Key Summary
- Experts rejected routine prostate cancer screening for all men due to high overdiagnosis and low benefit
- Only men with BRCA1/BRCA2 faulty genes may get targeted checks every two years from ages 45–61
- Decision sparked backlash from campaigners, while Cancer Research UK supports the evidence-based approach
A panel of expert government health advisers from the UK National Screening Committee (UKNSC) have rejected the suggestion to make routine prostate cancer checks for all men in the UK.
However, the committee recommends that men with faulty genes should get targeted screening every two years from ages 45 to 61 as they are at a higher risk of aggressive cancer.
BRCA1 and BRCA2 are faulty genes that raise the risk of several cancers, including breast, ovarian, pancreatic and prostate cancer.
As per Cancer Research UK, about one in 300 to 400 people carry such faulty genes, and most don’t even know they have it.
The committee commented, screening all men, even those with a family history would do more harm than good, because it would cause a lot of unnecessary overdiagnosis, while the number of deaths it would reduce is marginal.
Though one in four black men have a higher risk of prostate cancer than white men, the committee found the evidence to be ‘lacking and uncertain.’
The committee’s modelling finding showed that yearly screening for Black men aged 55–60 could result in 44 percent of prostate cancers being “overdiagnosed.”
Health secretary Wes Streeting assured to carefully review the draft recommendation and its evidence.
The committee also discovered that 40 to 50 percent of cancers picked up by PSA screening would be slow-growing meaning to result in overdiagnosis with regular checks.
It could also cause life-long side-effects such as incontinence, erectile issues, etc.
Other than black men, people of Jewish heritage are prone to prostate cancer.
Therefore, men with a family history of cancer have been urged to consult their GP and decide regarding their blood or saliva test to identify faulty gene.
The committee could not provide the exact number of eligible people for routine prostate check, yet it is assumed to be a few thousands only.
Many charities and campaigners are upset with UKNSC’s decision.
However, Cancer Research UK supports the committee’s decisions.
Dr Ian Walker, the executive director of policy at Cancer Research UK, commented “It can miss dangerous cancers and detect ones that don’t need treatment.
“Work is still needed to understand how the proposed screening programme could be delivered, and we look forward to the UKNSC setting out further details in due course,” he added.
On other hand, Laura Kerby, the chief executive of Prostate Cancer UK opined, “the decision came as a blow to the tens of thousands of men, loved ones and families who’ve fought for a screening programme”.
Former prime minister Rishi Sunak has also expressed ‘deep disappointment’ towards the committee’s choice.
