Search

This study examined factors that predict psychological morbidity and screening adherence in first-degree relatives (FDRs) taking part in a familial PSA screening study. Prostate cancer patients (index cases - ICs) who gave consent for their FDRs to be contacted for a familial PSA screening study to contact their FDRs were also asked permission to invite these FDRs into a linked psychosocial study. Participants were assessed on measures of psychological morbidity (including the General Health Questionnaire; Cancer Worry Scale; Health Anxiety Questionnaire; Impact of Events Scale); and perceived benefits and barriers, knowledge; perceived risk/susceptibility; family history; and socio-demographics. Of 255 ICs, 155 (61%) consented to their FDRs being contacted. Of 207 FDRs approached, 128 (62%) consented and completed questionnaires. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that health anxiety, perceived risk and subjective stress predicted higher cancer worry (P = 0.05). Measures of psychological morbidity did not predict screening adherence. Only past screening behaviour reliably predicted adherence to familial screening (P = 0.05). First-degree relatives entering the linked familial PSA screening programme do not, in general, have high levels of psychological morbidity. However, a small number of men exhibited psychological distress.

The feasibility of a population-based evaluation of screening for prostate cancer in men with a raised familial risk was investigated by studying reasons for non-participation and uptake rates according to postal recruitment and clinic contact. The levels of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and the positive predictive values (PPV) for cancer in men referred with a raised PSA and in those biopsied were analysed. First-degree male relatives (FDRs) were identified through index cases (ICs): patients living in two regions of England and diagnosed with prostate cancer at age < or =65 years from 1998 to 2004. First-degree relatives were eligible if they were aged 45-69 years, living in the UK and had no prior diagnosis of prostate cancer. Postal recruitment was low (45 of 1687 ICs agreed to their FDR being contacted: 2.7%) but this was partly due to ICs not having eligible FDRs. A third of ICs in clinic had eligible FDRs and 49% (192 out of 389) agreed to their FDR(s) being contacted. Of 220 eligible FDRs who initially consented, 170 (77.3%) had a new PSA test taken and 32 (14.5%) provided a previous PSA result. Among the 170 PSA tests, 10% (17) were > or =4 ng ml(-1) and 13.5% (23) tests above the age-related cutoffs. In 21 men referred, five were diagnosed with prostate cancer (PPV 24%; 95% CI 8, 47). To study further the effects of screening, patients with a raised familial risk should be counselled in clinic about screening of relatives and data routinely recorded so that the effects of screening on high-risk groups can be studied.