← Return to Half of Prostate Cancer Focal Therapy Cases Were Inappropriate

Discussion
Comment receiving replies
Profile picture for jim18 @jim18

@marko49 I am a big proponent of focal therapy. Looked at IRE, Laser, and Tulsa Pro. Was not a good candidate for any of these a couple of years ago. What I noticed in the study was that most of the inappropriate use was for Gleason 6. Percentage of Gleason 8 & 9 with focal therapy had large decreases. If someone with a 6 cannot take the thought of active surveillance any focal therapy is better than RT or RP. It is bad enough that most insurance will not cover these treatments.

Jump to this post


Replies to "@marko49 I am a big proponent of focal therapy. Looked at IRE, Laser, and Tulsa Pro...."

@jim18 I don't think that is the reason for issues with insurance:
1. They are money driven and don't want to support new interventions that are not SOC from NCCN. Gives them and out.
2. There is little proof that ANY treatment for Gleason 6 folks makes any real sense, other than helping psychologically those who "just want something done!"