Risk Stratification and Staging

Chapter Opening — David's Story

David, a 62-year-old engineer, sat in his urologist's office staring at his biopsy report. "Grade Group 2, Gleason 3+4, PSA 8.5, two of twelve cores positive," the doctor read aloud. David's mind raced — was this bad? Was it good? His urologist explained that these numbers, combined with his physical exam, would place him in a specific "risk group" that would guide every treatment decision going forward. "Think of it like a GPS for your cancer journey," the doctor said. "We need to know exactly where you are before we can map the best route forward."

Part 1: Why Risk Stratification Matters

If you have read the previous chapters, you now know your PSA level, your Gleason score (Grade Group), and what your biopsy and imaging showed. This chapter explains how doctors combine all of these pieces of information into a single profile — your risk group — that guides every treatment decision.

Not all prostate cancers are the same. Some grow so slowly that they may never cause harm in a man's lifetime. Others are aggressive and need prompt treatment. Risk stratification is the process of sorting cancers into categories based on how likely they are to grow, spread, and cause problems.¹ ²

Your risk group determines:

• Whether you can safely monitor the cancer without treatment (active surveillance)
• What type of treatment is recommended if treatment is needed
• Whether additional therapies like hormone therapy should be added
• How closely you need to be followed after treatment

The three main ingredients that go into your risk group are:

1. PSA level — the blood test discussed in Chapter 3
2. Grade Group (Gleason score) — the aggressiveness score from your biopsy discussed in Chapter 4
3. Clinical T stage — how much cancer the doctor can feel on exam or see on imaging

Additional factors such as the number of positive biopsy cores, PSA density, and genomic test results can further refine your risk profile.¹ ²

Part 2: The TNM Staging System

Doctors around the world use a standardized system called TNM staging to describe the extent of cancer. TNM stands for Tumor, Nodes, and Metastasis. The current version is the AJCC (American Joint Committee on Cancer) 8th edition, published in 2017.³ ⁴

T — Tumor (How far has the cancer grown?)

The T stage describes the size and extent of the primary tumor in the prostate:

• T1 — The cancer cannot be felt on a digital rectal exam (DRE) and is not seen on imaging. It was found either incidentally during surgery for another condition (T1a, T1b) or through a biopsy prompted by an elevated PSA (T1c). Most men diagnosed today are T1c.
• T1a: Found incidentally in ≤5% of tissue removed during a TURP
• T1b: Found incidentally in >5% of tissue removed during a TURP
• T1c: Found by needle biopsy (e.g., because of elevated PSA) — this is the most common scenario today
• T2 — The cancer can be felt on DRE but appears confined within the prostate.
• T2a: Involves half of one side or less
• T2b: Involves more than half of one side but not both sides
• T2c: Involves both sides
• T3 — The cancer has grown beyond the prostate capsule.
• T3a: Extraprostatic extension (EPE) — the cancer has broken through the outer shell of the prostate
• T3b: The cancer has invaded the seminal vesicles
• T4 — The cancer has invaded nearby structures other than the seminal vesicles, such as the bladder, rectum, pelvic wall, or external sphincter.³

Important note: There are two types of T staging:

• Clinical T stage (cT) — based on DRE and imaging before any treatment
• Pathological T stage (pT) — based on examination of the prostate after surgical removal. Pathological staging is generally more accurate but is only available after surgery. In pathological staging, all organ-confined disease is simply called pT2 (no longer subdivided into pT2a, pT2b, pT2c).³ ⁴

N — Nodes (Has the cancer spread to nearby lymph nodes?)

• N0 — No cancer in regional (pelvic) lymph nodes
• N1 — Cancer found in one or more regional lymph nodes³

M — Metastasis (Has the cancer spread to distant parts of the body?)

• M0 — No distant spread
• M1 — Cancer has spread to distant sites
• M1a: Spread to lymph nodes outside the pelvis (non-regional nodes)
• M1b: Spread to bones
• M1c: Spread to other organs (liver, lungs, etc.) with or without bone involvement³

When more than one site of metastasis is present, the most advanced category is used. M1c is the most advanced.³

Part 3: AJCC Prognostic Stage Groups

The AJCC 8th edition combines T, N, and M with PSA level and Grade Group to create prognostic stage groups. This is different from many other cancers where staging is based on anatomy alone.⁴ ⁵

• Stage I — T1–T2a, Grade Group 1, PSA 10. Very early cancer with excellent prognosis.
• Stage IIA — T1–T2a with PSA 10–20 and Grade Group 1, OR T2b–T2c with PSA 20 and Grade Group 1. Still early but slightly higher PSA.
• Stage IIB — T1–T2, PSA 20, Grade Group 2. The Gleason pattern has shifted to 3+4.
• Stage IIC — T1–T2, PSA 20, Grade Group 3 or 4. More aggressive patterns (4+3 or Gleason 8).
• Stage IIIA — T1–T2, PSA ≥20, Grade Group 1–4. The cancer is still organ-confined but PSA is high.
• Stage IIIB — T3–T4, any PSA, Grade Group 1–4. The cancer has grown beyond the prostate.
• Stage IIIC — Any T, any PSA, Grade Group 5. The most aggressive Gleason pattern (9–10), regardless of other factors.
• Stage IVA — Any T, N1, M0. Cancer in pelvic lymph nodes but no distant spread.
• Stage IVB — Any T, any N, M1. Cancer has spread to distant sites.³ ⁴

An important and unique feature of prostate cancer staging: some organ-confined cancers (T1–T2) can be Stage III based on high PSA or aggressive Grade Group. This is different from most other cancers where Stage III always means the cancer has grown beyond the organ.⁵

Part 4: NCCN Risk Groups — The System Your Doctor Likely Uses

While AJCC staging is important for communication and research, most treatment decisions in the United States are guided by the NCCN risk group system. This system divides clinically localized prostate cancer (no spread to lymph nodes or distant sites) into categories based on the likelihood of the cancer progressing.¹ ²

Very Low Risk (not a formal NCCN category on the main algorithm but referenced in guidelines)

• T1c (found by biopsy only, not felt on exam)
• Grade Group 1 (Gleason ≤6)
• PSA 10 ng/mL
• Fewer than 3 biopsy cores positive, with ≤50% cancer in any core
• PSA density 0.15 ng/mL/g

Low Risk

• T1–T2a
• Grade Group 1
• PSA 10 ng/mL
• Has ALL of the above features¹

Intermediate Risk — Has one or more intermediate risk factors (IRFs):

• T2b–T2c, OR
• Grade Group 2 or 3, OR
• PSA 10–20 ng/mL

Intermediate risk is further divided into two important subgroups:¹

Favorable Intermediate Risk — Has ALL of the following:

• Only 1 intermediate risk factor
• Grade Group 1 or 2 (not 3)
• Less than 50% of biopsy cores positive

Unfavorable Intermediate Risk — Has one or more of the following:

• 2 or 3 intermediate risk factors
• Grade Group 3 (Gleason 4+3)
• 50% or more of biopsy cores positive¹

High Risk — Has one or more of the following (but does not meet very high risk criteria):

• T3–T4
• Grade Group 4 or 5
• PSA >20 ng/mL¹

Very High Risk — Has at least TWO of the following:

• T3–T4
• Grade Group 4 or 5
• PSA >40 ng/mL¹

Why the favorable vs. unfavorable intermediate distinction matters:

This is one of the most important distinctions in prostate cancer. Research has shown that men with favorable intermediate-risk cancer have outcomes similar to low-risk patients, while men with unfavorable intermediate-risk cancer have outcomes closer to high-risk patients.⁶ This distinction affects whether active surveillance is an option, whether hormone therapy is added to radiation, and the intensity of treatment recommended.

Regional Disease (N1, M0):

Cancer found in pelvic lymph nodes but no distant spread. This is treated differently from localized disease and typically requires combination therapy.¹

Metastatic Disease (M1):

Cancer that has spread beyond the pelvis. This is further categorized by volume of disease (oligometastatic vs. polymetastatic) and hormone sensitivity (castration-sensitive vs. castration-resistant), which are discussed in detail in Chapter 12.¹

Part 5: Staging Workup — What Tests Do You Need?

The imaging tests you need depend on your risk group (discussed in detail in Chapter 5):¹ ⁷

• Low and Favorable Intermediate Risk: Generally, no staging imaging beyond a prostate MRI is needed. The chance of finding cancer spread is very low.
• Unfavorable Intermediate Risk: Soft tissue imaging (CT or MRI of abdomen/pelvis) is recommended, and bone imaging should be considered. Alternatively, a PSMA PET scan can replace both CT and bone scan.
• High and Very High Risk: Both bone and soft tissue imaging are recommended. PSMA PET can be used as an alternative to conventional imaging.¹ ⁷

If staging imaging reveals regional lymph node metastases or distant metastases, the treatment approach changes significantly, and patients are redirected to the appropriate treatment algorithms.¹

Part 6: Calculators and Nomograms — Refining Your Risk

Beyond risk groups, several mathematical tools (called nomograms) can provide more personalized risk estimates. These tools combine multiple factors to calculate the probability of specific outcomes.⁸ ⁹

CAPRA Score (Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment)

Developed at the University of California, San Francisco, the CAPRA score uses five factors:⁸ ⁹

• Age at diagnosis
• PSA at diagnosis
• Gleason score / Grade Group
• Clinical T stage
• Percentage of biopsy cores positive

The score ranges from 0 to 10. Higher scores indicate higher risk. The CAPRA score has been validated to predict biochemical recurrence, metastasis, cancer-specific mortality, and overall mortality across multiple treatment types.⁸ ⁹

MSKCC Nomograms (Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center)

These online calculators (available at mskcc.org/nomograms) provide personalized predictions for:⁸ ¹⁰

• Probability of organ-confined disease
• Probability of biochemical recurrence after surgery or radiation
• Probability of metastasis
• Life expectancy

You enter your specific clinical information and the calculator generates a percentage probability for each outcome.

Partin Tables

Originally developed at Johns Hopkins, the Partin Tables predict the pathological stage at surgery (organ-confined, extraprostatic extension, seminal vesicle invasion, or lymph node involvement) based on PSA, Grade Group, and clinical stage. They were most recently updated in 2017.¹¹

Roach Formulas

Developed by Dr. Mack Roach III, these simple formulas estimate:¹² ¹³

Risk of lymph node involvement:

$$\text{LN risk (\%)} = \frac{2}{3} \times \text{PSA} + (\text{Gleason score} - 6) \times 10$$

Risk of seminal vesicle involvement:

$$\text{SV risk (\%)} = \text{PSA} + (\text{Gleason score} - 6) \times 10$$

For example, a man with PSA of 15 and Gleason 7 would have:

• LN risk = (2/3 × 15) + (7−6) × 10 = 10 + 10 = 20%
• SV risk = 15 + (7−6) × 10 = 15 + 10 = 25%

Important caveat: The Roach formula was developed in the early PSA screening era and may overestimate risk in contemporary patients with mainly T1c/T2 disease detected through routine screening.¹³ ¹⁴ However, when validated against extended pelvic lymph node dissection, the formula remains reasonably accurate with an AUC of approximately 80%.¹⁵ The Roach formula is also used to determine which patients may benefit from pelvic lymph node radiation — the POP-RT trial established a benefit of whole pelvis radiotherapy in patients with >35% risk of lymph node involvement by the Roach formula.¹⁶

PSA Doubling Time (PSADT)

This is not a nomogram but an important calculation, especially after treatment. It measures how quickly PSA is rising. A shorter doubling time (e.g., 12 months) suggests slower-growing cancer. PSADT is discussed further in Chapter 13.

Part 7: Life Expectancy Estimation — A Critical Factor

Life expectancy is one of the most important factors in prostate cancer treatment decisions. Because prostate cancer often grows slowly, a man's overall health and expected lifespan significantly influence whether treatment will provide benefit.¹⁷ ¹⁸

General guidelines:¹⁷ ¹⁸ ¹⁹

• Life expectancy >10 years: Definitive treatment (surgery or radiation) is generally recommended for intermediate-risk disease
• Life expectancy >5 years: Definitive treatment is generally recommended for high-risk disease
• Life expectancy ≤5 years: Observation (watchful waiting) is often recommended, as treatment is unlikely to improve survival within this timeframe

Tools for estimating life expectancy include:¹⁷

• Social Security Administration life tables (www.ssa.gov)
• WHO Life Tables by country
• MSKCC Male Life Expectancy tool
• UCSF Lee-Schonberg Index (eprognosis.ucsf.edu)
• Prostate Cancer Comorbidity Index (PCCI)²⁰

When using life tables, the NCCN recommends adjusting based on overall health:¹⁷

• Best quartile of health (very healthy): Add 50% to the table estimate
• Worst quartile of health (multiple serious conditions): Subtract 50%
• Middle two quartiles: No adjustment

For example, if the life table says a 70-year-old man has a life expectancy of 14 years:

• Very healthy 70-year-old: 14 + 7 = 21 years
• Average health: 14 years
• Poor health: 14 − 7 = 7 years

This is not an exact science, and these are estimates for groups of patients, not predictions for individuals. However, they help frame the conversation about whether the potential benefits of treatment outweigh the risks.¹⁷

Part 8: Biomarkers — Beyond Standard Risk Groups

As discussed in Chapter 3, biomarkers are tests that provide additional information about your cancer. In the context of risk stratification, biomarkers fall into three categories:²¹ ²²

Diagnostic biomarkers — Help determine if you have cancer (discussed in Chapter 3):

• PCA3, ExoDx, SelectMDx, 4Kscore, PHI

Prognostic biomarkers — Help predict how the cancer will behave regardless of treatment:²¹ ²² ²³

• Decipher (22-gene genomic classifier): Predicts risk of metastasis. Scored 0–1, with higher scores indicating higher risk. Validated in multiple phase III randomized trials (NRG/RTOG 0126, 9202, 9413, 9902, 9601, SAKK 09/10) for predicting distant metastasis, cancer-specific mortality, and overall survival.²¹
• Prolaris (cell cycle progression score): Measures how fast cancer cells are dividing. Validated to predict biochemical recurrence, metastasis, and prostate cancer-specific mortality.²³
• Oncotype DX Genomic Prostate Score (GPS): A 17-gene test that predicts the likelihood of aggressive disease. Scores range from 0–100.²³
• ProMark: A protein-based test that predicts aggressive pathology.²³
• ArteraAI (MMAI): An artificial intelligence-based tool that analyzes biopsy slides to predict outcomes. Validated across eight phase III randomized trials.²¹

Predictive biomarkers — Help predict whether a specific treatment will benefit you:²¹ ²²

• ArteraAI (MMAI): Beyond its prognostic role, early data suggest it may predict which patients benefit from adding hormone therapy to radiation, though further validation is needed.²¹
• Decipher: In the post-surgery setting, may help predict which patients benefit from adding hormone therapy to salvage radiation.²¹

Important caveats about genomic tests:²¹ ²² ²⁴

The NCCN states that the primary method for personalizing treatment remains standard risk stratification (PSA, Grade Group, T stage), not genomic tests. Advanced tools are recommended only when they have the potential to change management and should not be ordered reflexively.²¹ ²²

The AUA/ASTRO guidelines similarly recommend that clinicians should not routinely use tissue-based genomic biomarkers for risk stratification but may use them selectively when added risk stratification may alter clinical decision-making.²⁴

Examples of when genomic tests may be helpful:²⁴

• A man with high-volume Grade Group 1 cancer considering active surveillance — a low genomic score may provide reassurance
• A man with favorable intermediate-risk cancer deciding between active surveillance and treatment — the genomic score may tip the balance
• After surgery, a man with adverse pathology deciding between immediate (adjuvant) radiation and waiting (salvage radiation) — Decipher may help guide timing

Toxicity biomarkers — An emerging area:

• Tests like Prostix aim to predict which patients are more likely to experience side effects from radiation, potentially allowing treatment to be tailored to minimize toxicity. These are still investigational.

Part 9: Putting It All Together — Your Cancer Profile

When your doctor discusses your cancer with you, they are combining all of these elements into a comprehensive profile. Here is an example of what a complete risk assessment might look like:

"Mr. Smith, your cancer profile shows:

• PSA: 12 ng/mL
• Grade Group 2 (Gleason 3+4)
• Clinical stage T2a (felt on one side of the prostate)
• 3 of 12 cores positive (25%)
• MRI: PI-RADS 4 lesion, no extraprostatic extension
• NCCN Risk Group: Favorable Intermediate
• AJCC Stage: IIB
• CAPRA Score: 3 (intermediate)
• Roach LN risk: 18%
• Decipher score: 0.35 (low risk)
• Life expectancy: approximately 20 years (healthy 62-year-old)"

This profile tells the treatment team that Mr. Smith has a cancer that is unlikely to spread quickly, that he has many years of life ahead, and that he has several good treatment options including active surveillance, surgery, or radiation — all with excellent long-term outcomes.

Questions to Ask Your Doctor

1. What is my NCCN risk group, and what does it mean for my treatment options?
2. What is my clinical T stage, and how was it determined?
3. What is my AJCC prognostic stage?
4. Do I need staging imaging (CT, bone scan, or PSMA PET), and why or why not?
5. Would a genomic test like Decipher or Prolaris help in my situation?
6. What is my estimated life expectancy, and how does that affect treatment recommendations?
7. Can you show me my risk on a nomogram like CAPRA or the MSKCC calculator?
8. Based on my risk profile, what are the chances that my cancer will spread if treated? If not treated?

Myth vs. Fact

Myth: "Stage IV prostate cancer means there is no hope."

Fact: Stage IVA (lymph node positive, no distant spread) is often curable with combination therapy. Even Stage IVB (metastatic) prostate cancer can be controlled for many years with modern treatments. The word "stage" can be misleading — always ask your doctor what your specific situation means for your prognosis.

Myth: "A high Gleason score means the cancer has already spread."

Fact: Gleason score describes how the cancer cells look under the microscope (aggressiveness), not where the cancer has spread. A man can have a high Gleason score with cancer still confined to the prostate, and a low Gleason score with cancer that has spread (though this is less common).

Myth: "If my PSA is low, my cancer must be low risk."

Fact: While PSA is an important factor, some aggressive cancers produce relatively little PSA. Risk is determined by the combination of PSA, Grade Group, and stage — not any single factor alone.

Myth: "Genomic tests can tell me exactly what will happen."

Fact: Genomic tests provide probability estimates, not certainties. They are one piece of the puzzle that, combined with standard clinical information, helps guide decisions. No test can predict the future with 100% accuracy.

Key Takeaways

• Risk stratification combines your PSA, Grade Group (Gleason score), and clinical stage to categorize your cancer and guide treatment decisions.
• The TNM system describes tumor extent (T), lymph node involvement (N), and distant spread (M). The AJCC 8th edition adds PSA and Grade Group to create prognostic stage groups.
• The NCCN risk group system (very low through very high risk) is the primary tool used to guide treatment recommendations in the United States.
• The distinction between favorable and unfavorable intermediate risk is one of the most important in prostate cancer — it significantly affects treatment options and intensity.
• Nomograms and calculators (CAPRA, MSKCC, Partin Tables, Roach formulas) provide more personalized risk estimates beyond risk groups.
• Life expectancy estimation is critical — treatment decisions should account for overall health and competing risks of mortality.
• Genomic tests (Decipher, Prolaris, Oncotype DX, ArteraAI) can refine risk assessment but should be used selectively, not routinely.

Support Resources

• NCCN Patient Guidelines — Prostate Cancer: www.nccn.org/patients (free, detailed guide written for patients)
• MSKCC Nomograms: www.mskcc.org/nomograms/prostate (free online calculators)
• UCSF CAPRA Score Calculator: Available through your doctor
• ePrognosis Life Expectancy Tools: eprognosis.ucsf.edu
• Prostate Cancer Foundation: www.pcf.org (educational materials on risk groups)
• ZERO — The End of Prostate Cancer: www.zerocancer.org
• Us TOO International: www.ustoo.org (peer support and education)

References

1. 1. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Prostate Cancer. Version 5.2026. PROS-2.
2. 2. Litwin MS, Tan HJ. The diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer: a review. JAMA. 2017;317(24):2532–2542.
3. 3. American Joint Committee on Cancer. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 8th ed. New York: Springer; 2017. Prostate chapter.
4. 4. Buyyounouski MK, Choyke PL, McKenney JK, et al. Prostate cancer — major changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67(3):245–253.
5. 5. Paner GP, Stadler WM, Hansel DE, et al. Updates in the eighth edition of the tumor-node-metastasis staging classification for urologic cancers. Eur Urol. 2018;73(4):560–569.
6. 6. Zumsteg ZS, Zelefsky MJ, Woo KM, et al. Unification of favourable intermediate-, unfavourable intermediate-, and very high-risk stratification criteria for prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2017;120(5B):E87–E95.
7. 7. Raychaudhuri R, Lin DW, Montgomery RB. Prostate cancer: a review. JAMA. 2025;333(16):1433–1446.
8. 8. Cooperberg MR, Broering JM, Carroll PR. Risk assessment for prostate cancer metastasis and mortality at the time of diagnosis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101(12):878–887.
9. 9. Brajtbord JS, Leapman MS, Cooperberg MR. The CAPRA score at 10 years: contemporary perspectives and analysis of supporting studies. Eur Urol. 2017;71(5):705–709.
10. 10. Destefanis N, Zugna D, Fiano V, et al. Update of the MSKCC nomogram for metastatic progression and its role in active surveillance: the Italian TPCP cohort. Front Oncol. 2026;16:1799343.
11. 11. van Wijk Y, Halilaj I, van Limbergen E, et al. Decision support systems in prostate cancer treatment: an overview. Biomed Res Int. 2019;2019:4961768.
12. 12. Roach M 3rd, Marquez C, Yuo HS, et al. Predicting the risk of lymph node involvement using the pre-treatment prostate specific antigen and Gleason score in men with clinically localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1994;28(1):33–37.
13. 13. Rahman S, Cosmatos H, Dave G, Williams S, Tome M. Predicting pelvic lymph node involvement in current-era prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;82(2):906–910.
14. 14. Nguyen PL, Chen MH, Hoffman KE, Katz MS, D'Amico AV. Predicting the risk of pelvic node involvement among men with prostate cancer in the contemporary era. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;74(1):104–109.
15. 15. Abdollah F, Cozzarini C, Suardi N, et al. Indications for pelvic nodal treatment in prostate cancer should change: validation of the Roach formula in a large extended nodal dissection series. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;83(2):624–629.
16. 16. De Meerleer G, Berghen C, Briganti A, et al. Elective nodal radiotherapy in prostate cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22(8):e348–e357.
17. 17. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Prostate Cancer. Version 5.2026. PROS-A.
18. 18. Eastham JA, Auffenberg GB, Barocas DA, et al. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO guideline, part I. J Urol. 2022;208(1):10–18.
19. 19. Raychaudhuri R, Lin DW, Montgomery RB. Prostate cancer: a review. JAMA. 2025;333(16):1433–1446.
20. 20. Heard J, Luu M, Thomas IC, Leppert J, Daskivich T. Life expectancy estimation in older men using the prostate cancer comorbidity index in VA & SEER-Medicare cohorts. Age Ageing. 2026;55(4):afag097.
21. 21. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Prostate Cancer. Version 5.2026. PROS-H-1 to PROS-H-5.
22. 22. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Prostate Cancer. Version 5.2026. PROS-H-3.
23. 23. Roidos C, Anastasiadis A, Tsiakaras S, et al. Integration of genomic tests in prostate cancer care: implications for clinical practice and patient outcomes. Curr Issues Mol Biol. 2024;46(12):14408–14421.
24. 24. Eastham JA, Auffenberg GB, Barocas DA, et al. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO guideline, part I. J Urol. 2022;208(1):10–18.
25. 25. Eggener SE, Rumble RB, Armstrong AJ, et al. Molecular biomarkers in localized prostate cancer: ASCO guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(13):1474–1494.
26. 26. Spratt DE, Zhang J, Santiago-Jiménez M, et al. Development and validation of a novel integrated clinical-genomic risk group classification for localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(6):581–590.
27. 27. Tabriz AA, Boyer MJ, Gordon AM, et al. Impact of genomic classifiers on risk stratification and treatment intensity in patients with localized prostate cancer: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2025;178(2):218–228.
28. 28. Yu Y, Lajkosz K, Finelli A, et al. Impact of cribriform pattern 4 and intraductal prostatic carcinoma on NCCN and CAPRA patient stratification. Mod Pathol. 2022;35(11):1695–1701.
29. 29. Sandeman K, Eineluoto JT, Pohjonen J, et al. Prostate MRI added to CAPRA, MSKCC and Partin cancer nomograms significantly enhances the prediction of adverse findings and biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. PLoS One. 2020;15(7):e0235779.
30. 30. Abdollah F, Cozzarini C, Sun M, et al. Assessing the most accurate formula to predict the risk of lymph node metastases from prostate cancer in contemporary patients. Radiother Oncol. 2013;109(2):211–216.
31. 31. Daskivich TJ, Luu M, Heard J, Thomas IC, Leppert JT. Overtreatment of prostate cancer among men with limited longevity in the active surveillance era. JAMA Intern Med. 2025;185(1):28–36.
32. 32. Droz JP, Aapro M, Balducci L, et al. Management of prostate cancer in older patients: updated recommendations of a working group of the International Society of Geriatric Oncology. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(9):e404–e414.