Give men life-saving prostate cancer checks at 45, say charity – after Olympic legend Sir Chris Hoy sparks NHS review

A CHARITY has called for men at high risk of developing prostate cancer to be screened from the age of 45.

It comes after Sir Chris Hoy suggested men should get prostate cancer checks in their forties, following his own diagnosis of the disease aged just 48.

A “little” pain in his shoulder was the only sign of the Olympic legend’s incurable cancer, which had spread from his prostate to his bones.

His statement that it was a “no-brainer” to offer prostate cancer testing to men below the current standard age of 50 prompted Health Secretary Wes Streeting to announce the Government was looking into the matter.

He said: “He makes a powerful argument.

“I’ve asked the NHS to look at the case for lowering the screening age on prostate cancer.”

Now, charity Prostate Cancer Research has called for a national prostate cancer screening programme to be rolled out across the UK.

Under such a programme, men would be checked for the disease between the ages of 50 and 69, while those at higher risk would get called in for tests from the age of 45, the charity’s head Oliver Kemp said.

There are currently national screening programmes in place to spot breast and bowel cancer, but none for prostate cancer – which kills more than 12,000 men every year.

The charity intends to present a report at the House of Commons today, urging the National Screening Committee – which supports the implementation of such programmes – to take up the initiative.

Currently, men over the age of 50 need to ask their for a GP blood test, called a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test.

Oliver said a national screening programme would invite men at higher risk of the disease to have the PSA test done.

He told the BBC‘s Today Programme: “Currently we’re relying on a system of informed choice.

“Not everyone is even aware that they have a prostate, never mind that they are at higher risk – so if they’ve got family history like Sir Chris Hoy had or if they’re black men.

“This informed choice system isn’t working.

“Not as many people are turning up to their doctors as they should be.”

“Some people obviously don’t get symptoms”, the charity head added, again referring to Sir Chris who suffered shoulder pain – a sign the cancer has already spread.

The charity said a screening programme could mean fewer deaths and fewer men getting diagnosed in the later stages of their disease.

“We surveyed men and asked ‘if you did get a letter through the post would you go [to the GP]’ and over 80 per cent said they would,” Oliver noted.

He went on: “We would ask for a similar screening programme to some of the others that are already in existence for other cancers, for breast cancer, for bowel cancer.

This a would involve a “targeted approach of getting letters to the door, text messages saying ‘please go and get a PSA test‘ as a first line, then onto an MRI and then onto a guided biopsy [if the results indicate that’s needed]”.

Unreliable testing

Oliver said: “The PSA test is just a simple blood test, you send your sample off and you get the results a few days later.”

But he acknowledged that the accuracy of PSA tests has been questioned.

According to the NHS, the tests aren’t routinely routinely used to screen for prostate cancer, as results can be unreliable.

An elevated level can be a sign that someone has prostate cancer, but PSA levels can also be raised by other, non-cancerous conditions.

This includes an enlarged prostate, inflammation and infections.

To this Oliver said: “Nobody’s arguing for just a PSA test and then having your prostate taken out.

“We want multiple different tests in place to funnel that group of people, to prevent over-diagnosis, to prevent over-treatment.

“There are lots of good new tests already coming onto the market.”

Other ways in which prostate cancer is currently diagnosed include MRI scans, biopsies and physical examinations of the prostate.

Prostate Cancer Research’s report also aims to show that screening men for the disease could benefit the UK economically.

“We used to have a moral argument for screening and we now have an economic one as well,” Oliver said.

“By using the latest technology we could diagnose 4,600 people early, giving them 100 per cent chance of survival at stage 1.”

He claimed this would deliver a net economic benefit of 100 million pounds.