomes.

Keywords:
Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results, Simulated annealing, 90-Day complications, Prediction, Prostate cancer, Deyo, Charlson, Klabunde
1.
Song W, Park JH, Jeon HG, Jeong BC, Seo SI, Jeon SS, et al: Comparison of oncologic outcomes and complications according to surgical approach to radical prostatectomy: special focus on the perineal approach. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2017; 15:e645–e652.
2.
Campbell JM, Raymond E, O'Callaghan ME, Vincent AD, Beckmann KR, Roder D, et al: Optimum tools for predicting clinical outcomes in prostate cancer patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: a systematic review of prognostic accuracy and validity. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2017; 15(5):e827–e834.
3.
Leyh-Bannurah SR, Dell'Oglio P, Tian Z, Schiffmann J, Shariat SF, Suardi N, et al: A proposal of a new nomogram for predicting upstaging in contemporary D’Amico low-risk prostate cancer patients. World J Urol 2016; 35: 189–197.
4.
Albkri A, Girier D, Mestre A, Costa P, Droupy S, Chevrot A: Urinary incontinence, patient satisfaction, and decisional regret after prostate cancer treatment: a French national study. Urol Int 2018; 100: 50–56.
5.
Patel VR, Sivaraman A, Coelho RF, Chauhan S, Palmer KJ, Orvieto MA, et al: Pentafecta: a new concept for reporting outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2011; 59: 702–707.
6.
Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR: A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis.1987; 40: 373–383.
7.
Deyo R, Cherkin DC, et al: Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 1992; 45: 613–619.
8.
Klabunde CN, Potosky AL, Legler JM, Warren JL: Development of a comorbidity index using physician claims data. J Clin Epidemiol 2000; 53: 1258–1267.
9.
Extermann M: Measuring comorbidity in older cancer patients. Euro j cancer 2000; 36: 453–471.
10.
Hall WH, Ramachandran R, Narayan S, Jani AB, Vijayakumar S: An electronic application for rapidly calculating charlson comorbidity score. BMC cancer 2004; 4: 94.
11.
Gabbe BJ, Magtengaard K, Hannaford AP, Cameron PA: Is the Charlson comorbidity index useful for predicting trauma outcomes? Acad Emerg Med 2005; 12: 318–321.
12.
Warren JL, Klabunde CN, Schrag D, Bach PB, Riley GF: Overview of the SEER-medicare data: content, research applications, and generalizability to the United States elderly population. Med Care 2002; 40(8 suppl):IV-3-IV-18.
13.
Hu JC, Gu X, et al: Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy. JAMA 2009; 302: 1557.
14.
Kirkpatrick S, Gelatt CD Jr, Vecchi MP: Optimization by simulated annealing. Science 1983; 220: 671–680.
15.
Burnham KP: Multimodel inference: understanding AIC and BIC in model selection. Sociol Methods Res 2004; 33: 261–304.
16.
Fox KAA, Dabbous OH, Goldberg RJ, Pieper KS, Eagle KA, Van de Werf F, et al: Prediction of risk of death and myocardial infarction in the six months after presentation with acute coronary syndrome: prospective multinational observational study (GRACE). BMJ 2006; 333: 1091.
17.
Middleton SJ, Nishida S, Tzakis A, Woodward JM, Duncan S, Watson CJ, et al: Cambridge-miami score for intestinal transplantation preoperative risk assessment: initial development and validation. Transplant Proc 2010; 42: 19–21.
18.
Gilbert SM, Dunn RL, Miller DC, Daignault S, Ye Z, Hollenbeck BK: Mortality after urologic cancer surgery: impact of non-index case volume. Urology 2008; 71: 906–910.
19.
Higgins TL, Estafanous FG, Loop FD, Beck GJ, Blum JM, Paranandi L: Stratification of morbidity and mortality outcome by preoperative risk factors in coronary artery bypass patients. A clinical severity score. JAMA 1992; 267: 2344–2348.
20.
Magapu P, Haskard D, Fisher M: A review of the peri-operative risk stratification assessment tools used for the prediction of cardiovascular complications in non-cardiac surgery. Perfusion 2016; 31: 358–365.
21.
Licker MJ, Widikker I, Robert J, Frey JG, Spiliopoulos A, Ellenberger C, et al: Operative mortality and respiratory complications after lung resection for cancer: impact of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and time trends. Ann thorac surg 2006; 81: 1830–1837.
22.
Virani S, Michaelson JS, Hutter MM, Lancaster RT, Warshaw AL, Henderson WG, et al: Morbidity and mortality after liver resection: results of the patient safety in surgery study. J Am Coll Surg 2007; 204: 1284–1292.
23.
Davila JA, Rabeneck L, Berger DH, El-Serag HB: Postoperative 30-day mortality following surgical resection for colorectal cancer in veterans: changes in the right direction. Dig dis sci 2005; 50: 1722–1728.
24.
Hammill BG, Curtis LH, Bennett-Guerrero E, O'Connor CM, Jollis JG, Schulman KA, et al: Impact of heart failure on patients undergoing major noncardiac surgery. Anesthesiology 2008; 108: 559–567.
25.
Wilt TJ, Cowper DC, Gammack JK, Going DR, Nugent S, Borowsky SJ: An evaluation of radical prostatectomy at veterans affairs medical centers: time trends and geographic variation in utilization and outcomes. Med care 1999; 37: 1046–1056.
26.
Musallam KM, Tamim HM, Richards T, Spahn DR, Rosendaal FR, Habbal A, et al: Preoperative anaemia and postoperative outcomes in non-cardiac surgery: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 2011; 378: 1396–1407.
27.
Noordzij PG, Boersma E, Schreiner F, Kertai MD, Feringa HH, Dunkelgrun M, et al: Increased preoperative glucose levels are associated with perioperative mortality in patients undergoing noncardiac, nonvascular surgery. European journal of endocrinology/Eur J Endocrinol 2007; 156: 137–142.
28.
Krolikowska M, Kataja M, Pöyhiä R, Drzewoski J, Hynynen M: Mortality in diabetic patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery: a 7-year follow-up study. Acta anaesthesiol Scand 2009; 53: 749–758.
29.
Thourani VH, Weintraub WS, Stein B, Gebhart SS, Craver JM, Jones EL, et al: Influence of diabetes mellitus on early and late outcome after coronary artery bypass grafting. The Ann thorac surg 1999; 67: 1045–1052.
30.
Jayalath VH, Ireland C, Fleshner NE, Hamilton RJ, Jenkins DJ: The relationship between metformin and serum prostate-specific antigen levels. Prostate 2016; 76: 1445–1453.
31.
Albertsen PC, Klotz L, Tombal B, Grady J, Olesen TK, Nilsson J: Cardiovascular morbidity associated with gonadotropin releasing hormone agonists and an antagonist. Eur urol 2014; 65: 565–573.
32.
Cantarutti A, Bonn SE, Adami HO, Grönberg H, Bellocco R, Bälter K: Body mass index and mortality in men with prostate cancer. Prostate 2015; 75: 1129–1136.
33.
Russo GI, Cimino S, Castelli T, Favilla V, Gacci M, Carini M, et al: Benign prostatic hyperplasia, metabolic syndrome and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: Is Metaflammation the Link? Prostate 2016; 76: 1528–1535.
34.
Funahashi Y, Majima T, Matsukawa Y, Yamamoto T, Yoshida M, Gotoh M: Intraprostatic reflux of urine induces inflammation in a rat. Prostate 2017; 77: 164–172.
35.
Boehm K, Valdivieso R, Meskawi M, Larcher A, Sun M, Sosa J, et al: BPH: a tell-tale sign of prostate cancer? Results from the Prostate Cancer and Environment Study (PROtEuS). World J Urol. 2015; 33: 2063–2069.
36.
Sammon JD, Karakiewicz PI, Sun M, Sukumar S, Ravi P, Ghani KR, et al: Robot-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy: the differential effect of regionalization, procedure volume and operative approach. J Urol 2013; 189: 1289–1294.
37.
Begg CB, Riedel ER, Bach PB, Kattan MW, Schrag D, Warren JL, et al: Variations in morbidity after radical prostatectomy. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 1138–1144.
38.
Sugi M, Matsuda T, Yoshida T, Taniguchi H, Mishima T, Yanishi M, et al: Introduction of an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol for robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Urol Int 2017; 99: 194–200.
39.
Penson DF: The power and the peril of large administrative databases. J Urol 2015; 194: 10–21.
© 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel
2018
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.