i know of one person who underwent focal treatment. He is on the Healingwell site. His focal treatment was cyro. I believe he was treated in 2009 at the University of Colorado Health Center (Anschutz). He thinks focal treatment is the best. Recently he has indicated that non-cryo energy sources are being used.

hopeful and optimistic said:

focal treatments

LITT using with MRI guidance is  able to target individual areas of cancer as targets as opposed to a standardised hemi-ablation with a resulting reduction of margin around the the cancer. To my knowledge cryo and HIFU are not able to target individural areas.

There is an article in the Sept 2014 hot sheet page 4 http://www.ustoo.org/PDFs/HotSheets/HotSheet092014.pdf where the FDA does not approve HiFU for early stage prostate cancer.

 

As I understand cryo and HIFU are basically  salvage therapies. Full Cyro of the prostate causes ed in 100 percent of cases.

LITT is basically for early stage prostate cancers. The side effects are very minimal and LITT can be repeated.

Ziggy9, on the Healingwell site, had focal treatment with cyro in 2009 ( or there about) at the University of Coloado Health Center. Based on what I read of Ziggy's post, UC still does focal treatments but they no longer do it with cyro. Ziggy's swears by focal and feels that radiation, surgery etc is an overkill. Apparently he had no side effects ... the cyro hit only the tumor. I imagine with the new imaging technologies and energy sources (such as laser) focal is a lot better now than it was in 2009.

hopeful and optimistic said:

Studies for LITT

For those who are interested, here  are studies about LITT

 

MR Imaging–guided Focal Laser Ablation for Prostate Cancer: Phase I Trial1 - Oto, et al. (2013)
http://pubs.rsna.org/doi/pdf/10.1148/radiol.13121652


Focal Laser Ablation for Localized Prostate Cancer: Principles, Clinical Trials, and Our Initial Experience
Ted Lee, B - Vol. 16 No. 2 • 2014 • Reviews in Urology • 55
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4080850/

You may be interested in this link. They are discussing Bipolar radiofrequency ablation as focal treatment for PCa. Appears a trial is starting.

http://www.healingwell.com/community/default.aspx?f=35&m=3183655

hopeful and optimistic said:

radiofrequency ablation as focal treatment for PC

Here is information that I found that is not complete.

 I wonder about the precision of this method. How much of the prostate would be treated, (hemispere)? Are there past studies? I wonder how safe this method is for localized cancer, do the side effect risks outway potential benefits (For example HIFU is not recommended for focal treatment pf  PCa in the USA...see hot sheet from USTOO). Can there be radiation after this treatment type?

http://www.cancercenter.com/treatments/radiofrequency-ablation/?source=GOOGLEWE&channel=paid%20search&c=paid%20search:Google:Google%20-%20Western%20Core%20Terms:Procedures%3A+Surgical+Oncology%7CRadiofrequency+Ablation:radiofrequency+ablation+cancer:Broad&OVMTC=Broad&site=&creative=4341136671&OVKEY=radiofrequency%20ablation%20cancer&url_id=129372569&adpos=1t2&device=c&devicemodel=&gclid=Cj0KEQjw-dSgBRDb0oOl9MzxqMEBEiQAkHqy-fcLTQz8YTCzl45Jh0kRDfQLcNnu5VLwaIwW-uk42mMaAt_K8P8HAQ

http://www.focaltherapy.org/2012/PostersAbstracts/P-31.pdf

 

 

I have mailed Hopeful my thoughts on this treatment and I decided to paste here (sorry Ira) my comments about the Laser Interstitial Thermal Therapy.
“LITT was FDA approved for brain cancer treatment, in 2009. Logically the system may be proper for application in other cancers. The principle is to heat (burn) and kill tissues at its reach (cancerous and benign). This means that success depends in knowing previously the right location of the tissue to be treated, otherwise one sees lesser healthy flesh, the risk and the side effects and a latter recurrence.

They do the job using live MRI images (real-time MR-thermography) to help in reaching pre-established targets which in PCa means the whole prostate gland. Cancer is microscopic and cannot be detected even with that thermal capability. The monitoring is done live so that the surgeon can avoid hitting tissue out of the treatment scope. They use a cooling technique in the marginal areas. Imagine one rod (the arm that is inserted into the gland through a “keyhole”) with two sides, one delivers the heat and the other the cool. You can move it up and down along the gland’s walls turning the heat (side) to the internal part. What this tells is that without proper visualization no proper treatment can be expected. Most of the job is done by guessing. Experiences by the acting professional and past results statistics (not yet available) are necessary for a good outcome.
Radiation treatment may require similar details to be successful but it is here with loads of existing experiences and statistics. The difference is that one burns for good (thermal) and the other destroys the DNA for worse or good”.

Well this is my franc opinion and you know that I do not answer “in circles”. I am straight forward but not a medical professional so these are just lay opinions. I think it possible to radiate on top of LITT if the affected field can be focal to the organ alone.

Best wishes.

VGama