Six-time Olympic champion Sir Chris Hoy has said he is “extremely disappointed and saddened” after the UK’s national screening advisers recommended against introducing a prostate cancer screening programme for all men on the NHS, warning it would be likely to cause more harm than good.
The UK National Screening Committee (UKNSC) on Friday published draft advice ruling out mass screening using the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) blood test, despite prostate cancer being the most common cancer in UK men and causing around 12,000 deaths a year. Instead, it has backed a narrowly targeted scheme offering regular checks only to men aged 45 to 61 with specific high‑risk BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutations.
The proposals, now out to a 12‑week public consultation, mean millions of men – including Black men, who face roughly double the risk of developing and dying from prostate cancer, and those with a strong family history – would not receive routine invitations for screening. A final recommendation to ministers is expected in March 2026.
Hoy, who revealed this year that he has terminal prostate cancer with a prognosis of two to four years, said the decision failed men at greatest risk. He welcomed the move to offer screening to men with BRCA gene faults as “a very small step forward” but said it did not go far enough while thousands of men were still dying annually.
He argued that men like him, with a clear family history of the disease, and Black men, whose risk is known to be significantly higher, should be included in any targeted programme. Hoy credited public discussion of his own diagnosis with encouraging other men to get tested and has pledged to keep campaigning for wider access to early detection.
Former prime minister Lord David Cameron, who was treated for prostate cancer in 2024, also criticised the UKNSC recommendation, describing it as “too targeted” in a post on X. He highlighted that prostate cancer can be symptomless in its early stages and said structured screening had been crucial in catching his own cancer while it was still curable.
Other high‑profile survivors and campaigners, including Sir Stephen Fry, Sir Tony Robinson, broadcaster Dermot Murnaghan, former footballer Les Ferdinand and actor Colin McFarlane, expressed deep disappointment. They warned that many men, particularly in Black communities, are still being diagnosed too late for curative treatment and called for at least a “halfway house” of targeted screening for Black men and those with a strong family history.
The UKNSC, chaired by former National Cancer Director Prof Sir Mike Richards, said its draft advice was based on extensive evidence that current PSA‑based screening is an imprecise tool which, when used across the whole population, offers only a modest reduction in deaths while driving very high levels of overdiagnosis.
Around three-quarters of men with an elevated PSA level do not have prostate cancer, while some men with aggressive disease can have a PSA reading within the normal range. Committee modelling suggests that screening all men would detect large numbers of slow‑growing cancers that would never have caused harm, leading to unnecessary biopsies and treatment.
Such overtreatment can have serious side effects, including impotence and incontinence. The committee concluded that, on current evidence, a national PSA screening programme would be “likely to cause more harm than good”.
Its proposed targeted scheme would invite men aged 45 to 61 with confirmed BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations – a group estimated at around 30,000 across the UK – for screening every two years, using PSA tests within modern diagnostic pathways that increasingly include MRI scans to reduce unnecessary biopsies.
However, the UKNSC said it did not yet have robust enough data to justify similar programmes for other high‑risk groups. That includes Black men and men with a family history of prostate cancer or related breast and ovarian cancers, despite longstanding evidence that their risk is significantly higher than average.
The stance has been welcomed by some medical bodies. The Royal College of GPs backed the cautious approach, arguing that any screening offer must be “evidence‑based and reliable” and warning that PSA alone cannot accurately distinguish cancers that need treatment from those that do not.
Cancer Research UK described the BRCA‑focused proposal as a “first step towards a targeted screening programme”, but also stressed that better tests and more evidence are needed before widening eligibility. Prostate Cancer UK and urology specialists said they supported targeted screening for BRCA carriers and called for clearer NHS guidance, better tools for GPs and stronger awareness campaigns, especially for Black men and those with family histories.
The UKNSC has pointed to the £42m TRANSFORM trial, launched in 2024, as crucial to future decisions. The study, backed by Prostate Cancer UK, the National Institute for Health and Care Research and the government, is testing combinations of PSA, advanced genetic risk scoring and rapid MRI scans in up to 300,000 men, with early results expected within about two years.
The draft recommendation also lands just days after the government unveiled England’s first Men’s Health Strategy, which promises improved care for men with prostate cancer and at‑home PSA testing for men already diagnosed and under monitoring, potentially from 2027 via the NHS App.
Health Secretary Wes Streeting said he would “examine the evidence and arguments” before deciding whether to accept the UKNSC’s final advice next March. He has said he wants earlier diagnosis and faster treatment but must also weigh potential harms from wider screening. More than 120 MPs, including former prime minister Rishi Sunak, have urged him to consider broader offers for high‑risk men regardless of the committee’s caution.
For now, the draft decision leaves the UK as one of the few countries without a national prostate cancer screening programme, and men concerned about their risk remain reliant on ad hoc PSA testing through their GP or private providers while the consultation and political debate continue.
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!