Focal therapy: a tissue-sparing strategy—only when mapping confidence is high
Focal therapy is a strategy, not a single device. The goal is to treat the region of clinically significant cancer while minimizing impact on the rest of the prostate. This can be appropriate for selected men—particularly when: disease appears localized to a defined area, risk category supports a lesion-targeted approach, imaging and biopsy provide strong mapping confidence, the patient understands and accepts strict follow-up. Focal therapy is not the same as 'avoiding treatment.' It is treatment—done in a more selective manner, with different trade-offs.
Quick navigation
What focal therapy is (and what it is not)
Focal therapy is:
Treatment of a defined lesion/region of clinically significant cancer. Built on imaging + biopsy concordance. Paired with a structured follow-up protocol.
Focal therapy is not:
'No treatment.' A guarantee of avoiding side effects. Suitable for every prostate cancer. A shortcut that eliminates need for monitoring. A patient must understand: you treat what you can map the outcomes of confidently. If mapping confidence is low, focal therapy becomes unsafe.
Who may be a candidate
Focal therapy is typically discussed when: cancer appears localized to a defined area, disease risk profile is appropriate for focal intent, MRI identifies a target lesion and biopsy supports it, there is no evidence suggesting extensive multifocal clinically significant disease, patient priorities favour tissue-sparing approaches and they accept follow-up discipline.
Who should not choose focal therapy
Focal therapy may be less appropriate when: higher-risk disease where established definitive therapy is recommended, multifocal clinically significant disease is present or strongly suspected, imaging/biopsy mapping is inconsistent or incomplete, patient cannot commit to follow-up testing, anxiety profile is such that uncertainty would be intolerable.
How candidacy is confirmed: mapping and risk
Good focal therapy programs treat candidacy as the core work. Typically required: PSA history and context, mpMRI prostate interpreted carefully, targeted biopsy data (and sometimes systematic sampling), assessment of Grade Group/Gleason and tumor volume, staging if risk profile suggests it. The key output is 'mapping confidence': Do we have a high probability we are targeting the clinically significant disease? If the answer is no, focal therapy should not proceed.
Tools used for focal therapy (cryo is one option)
Because focal therapy is a strategy, it can be performed using different energy tools in different centers. Cryoablation is one such tool. Like the cancer team at MyDocsy, a good clinical team should explain: which tool is used, why it suits your lesion location, and what the expected ablation zone and safety margins are.
Expected benefits and limitations
Potential benefits (for selected patients)
Tissue-sparing intent. Possibility of maintaining urinary control better than whole-gland treatments (varies). Possibility of reducing impact on sexual function compared to whole-gland treatments (varies). Shorter recovery profile than major surgery in some settings.
Limitations (non-negotiable before we recommend to patients)
Focal therapy treats only the targeted region. Untreated prostate tissue remains and can develop or contain disease. Follow-up is strict. Additional treatment may be needed later in some cases. Patients should choose focal therapy only when they accept these realities.
Follow-up: the non-negotiable
It is impossible to know the outcome of the treatment without a robust follow-up protocol. Focal therapy follow-up commonly involves: PSA monitoring at defined intervals, repeat MRI at defined intervals, repeat biopsy in selected protocols, symptom and function monitoring, a plan if recurrence or new lesion is detected. If a cancer center offers focal therapy without structured follow-up, that should be a quality concern. MyDocsy has a comprehensive post intervention follow up protocol—and we ask patients to commit to this before they start any treatment.
Focal therapy vs active surveillance vs surgery vs radiation
Active surveillance
Monitoring strategy for selected low-risk disease. Aims to avoid treatment until necessary. Requires follow-up but is not ablative treatment.
Focal therapy
Targeted treatment strategy for selected localized lesions. Aims to reduce treatment footprint. Requires strict follow-up and accepts the possibility of later treatment.
Surgery / Radiation
Established definitive whole-gland pathways in appropriate risk categories. Usually more definitive coverage. Different side-effect profiles.
FAQs
Talk to a doctor / see if you are a fit
If you're considering focal therapy, please share: PSA history, MRI report, biopsy report (Grade Group/Gleason + cores), any staging scans, your priorities and baseline urinary/sexual function concerns. We will guide you on: whether focal therapy is reasonable to discuss in your case, whether surveillance or definitive therapy is safer, what follow-up protocol would be required, what outcomes and uncertainties to expect.
