Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Cancer Therapies02:49

Cancer Therapies

10.2K
Cancer therapies are various modes of treatment, such as surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy that are administered to cancer patients.
However, cancer treatments can pose several challenges, as therapies used to kill cancer cells are generally also toxic to normal cells. Moreover, cancer cells mutate rapidly and can develop resistance to chemical agents or radiation therapy. Besides, all types of cancer cells may not respond to the same therapy. Some cancer cells respond to one...
10.2K
Targeted Cancer Therapies02:57

Targeted Cancer Therapies

9.0K
The targeted cancer therapies, also known as “molecular targeted therapies,” take advantage of the molecular and genetic differences between the cancer cells and the normal cells. It needs a thorough understanding of the cancer cells to develop drugs that can target specific molecular aspects that drive the growth, progression, and spread of cancer cells without affecting the growth and survival of other normal cells in the body.
There are several types of targeted therapies against...
9.0K
Radical Reactivity: Nucleophilic Radicals01:16

Radical Reactivity: Nucleophilic Radicals

2.7K
Radicals adjacent to electron-donating groups are called nucleophilic radicals. These radicals readily react with electrophilic alkenes. The SOMO–LUMO interactions are the driving force for the reaction, where the high-energy SOMO of the electron-rich, nucleophilic radicals interacts with the low-energy LUMO of the electron-deficient, electrophilic alkenes. Such SOMO–LUMO interactions are the basis of reactive radical traps, affecting the selectivity in radical reactions. For...
2.7K
Radicals01:27

Radicals

762
Roots, often written as radicals, identify the quantity that must be raised to a specific exponent to produce a given value. A radical expression consists of two main components: the radicand, which is the value placed inside the root symbol, and the index, which indicates the degree of the root being taken. The notation n√a indicates the principal nth root of a. If n equals 2, the operation is the square root, while n = 3 defines the cube root. When n is even, a negative radicand does...
762
Radical Reactivity: Electrophilic Radicals01:02

Radical Reactivity: Electrophilic Radicals

2.5K
Radicals adjacent to electron‐withdrawing groups are called electrophilic radicals. These radicals readily react with nucleophilic alkenes. For example, the malonate radical, in which the radical center is flanked by two electron‐withdrawing groups, reacts readily with butyl vinyl ether, which consists of an electron‐donating oxygen substituent. The reaction between electrophilic malonate radical and nucleophilic vinyl ether is favored because the radical has a...
2.5K
Intracellular Signaling Affects Focal Adhesions01:17

Intracellular Signaling Affects Focal Adhesions

3.6K
Integrins act both as extracellular input receivers and as intracellular processing activators. As their name suggests, integrins are entirely integrated into the membrane structure. Their hydrophobic membrane-spanning regions interact with the phospholipid bilayer's hydrophobic region. These membrane receptors provide extracellular attachment sites for effectors like hormones and growth factors. They activate intracellular response cascades when their effectors are bound and active.
Some...
3.6K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Prescribing Trajectories in Type 2 Diabetes in the United States, 2019-2024.

Diabetes, obesity & metabolism·2026
Same author

Artificial intelligence in urology: A review of United States Food and Drug Administration-cleared devices.

BJU international·2026
Same author

Concomitant MRI-detected and MRI-undetected Prostate Cancer with Implications for Biopsy Strategies and Focal Therapy Planning: An Analysis of the PROMIS and PICTURE Trials.

European urology oncology·2026
Same author

Prostate Imaging Standards for Screening Magnetic Resonance Imaging (PRISM): International Consensus Recommendations.

JAMA oncology·2026
Same author

Water vapor thermotherapy and high-grade Clavien-Dindo complications: retrospective analysis of 10 cases.

World journal of urology·2026
Same author

Caution in Interpreting Survival After for Salvage Focal Therapy vs Salvage Radical Prostatectomy-Reply.

JAMA oncology·2026
Same journal

Cardiac Risk After Heart-Sparing Breast Radiotherapy.

JAMA oncology·2026
Same journal

When Not to Push the Boulder.

JAMA oncology·2026
Same journal

Circulating Methylated SEPT9 for Detection of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Cirrhosis.

JAMA oncology·2026
Same journal

Less Can Be More by Circulating Tumor DNA Use in ERBB2-Positive Breast Cancer.

JAMA oncology·2026
Same journal

Long-Term Outcomes in Patients With Recurrent Ovarian Cancer and Exceptional Response to PARP Inhibitors.

JAMA oncology·2026
Same journal

Three-Body Problem at Digital Frontiers.

JAMA oncology·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Feb 13, 2026

Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy
12:10

Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy

Published on: May 19, 2022

9.4K

Salvage Focal Therapy vs Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Radiorecurrent Prostate Cancer.

Alexander Light1,2, Max Peters3, Manit Arya1,2

  • 1Imperial Prostate, Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, England, United Kingdom.

JAMA Oncology
|February 12, 2026
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Salvage focal therapy (sFT) and salvage radical prostatectomy (sRP) effectively treat recurrent prostate cancer after radiotherapy. sFT shows fewer complications, offering a favorable therapeutic ratio for patients with localized disease.

More Related Videos

Focal Laser Ablation of Prostate Cancer: An Office Procedure
11:07

Focal Laser Ablation of Prostate Cancer: An Office Procedure

Published on: March 30, 2021

8.5K
Isolation, Culture, and Characterization of Prostate Cancer-Associated Fibroblasts
09:43

Isolation, Culture, and Characterization of Prostate Cancer-Associated Fibroblasts

Published on: August 1, 2025

826

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Feb 13, 2026

Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy
12:10

Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy

Published on: May 19, 2022

9.4K
Focal Laser Ablation of Prostate Cancer: An Office Procedure
11:07

Focal Laser Ablation of Prostate Cancer: An Office Procedure

Published on: March 30, 2021

8.5K
Isolation, Culture, and Characterization of Prostate Cancer-Associated Fibroblasts
09:43

Isolation, Culture, and Characterization of Prostate Cancer-Associated Fibroblasts

Published on: August 1, 2025

826

Area of Science:

  • Urology
  • Oncology
  • Radiation Oncology

Background:

  • Recurrent prostate cancer after radiotherapy typically has poor survival outcomes.
  • Salvage focal therapy (sFT) and salvage radical prostatectomy (sRP) are potential treatment options for localized recurrence.
  • Limited data exists on long-term outcomes and comparative effectiveness of sFT versus sRP.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare cancer control and perioperative complications between sFT and sRP in patients with recurrent prostate cancer post-radiotherapy.
  • To evaluate the 10-year cancer-specific and overall survival rates for both treatment modalities.
  • To assess the incidence of perioperative complications associated with sFT and sRP.

Main Methods:

  • International, multicenter cohort study utilizing matched comparison data.
  • sFT patients derived from prospective registries (HIFU, Cryotherapy, Focal Recurrent Assessment and Salvage Treatment).
  • sRP patients derived from an international retrospective registry.
  • 1:1 cardinality matching based on key clinical and treatment variables.
  • Primary outcome: 10-year cancer-specific survival; Secondary outcomes: overall survival, perioperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grades 1-5 and 3-5).

Main Results:

  • No statistically significant difference in 10-year cancer-specific survival (92% for sFT vs. 99% for sRP) or overall survival between sFT and sRP.
  • sRP was associated with significantly higher odds of any perioperative complication (aOR 24.20) and major complication (aOR 9.31) compared to sFT.
  • A total of 923 patients were eligible for matching (419 sFT, 504 sRP).

Conclusions:

  • Both sFT and sRP are effective treatments for localized recurrent prostate cancer post-radiotherapy.
  • sFT demonstrates a significantly lower rate of perioperative complications compared to sRP.
  • sFT may offer a more favorable therapeutic ratio for select patients with localized radiorecurrent prostate cancer.