Cypherknife or Laser Focal Treatment

You are doing the smart thing to research, research, research. There's a lot to know about the disease and the treatment options, and unfortunately, there ain't one doc any of us can go to who will lay out all the treatment options, the pros and cons, the survival rates, the permanent side effect rates, etc. That's on us......

Perhaps you meant to say FLA instead of "LFA"?

FLA is newer than CK and unproven, but supposedly showing good early promise (not unlike other therapies which then fizzled out). My brother who has intermediate risk PCa is very interested in having it and is going to see if he qualifies for the NIH/NCI trial which is recruiting. Most insurance companies don't cover it, from what I understand.

There's another PCa forum where FLA has been thoroughly discussed, surveys conducted of those who have had the procedure, etc. Some of the docs who perform FLA are active in responding to the threads there and have released preliminary data on their patients. Have a look and you'll get educated in a hurry:

https://www.inspire.com/groups/us-too-prostate-cancer/discussion/focal-laser-ablation-fla-outcome-data/
https://www.inspire.com/groups/us-too-prostate-cancer/discussion/prostate-cancer-new-technology-our-story/

I was researching the radiation options and was down to IGMRT versus CK/SBRT, until I went to a radiation oncologist who educated me about HDR monotherapy for low risk PCa. Now I'm leaning heavily in that direction. See: https://www.inspire.com/groups/us-too-prostate-cancer/discussion/side-effects-hdr-monotherapy-seems-to-have-the-least/ and https://www.inspire.com/groups/us-too-prostate-cancer/discussion/experience-with-one-fraction-hdr/

HDR monotherapy, which is usually administered over 2 days separated by a week or two, provided the impetus for the SBRT/CK therapies, but seems to have less risk of permanent side effects.

The more you know, the easier it will be for you to make an informed decision about whether to treat and if so, with which procedure.

What did your biopsy look like?

Cyberknife is RELATIVELY new, but from what i understand has had excellent results with an 8 year history. I am sure Tall Allen will weigh in soon with some more specifics in that regard.

I would have Epstein or Bostwich give you second opinion on your biopsy slides....You need to be be SURE of what you are dealing with...Unfortunately, PC tends to be multi-focal, there is usually more than one tumor and you can't be sure the 12 core biopsy found all of them..So yes, a saturation biopsy makes sense when considering a focal therapy...Also, get a pre-approval from your insurance company...

Joey,
CyberKnife is not new. It was begun in 2003. For 7-yr results, see links in my signature. Dr Katz will be presenting 9-yr results at ASTRO next month. The longest-running series on IMRT (from MSKCC) is only 10 years and on a much smaller sample size). You should also read my recent article about a study comparing it to IMRT and seeds on side effects. Sean Collins is excellent!

As for focal ablation of any kind, you may want to see some of my previous posts about it (below).

www.healingwell.com/community/default.aspx?f=35&m=2894922
www.healingwell.com/community/default.aspx?f=35&m=3364017

Only you can decide which is best for you. You have to go into FLA thinking it may require another treatment fairly soon, although most are fine with just one treatment, and you have to watch it closely afterwards. But, if the tumor is in the right place (as shown on an expert 3T mpMRI), it can provide good tumor control with low side effects. If you are concerned about "new", FLA should be of more concern.

Post Edited (Tall Allen) : 9/18/2015 2:04:30 PM (GMT-6)

Mike T, AS?? Not with my Italian makeup. It will not ever leave my mind. LOL

Post Edited (Joeyc0726) : 9/18/2015 12:36:55 PM (GMT-6)

No, two is enough.....