Introduction—Targeting the lesion, not the organ

The current diagnostic and therapeutic strategy for localized prostate cancer is not working. In fact, it is severely flawed and, as such, fraught with controversy. Our current strategy has arisen from the imprecision of our diagnostic pathway. We do not know where the cancer is, so we subject the prostate to randomly placed needles in the hope of hitting the tumor. This leads to overdiagnosis, underdiagnosis, missclassification of risk and overtreatment and undertreatment. If we do find cancer, we usually subject the entire prostate to radiotherapy or surgery, which damages the surrounding structures—neurovascular bundles, external urinary sphincter, rectum, and bladder neck. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, coupled with an intensive sampling strategy (targeted biopsies), might be able to rule out clinically significant lesions with a negative predictive value in the order of 90% to 95%. Focal therapy certainly leads to less genitourinary and rectal side effects. Current data from more than 3,000 men treated internationally show that incontinence after focal therapy is 0% to 5% (radical therapy can lead to incontinence in 15%–20%) whereas erectile dysfunction occurs in 5% to 10% of men with good baseline function (radical therapy rates vary between 30% and 60%). Early to medium cancer control using biopsies after treatment shows between 80% and 90% of patients have a successful treatment, with 10% to 15% of men requiring redo-treatment with minimal additional morbidity.