The Risk Factors and Screening Uptake for Prostate Cancer: A Scoping Review

The purpose of this scoping review was to identify the risk factors and screening uptake for prostate cancer.

Scoping review.

Arksey and O'Malley's framework guided this review; five databases (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Academic Search Complete and Cochrane Library) and grey literature were searched. Screening was undertaken against predetermined inclusion criteria for articles published before July 2023 and written in English. This review is reported in line with PRISMA-Sc.

10,899 database results were identified; 3676 papers were removed as duplicates and 7115 papers were excluded at title and abstract review. A total of 108 papers were full-text reviewed and 67 were included in the review. Grey literature searching yielded no results. Age, family history/genetics, hormones, race/ethnicity, exposure to hazards, geographical location and diet were identified as risk factors. Prostatic antigen test (PSA), digital rectal examination (DRE), transrectal ultrasound (TRUS), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging (MRSI) and prostate biopsy were identified as screening/diagnostic methods. The evidence reviewed highlights moderate knowledge and screening uptake of prostate cancer with less than half of men reporting for PSA screening. On the other hand, there is a year-to-year increase in PSA and DRE screening, but factors such as poverty, religion, culture, communication barriers, language and costs affect men's uptake of prostate cancer screening.

As prostate cancer rates increase globally, there is a need for greater uptake of prostate cancer screening and improved health literacy among men and health workers. There is a need to develop a comprehensive prostate cancer awareness and screening programme that targets men and addresses uptake issues so as to provide safe, quality care.

(1) A broad search strategy was utilised incorporating both databases and grey literature. (2) The PRISMA reporting guidelines were utilised. (3) Only English language papers were included, and this may have resulted in relevant articles being omitted.