On October 14, 2025, a renewed call for targeted prostate cancer screening for men at highest risk has ignited both hope and debate across the UK. Former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, now a patron of Prostate Cancer Research, has thrown his considerable weight behind a campaign aiming to save thousands of lives through early detection—especially among black men and those with a family history of the disease.
Prostate Cancer Research, the charity at the forefront of this push, recently published a report detailing the costs and projected benefits of a national screening programme. Their analysis suggests that inviting 1.3 million high-risk men—those aged 45 to 69 who are black or have a family history of prostate cancer—for annual checks could be achieved for £25 million a year, or about £18 per patient. This is actually £4 less per eligible patient than the cost of breast cancer screening currently offered to women between 50 and 70, according to figures reported by The Express.
“This report makes clear that a targeted screening programme for prostate cancer is deliverable and would save lives,” Sunak told The Telegraph. He added, “I’m convinced of the urgency. We cannot sit still while more than 12,000 fathers, husbands, and sons are lost every year.”
The statistics are sobering. In 2024 alone, more than 58,000 men in England were diagnosed with prostate cancer—a 9% increase from the previous year, according to the National Prostate Cancer Audit cited by the BBC. Nationally, the annual toll is even higher, with around 55,000 new cases and over 12,000 deaths attributed to the disease each year. The risk is not evenly distributed: one in four black men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer in their lifetimes, compared to one in eight white men and one in 13 men of other ethnicities. Men with a family history of the disease are also more than twice as likely to develop it.
Prostate cancer is notorious for its stealth. Early stages often present no symptoms at all, and the prostate—a walnut-sized gland at the base of the bladder—can become cancerous as cells grow out of control. For many, the first sign comes only when the disease has already spread.
David Bateman, 66, is one such patient. Diagnosed at age 59 after proactively requesting a PSA (prostate-specific antigen) blood test, he learned the cancer had already spread to his pelvis. “That is very important to me because of my sons—they are 38 and 40—I want them checked as soon as possible. If I had been screened at 50, I am sure I wouldn’t be in the position I am today,” Bateman told the BBC. Despite chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and hormone treatment, his cancer cannot be cured. He’s now a vocal advocate for screening, especially for those most at risk.
The proposed screening programme would combine MRI scans, PSA blood tests, and biopsies. Prostate Cancer Research estimates that, if 20% of eligible men are invited annually, with a 72% uptake rate, diagnostic activity such as scans and biopsies would need to rise by 23%. The charity believes this could be managed with only a modest increase in NHS staffing.
Oliver Kemp, the chief executive of Prostate Cancer Research, is unequivocal: “We hope the screening committee will notice the significant findings in this report. It shows that a national screening programme—targeting men at highest risk—is affordable, deliverable and will save lives.”
Yet, not everyone in the medical community is convinced. The UK National Screening Committee is currently reconsidering its decision from five years ago not to recommend routine prostate cancer screening. Media reports suggest it may stick with its current stance, despite the mounting pressure. Critics cite the risks of overdiagnosis and unnecessary treatment. The PSA test, for example, is controversial because levels can rise for reasons other than cancer, such as infections, leading to false positives and potentially unnecessary interventions.
Professor Hashim Ahmed, Chair of Urology at Imperial College, offered a word of caution: “The problem is we can often find disease that doesn’t need to be treated and we end up causing harm...and my concern at the moment is that harm to benefit equation isn’t quite right.” The potential side effects of prostate cancer treatment—such as incontinence and erectile dysfunction—are not trivial, and overzealous treatment could do more harm than good for some men.
Olympic cycling champion Sir Chris Hoy, who himself has advanced, incurable prostate cancer, has joined the chorus calling for earlier checks. He advocates for lowering the age threshold for requesting a PSA blood test, which is currently not routinely offered to men under 50 unless they have symptoms. “We must also tackle the inequalities revealed by the audit so that age or postcode never determine the quality of care men receive,” said urologist Professor Noel Clarke, representing the British Association of Urological Surgeons, in comments reported by the BBC.
Film director Sir Steve McQueen, who lost his father to prostate cancer and survived a diagnosis himself in 2022, has also spoken out about the need for greater screening. “I find it very, very difficult to think that just because people have a certain kind of privilege they can be treated. It’s unfair,” he said on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. “Now we have the potential to cure so many men of this, when they don’t even know they have cancer.”
Sunak, reflecting on his own experiences with family and friends affected by the disease, highlighted a key barrier: men’s reluctance to seek help for health issues. “That’s why a proactive targeted screening programme could make a difference in helping save lives,” he told the BBC. He noted that the reliability of testing has improved, particularly with the advent of MRI scans, making early detection more feasible than ever before.
While the debate continues, the urgency is clear to those affected. Every £20,000 spent on the screening programme could lead to one extra year of life for a patient, according to Prostate Cancer Research. With more than 12,000 men dying from prostate cancer annually, advocates argue that the time for action is now.
As the UK National Screening Committee weighs its decision, voices from patients, campaigners, and medical professionals alike are shaping a national conversation about risk, cost, and the value of a life saved. For many families, the hope is that a targeted approach—focusing on those at greatest risk—will tip the balance toward early detection and a fighting chance.
