Physicians To Pay $12,000,000 Jury Award In Claim Involving Delayed Diagnosis Of Breast Cancer

Among the main tools available to aid physicians in saving the lives of female patients is the mammogram, a test that checks for signs of possible cancer in the breast, making it possible for physicians to spot the cancer in its early stages. But the mammogram is only as reliable as the doctor who interprets it. If a mistake is made in the interpretation of a mammogram it could holdup the detection of the patient's cancer. During this time, the cancer might become advanced. By reaching a late stage, the patient has a lessened five year survival rate. This means that the chances of her passing away of the cancer rise substantially.

Look into the reported case of a woman who had a routine mammogram and was told that there was no indication of cancer. About two years after, the patient had another mammogram. This time the mammogram was interpreted as showing no change to the dilated duct from the previous mammogram. However, the earlier mammogram was free of a dilated duct and so the doctors did nothing to study the suspicious reverse from the previous, clean, mammogram. Her mammogram was misinterpreted and her cancer was not detected. When the patient went in for another mammogram at another hospital the following year, the physician interpreting the mammogram listed a number of small nodular densities. The doctor noted that these had not changed from the prior mammograms. But, neither of the prior mammograms had included any nodular densities. Again, her mammogram was misinterpreted and again her cancer was not detected.

When the woman was finally diagnosed at a future date, the patient had advanced breast cancer that had metastasized. The main tumor was in the same area where the prior mammogram had been interpeted as exhibiting a dilated duct. The woman initiated a malpractice claim against both physicians and hospitals. The doctor and hospital that read the third mammogram as indicating small nodular densities reached a settlement for an undisclosed sum in an amount less that the $2,000,000 available in insurance coverage. The doctor and hospital that incorrectly interpreted the earlier mammogram refused to settle for the full amount of the policy. They were willing to pay only a mere $125,000. The case went to trial where evidence was introduced that had the mammogram not been misread the cancer might have been detected while only a Stage 1 cancer, which normally has a 5 year survival rate higher than 90%. The law firm that represented the woman reported that the trial led to an award of $12.0 million.

This is a good case to examine for several reasons. To begin, two separate mammograms were incorrectly interpreted by two distinct doctors at two distinct hospitals. Plus both doctors attributed findings to previous mammograms which were actually not present in those earlier mammograms. It is hard to figure out how this could have occurred unless the doctors both compared the mammogram they were examining to another patient's mammogram. However the probability of this happening twice at 2 separate hospitals is highly improbable. However the amount of carelessness that would be necessary otherwise is genuinely unexcusable. In this case, the jury appears to have agreed.