Actually, PRS is not looking all that promising, unfortunately, at least according to this study:

«PSA was a much stronger predictor of prostate cancer metastasis or death with an area-under-the-curve of 0.78 versus 0.63 for the PRS. Importantly, addition of PRS to PSA did not contribute additional risk stratification for lethal prostate cancer. We have shown that a PRS that predicts prostate cancer incidence does not have utility above and beyond that of PSA measured at baseline when applied to the clinically relevant endpoint of prostate cancer death.»

In other words, PRS can show that you have a genetic risk of prostate cancer, but it doesn't help to differentiate whether it's dangerous or not as well as PSA does. Given that autopsies have shown over 50% of elderly men had prostate cancer at time of death (even if they didn't know it), that's not so useful.

Perhaps PRS would be helpful for routine screening for people who are afraid of needles and would otherwise avoid it (?)

Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8993880/