Back to Authors

Yamoah, Kosj

0000-0001-9055-3538

Mayo Clinic

Moffitt Cancer Center

Citations 9

Genomically Adjusted Radiation Dose Predicts Outcomes in Pediatric Brain Tumors and Supports Biologically Personalized Radiotherapy
Joshi, Nikhil , Bergman, Drew T. , Nellore, Shivani, Chen, Peng, Murphy, Erin, Sheikh, Saad , LaRiviere, Michael J. , Foster, Jessica, Durkin, Jill, Matulis, Thomas, Nanda, Ronica, Yamoah, Kosj, Stapleton, Stacie, Beltran, Chris, Torres-Roca, Javier F., Scott, Jacob G., Foster, Jessica , Durkin, Jill, Ajao, Anuoluwapo , Nanda, Ronica H. , Yamoah, Kosj , Stapleton, Stacie L. , Eschrich, Steven A , Scott, Jacob Gardinier

No container title available | August 10, 2026 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: No issue available | Pages: No page available

10.64898/2026.08.09.26359976 Get It

ABSTRACT Background Radiotherapy is a cornerstone of treatment for pediatric central nervous system (CNS) tumors, but dose selection remains uniform despite interpatient variability in tumor radiosensitivity. This is consequential in children, for whom toxicity can have lifelong effects. Genomic-adjusted radiation dose (GARD) integrates tumor genomics with delivered radiation dose to quantify the biological effect of radiotherapy and has been validated across adult malignancies. Its relevance in pediatric CNS tumors is unknown. Methods We performed a cohort study using gene expression and data from 246 pediatric patients with high-grade glioma, medulloblastoma, or ependymoma from the Children’s Brain Tumor Network. GARD was calculated using a sequencing-adapted radiosensitivity index integrated with radiation dose through the linear–quadratic model. Associations of GARD and physical radiation dose with event-free and overall survival were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models stratified by tumor type and anatomic location. Patients who did not receive radiotherapy comprised a negative control cohort (sham-GARD). Results Among patients receiving radiotherapy, physical dose was uniform, whereas GARD showed substantial interpatient variability in biological effect. Higher GARD was associated with improved event-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0·90, 95% CI 0·83–0·97; p=0·004) and overall survival (HR 0·90, 95% CI 0·83–0·99; p=0·018). Physical dose was not associated with either endpoint. Among patients who did not receive radiotherapy, sham-GARD was not associated with outcomes, supporting GARD as a treatment-specific predictor rather than a prognostic biomarker. Conclusions In pediatric CNS tumors, the biological effect of radiotherapy quantified by GARD was associated with outcomes, whereas physical dose was not. These findings challenge uniform radiotherapy dosing and support genomically informed dose individualization. Prospective evaluation of GARD-guided radiotherapy is warranted to optimize tumor control while minimizing long-term toxicity in children.
Phase II trial of combination radiation, hormone, and immunotherapy in grade group 5 prostate cancer
Bryant, John Michael, Sandoval, Maria, Putney, Ryan, Trivedi, Purvish , Katende, Esther N. , Fink, Angelina, Naqvi, Syeda Mahrukh, Kim, Youngchul, Yin, Vivian, Zhang, Jingsong, Park, J Y, Serna, Amparo, Lam, Nghi, Pow-Sang, J., Poch, Michael, Li, Roger, Manley, Brandon J, Naghavi, Arash, Torres-Roca, Javier, Grass, G Daniel, Kim, S, Latifi, Kujtim, Hunt, Dylan, Johnstone, Peter, Dhillon, Jasreman, Rodriguez, Paulo C, Jain, Rohit, Fernandez, Daniel C. , Yamoah, Kosj , Bryant, John Michael, Sandoval, Maria L., Putney, Ryan M. , Zhang, Jingsong , Serna, Amparo , Lam, Nghi B. , Poch, Michael , Manley, Brandon J, Naghavi, A.O. , Grass, G. Daniel , Latifi, Kujtim , Dhillon, Jasreman

Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer | May 4, 2026 | Volume: 14 | Issue: 5 | Pages: e013906

10.1136/jitc-2025-013906 Get It

Background Grade group 5 (GG5) prostate cancer (PCa) carries a less favorable prognosis after standard-of-care (SOC) therapy, necessitating novel therapeutic approaches. High-dose rate brachytherapy (HDRBT) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) may modulate immune response in GG5 PCa, particularly in tumors with increased immune content. This study evaluated whether the addition of nivolumab to SOC was associated with improved disease control in patients with high-volume GG5 PCa, including those with oligometastatic disease. Methods In this non-randomized phase II trial, 31 patients with localized or oligometastatic GG5 PCa and >30% positive biopsy cores were evaluated between September 2018 and April 2021. Patients received four doses of nivolumab (240 mg every 2 weeks) beginning 4 weeks prior to HDRBT, alongside ADT, HDRBT, and external beam radiation. The primary endpoint was to evaluate whether the 2-year freedom from biochemical recurrence (FFBR) rate would exceed a prespecified historical control rate of 75%. Results Among the 31 patients, the median follow-up was 38.8 months (IQR 31.0–46.5 months). The addition of nivolumab to SOC RT with ADT was associated with a 2-year FFBR rate of 90.3% (95% CI 74.3% to 98.0%) (median FFBR not reached), exceeding the prespecified historical control rate of 75% (one-sided p value from binomial test=0.024). Definitive and probable nivolumab-related toxicity included 6.3% acute grade 2 and 6.3% acute grade 3 adverse events (AEs), with no grade 4+ AEs observed. A higher Decipher immunosuppression score at diagnosis correlated with early pathologic response (p=0.005) and was independently associated with time to metastatic failure (p=0.044). Conclusions Nivolumab combined with SOC was associated with encouraging FFBR in this high-risk GG5 PCa population and may represent a promising therapeutic intensification strategy. The Decipher immunosuppression score may serve as a predictive biomarker for response. These findings warrant further investigation in randomized trials.
Trial Design and Objectives for Patients With Prostate Cancer: Recommendations From the Prostate Cancer Working Group 4
Armstrong, Andrew J., Morris, M., Abida, Wassim , Aggarwal, Rahul R., Antonarakis, Emmanuel S., Attard, Gerhardt , Beltran, Himisha, Bryce, Alan H. , Carducci, Michael A. , Cheng, Heather H., Dahut, William L. , Emmett, Louise , Fizazi, Karim, Gafita, Andrei, George, Daniel J., Hermann, Ken, Hofman, Michael S., Hope, MD Thomas A., Hussain, Maha, Kelly, W. Kevin, Kuo, Phillip H. , Liu, Glenn X., Morgans, Alicia K., McKay, Rana R., Nanus, David, Nelson, P., Reichert, Zachery R. , Ryan, Charles J. , Sartor, A. Oliver, Schwartz, Lawrence H., Sharifi, Nima , Stadler, Walter M., Stein, M., Sternberg, Cora N., Szmulewitz, Russell Z., Tagawa, Scott T., Sokolova, Alexandra O., Wyatt, Alex, Yu, Evan Y., Halabi, S., Scher, Howard I., Group, for the PCWG4 Writing, Alumkal, Joshi J. , Aparicio, Ana, Barata, Pedro C., Drake, Charles G., Hamid, Anis , Heath, Elisabeth I. , Nauseef, Jones, Lage, Daniel E. , Mallak, Nadine , Patnaik, Akash, Prepelica, Kristofer, Rowe, Steven P., Slovin, Susan F. , Taplin, Mary‐Ellen , Zorko, Nicholas, Carducci, Michael A. , Halabi, Susan , Cheng, Heather H. , Antonarakis, Emmanuel S. , Morris, Michael J. , Armstrong, Andrew J. , Nauseef, Jones T. , Antonarakis, Emmanuel S. , Zorko, Nicholas A. , Armstrong, Andrew J , Morris, Michael J , Aggarwal, Rahul , Antonarakis, Emmanuel S , Beltran, Himisha , Bryce, Alan H , Cheng, Heather H , Chen, Delphine L , Chi, Kim N , Childs, Daniel S , Dahut, William , Emmett, Louise , Fizazi, Karim , Gafita, Andrei , George, Daniel J , Hermann, Ken , Hofman, Michael S , Hope, Thomas A , Hussain, Maha H A , Kelly, W Kevin , Kessler, Elizabeth , Lang, Joshua M , Liu, Glenn , Marshall, Catherine H , Morgans, Alicia K , McKay, Rana R , Nelson, Peter S , Paller, Channing J , Reichert, Zachery R , Sartor, A Oliver , Schöder, Heiko , Sharifi, Nima , Stadler, Walter M , Stein, Mark , Sternberg, Cora N , Szmulewitz, Russell Z , Tagawa, Scott T , Sokolova, Alexandra O , Wyatt, Alexander , Yamoah, Kosj , Yu, Evan Y , Halabi, Susan , Antonarakis, Emmanuel S , Zorko, Nicholas A , Nauseef, Jones T , N., Kim , Childs, Daniel S. , Fizazi, Karim , Gafita, Andrei , George, Daniel J. , Hofman, Michael S. , Lang, Joshua M. , Liu, Glenn , Marshall, Catherine H. , Morgans, Alicia K. , McKay, Rana R. , Paller, Channing J. , Sartor, Oliver , Schöder, Heiko , Schwartz, Lawrence H., Stadler, Walter M. , Tagawa, Scott T. , Scher, Howard I. , Aparicio, Ana, Barata, Pedro C. , Drake, Charles G. , Graff, Julie Nicole , Patnaik, Akash , Rathkopf, Dana E , Rettig, Matthew B.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | February 26, 2026 | Volume: 44 | Issue: 13 | Pages: 1249-1265

10.1200/jco-25-02834 Get It

PURPOSE The continuous development of new imaging approaches, molecular phenotyping, genetic subtypes, prognosis assessments, and effective therapies across a range of disease states has created a need to redefine terminology and best practices for clinical trial conduct in patients with advanced prostate cancer. Methods We convened an international expert committee of diverse working groups, the Prostate Cancer Working Group 4 (PCWG4), between 2016 and 2025. Our objective was to formulate updated criteria based on emerging evidence and clinical trial data in a biomarker context to provide guidance for clinical trial design, eligibility, and end point assessments for patients with advanced prostate cancer. RESULTS PCWG4 redefines terminology around the disease state and previous therapies in a patient-centric context and terminology focused on androgen pathway modulation. We consider imaging, with a particular focus on positron emission tomography (PET)–defined disease. New recommendations are provided for disease state terminology, defining eligibility criteria, response and delay/prevent end points, intervals for reassessments including imaging, and patient-reported outcome determination. We provide recommendations in a biomarker-based context of use for the intended indication, reflective of patient benefit for specific interventions. We emphasize the need for development of validated PET imaging and molecular and phenotypic criteria as well as trial designs to appropriately risk stratify patients, predict and assess benefit, and measure post-treatment outcomes reliably in a trial framework. CONCLUSION PCWG4 updates recommendations on patient and tumor characterization, therapy development, and imaging criteria and extends guidance into earlier androgen pathway modulator–naïve/sensitive disease states to reflect an evolving, heterogeneous, and diverse patient population to optimize treatment benefits for all patients.
NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Testicular Cancer, Version 2.2025
Lin, Daniel W. , Feldman, Darren R., Aggarwal, Rahul , Drakaki, Alexandra , Eggener, Scott E. , Humphrey, Peter A. , Leuva, Harshraj , Levine, Ellis G., Maughan, Benjamin L. , Reichert, Zachery R. , Rwigema, Jean‐Claude M. , Shah, Sumit, Singla, Nirmish, Sircar, Kanishka , Zhumkhawala, Ali , Sliker, Bailee , Gilligan, Timothy D. , Adra, Nabil , Bagrodia, Aditya , Yamoah, Kosj , Chandrasekar, Thenappan , Costa, Daniel Nobrega da , Drakaki, Alexandra , Emamekhoo, Hamid , Geynisman, Daniel M. , Graham, Laura , Luckenbaugh, Amy N. , McGregor, Bradley A. , Monk, Paul , Picus, Joel , Pierorazio, Phillip , Rais‐Bahrami, Soroush , Saylor, Philip J. , Shah, Ankeet , Shah, Sumit, VanderWeele, David James , Montgomery, Sarah E.

Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network | April 9, 2025 | Volume: 23 | Issue: 4 | Pages: No page available

10.6004/jnccn.2025.0018 Get It

The NCCN Guidelines for Testicular Cancer provide recommendations for the multidisciplinary approach to the diagnostic workup, treatment, and follow-up for testicular germ cell tumors, including both seminoma and nonseminoma. These NCCN Guidelines Insights discuss the current treatment recommendations and supporting clinical data for seminomas as presented in Version 2.2025 of the NCCN Guidelines for Testicular Cancer.
Epigenome‐wide association study of prostate cancer in African American men identified differentially methylated genes
Berglund, Anders , Yamoah, Kosj , Falahat, Rana , Kim, Sungjune, Dutil, Julie , Ruiz-Deyá, Gilberto, Sanchez, Carmen Ortiz, Park, Hyun, Banerjee, Hirendra N., Lotan, Tamara, Barry, Kathryn Hughes , Putney, Ryan M. , Kim, Young‐Chul , Chakrabarti, Ratna , Eschrich, Steven A , Kim, Seung Joon , Park, Jong Y , Yamoah, Kosj , Berglund, Anders E , Mulé, James J. , Matta, Jaime L. , Wang, Liang , Banerjee, Hirendra N., Gwede, Clement K. , Kresovich, Jacob K. , Kim, Youngchul, Lin, Hui‐Yi , Dhillon, Jasreman , Park, Jong Y.

Cancer Medicine | August 20, 2024 | Volume: 13 | Issue: 16 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/cam4.70044 Get It

Abstract Introduction Men with African ancestry have the highest incidence and mortality rates of prostate cancer (PCa) worldwide. Methods This study aimed to identify differentially methylated genes between tumor vs. adjacent normal and aggressive vs. indolent PCa in 121 African American patients. Epigenome‐wide DNA methylation patterns in tumor DNA were assessed using the human Illumina Methylation EPIC V1 array. Results Around 5,139 differentially methylated CpG‐sites (q < 0.01, lΔβl > 0.2) were identified when comparing normal vs. tumor, with an overall trend of hypermethylation in prostate tumors. Multiple representative differentially methylated regions (DMRs), including immune‐related genes, such as CD40 , Galectin3 , OX40L , and STING , were detected in prostate tumors when compared to adjacent normal tissues. Based on an epigenetic clock model, we observed that tumors’ total number of stem cell divisions and the stem cell division rate were significantly higher than adjacent normal tissues. Regarding PCa aggressiveness, 2,061 differentially methylated CpG‐sites (q < 0.05, lΔβl > .05) were identified when the grade group (GG)1 was compared with GG4/5. Among these 2,061 CpG sites, 155 probes were consistently significant in more than one comparison. Among these genes, several immune system genes, such as COL18A1 , S100A2 , ITGA4 , HLA‐C , and ADCYAP1 , have previously been linked to tumor progression in PCa. Conclusion Several differentially methylated genes involved in immune‐oncologic pathways associated with disease risk or aggressiveness were identified. In addition, 261 African American‐specific differentially methylated genes related to the risk of PCa were identified. These results can shedlight on potential mechanisms contributing to PCa disparities in the African American Population.
Disparities in Survival Outcomes among Racial/Ethnic Minorities with Head and Neck Squamous Cell Cancer in the United States
Baliga, Sujith , Yildiz, Vedat, Bazan, Jose G. , Palmer, Joshua D. , Jhawar, Sachin R. , Konieczkowski, David J. , Grecula, J.C., Blakaj, Dukagjin , Mitchell, Darrion , Hu, Kenneth S. , Gamez, Mauricio E. , Palmer, Joshua D , Mitchell, Darrion L , Jhawar, Sachin R , Henson, Christina , Yamoah, Kosj

Cancers | March 15, 2023 | Volume: 15 | Issue: 6 | Pages: 1781

10.3390/cancers15061781 Get It

Background: Racial/ethnic (R/E) minorities with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) have worse survival outcomes compared to White patients. While disparities in patient outcomes for R/E minorities have been well documented, the specific drivers of the inferior outcomes remain poorly understood. Patients and Methods: This was a population-based retrospective cohort study that analyzed HNSCC patients using the National Cancer Database (NCDB) from 2000–2016. Patient outcomes were stratified by R/E groups including White, Black, Hispanic, Native American/Other, and Asian. The main outcome in this study was overall survival (OS). Univariate time-to-event survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan–Meier product limit estimates and the log-rank test to evaluate the differences between strata. Results: There were 304,138 patients with HNSCC identified in this study, of which 262,762 (86.3%) were White, 32,528 (10.6%) were Black, 6191 were Asian (2.0%), and 2657 were Native American/Other (0.9%). Black R/E minorities were more likely to be uninsured (9% vs. 5%, p < 0.0001), have Medicaid insurance (22% vs. 8%, p < 0.0001), be in a lower income quartile (<30,000, 42% vs. 13%, p < 0.0001), have metastatic disease (5% vs. 2%, p < 0.001), and have a total treatment time 6 days longer than White patients (median 107 vs. 101 days, p < 0.001). The 5-year OS for White, Black, Native American/Other, and Asian patients was 50.8%, 38.6%, 51.1%, and 55.8%, respectively. Among the oropharynx HNSCC patients, the 5-year OS rates in p16+ White, Black, and Asian patients were 65.7%, 39.4%%, and 55%, respectively. After a multivariate analysis, Black race was still associated with an inferior OS (HR:1.09, 95% CI: 1.03–1.15, p = 0.002). Conclusions: This large cohort study of HNSCC patients demonstrates that Black race is independently associated with worse OS, in part due to socioeconomic, clinical, and treatment-related factors.
Comparative Genomics Reveals Distinct Immune-oncologic Pathways in African American Men with Prostate Cancer
Awasthi, Shivanshu , Berglund, Anders , Abraham-Miranda, Julieta , Rounbehler, Robert J., Kensler, Kevin H. , Serna, Amparo , Vidal, Adriana C. , You, Sungyong , Freeman, Michael R. , Karnes, R. Jeffrey , Klein, Eric A. , Campbell, Joshua D. , Gupta, Raavi , Lal, Priti , Freedland, Stephen J. , Kensler, Kevin , Den, Robert B , Trock, Bruce J , Campbell, Joshua D , Einstein, David J , Balk, Steven , Park, Jong Y , Yamoah, Kosj , Klein, Eric A , Berglund, Anders E , Davicioni, Elai , Liu, Yang , Den, Robert B. , Balk, Steven P. , Park, Jong Y. , Cleveland, John L. , Rebbeck, Timothy R.

Clinical Cancer Research | October 9, 2020 | Volume: 27 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 320-329

10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-20-2925 Get It

Abstract Purpose: The role of immune-oncologic mechanisms of racial disparities in prostate cancer remains understudied. Limited research exists to evaluate the molecular underpinnings of immune differences in African American men (AAM) and European American men (EAM) prostate tumor microenvironment (TME). Experimental Design: A total of 1,173 radiation-naïve radical prostatectomy samples with whole transcriptome data from the Decipher GRID registry were used. Transcriptomic expressions of 1,260 immune-specific genes were selected to assess immune-oncologic differences between AAM and EAM prostate tumors. Race-specific differential expression of genes was assessed using a rank test, and intergene correlational matrix and gene set enrichment was used for pathway analysis. Results: AAM prostate tumors have significant enrichment of major immune-oncologic pathways, including proinflammatory cytokines, IFNα, IFNγ, TNFα signaling, ILs, and epithelial–mesenchymal transition. AAM TME has higher total immune content score (ICSHIGH) compared with 0 (37.8% vs. 21.9%, P = 0.003). AAM tumors also have lower DNA damage repair and are genomically radiosensitive as compared with EAM. IFITM3 (IFN-inducible transmembrane protein 3) was one of the major proinflammatory genes overexpressed in AAM that predicted increased risk of biochemical recurrence selectively for AAM in both discovery [HRAAM = 2.30; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.21–4.34; P = 0.01] and validation (HRAAM = 2.42; 95% CI, 1.52–3.86; P = 0.0001) but not in EAM. Conclusions: Prostate tumors of AAM manifest a unique immune repertoire and have significant enrichment of proinflammatory immune pathways that are associated with poorer outcomes. Observed immune-oncologic differences can aid in a genomically adaptive approach to treating prostate cancer in AAM.
Testicular Cancer, Version 2.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology
Gilligan, Timothy D. , Lin, Daniel W. , Aggarwal, Rahul , Chism, David D. , Cost, Nicholas G. , Derweesh, Ithaar , LaGrange, Chad A. , Levine, Ellis , Longo, Thomas A., Lowrance, Will, Rais‐Bahrami, Soroush , Sircar, Kanishka , Smith, David C. , Tzou, Katherine S., Vaena, Daniel A. , Vaughn, David J. , Yamzon, Jonathan , Johnson-Chilla, Alyse, Keller, Jennifer , Pluchino, Lenora A. , Tzou, Katherine, Emamekhoo, Hamid , Feldman, Darren Richard , Geynisman, Daniel M. , Hancock, Steven Lee , McGregor, Bradley A. , Monk, Paul , Picus, Joel , Pierorazio, Phillip , Saylor, Philip J. , Yamoah, Kosj

Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network | December 5, 2019 | Volume: 17 | Issue: 12 | Pages: 1529-1554

10.6004/jnccn.2019.0058 Get It

Testicular cancer is relatively uncommon and accounts for <1% of all male tumors. However, it is the most common solid tumor in men between the ages of 20 and 34 years, and the global incidence has been steadily rising over the past several decades. Several risk factors for testicular cancer have been identified, including personal or family history of testicular cancer and cryptorchidism. Testicular germ cell tumors (GCTs) comprise 95% of malignant tumors arising in the testes and are categorized into 2 main histologic subtypes: seminoma and nonseminoma. Although nonseminoma is the more clinically aggressive tumor subtype, 5-year survival rates exceed 70% with current treatment options, even in patients with advanced or metastatic disease. Radical inguinal orchiectomy is the primary treatment for most patients with testicular GCTs. Postorchiectomy management is dictated by stage, histology, and risk classification; treatment options for nonseminoma include surveillance, systemic therapy, and nerve-sparing retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. Although rarely occurring, prognosis for patients with brain metastases remains poor, with >50% of patients dying within 1 year of diagnosis. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Testicular Cancer focuses on recommendations for the management of adult patients with nonseminomatous GCTs.
Tristetraprolin Is a Prognostic Biomarker for Poor Outcomes among Patients with Low-Grade Prostate Cancer
Rounbehler, Robert J., Berglund, Anders , Gerke, Travis , Takhar, Mandeep, Awasthi, Shivanshu , Li, Weimin , Davicioni, Elai , Erho, Nicholas , Ross, Ashley E. , Schaeffer, Edward M. , Klein, Eric A. , Karnes, R. Jeffrey , Jenkins, Robert B. , Yamoah, Kosj , Davicioni, Elai , Klein, Eric A , Berglund, Anders E , Cleveland, John L. , Park, Jong Y.

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention | August 14, 2018 | Volume: 27 | Issue: 11 | Pages: 1376-1383

10.1158/1055-9965.epi-18-0369 Get It

AbstractBackground: We studied the utility of the tumor suppressor Tristetraprolin (TTP, ZFP36) as a clinically relevant biomarker of aggressive disease in prostate cancer patients after radical prostatectomy (RP).Methods: TTP RNA expression was measured in an RP cohort of patients treated at Moffitt Cancer Center (MCC) and obtained from six publically available RP datasets with biochemical recurrence (BCR; total n = 1,394) and/or metastatic outcome data (total n = 1,222). TTP protein expression was measured by immunohistochemistry in a tissue microarray of 153 MCC RP samples. The time to BCR or metastasis based on TTP RNA or protein levels was calculated using the Kaplan–Meier analysis. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were performed on multiple cohorts to evaluate if TTP is a clinically relevant biomarker and to assess if TTP improves upon the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment postsurgical (CAPRA-S) score for predicting clinical outcomes.Results: In all of the RP patient cohorts, prostate cancer with low TTP RNA or protein levels had decreased time to BCR or metastasis versus TTP-high tumors. Further, the decreased time to BCR in TTP-low prostate cancer was more pronounced in low-grade tumors. Finally, pooled survival analysis suggests that TTP RNA expression provides independent information beyond CAPRA-S to predict BCR.Conclusions: TTP is a promising prostate cancer biomarker for predicting which RP patients will have poor outcomes, especially for low-grade prostate cancer patients.Impact: This study suggests that TTP RNA expression can be used to enhance the accuracy of CAPRA-S to predict outcomes in patients treated with RP. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 27(11); 1376–83. ©2018 AACR.