Delay in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Cancer

After three days of abdominal pain Clare was admitted to hospital. Her appendix was removed after test results revealed a growth. Further tests were carried out on the appendix which showed the appendix wall was affected by a rare and aggressive tumour known as a goblet cell carcinoma. Cords of the tumour had also started to affect the serosal fat which surrounds the organs. This finding meant that it was likely that the cancer was on the point of spreading beyond the appendix. Goblet cell carcinoma is known to progress to the ovaries in women. Clare should have been offered surgical removal of her ovaries ("salpingo-oophrectomy") at this point. But no such surgery was mentioned and Clare left hospital under the impression that all was well.

Over the next four years, Clare continued to suffer regular abdominal pain and severe bloating which eventually became so bad that she was referred to a specialist hospital. Here a CT (Computer Tomographic) scan was performed which showed a growth on both ovaries. The medical staff looked back through her notes and discovered that she had a past history of carcinoma. Immediate investigative surgery revealed that the cancer had spread to both ovaries and throughout her abdomen. Clare underwent very radical surgery consisting of a combined total abdominal hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophrectomy (the operation she needed in the first place) and a right hemicolectomy (an operation which removes a significant portion of your large intestine/bowel.)

Sadly at the end of the surgery it was noticed that there were new tumours which were identical in type to the growth identified some four years ago. Clare was told she had less than five years to live. She underwent both radiotherapy and chemotherapy with little success.

Misdiagnosis of cancer and delay in the diagnosis of cancer cases can be difficult. Mainly due to causation. Essentially, we have to show that the negligence that took place, in this case not operating some four years previously, had affected the outcome for Clare.

In this case the defendants admitted that there had been a breach of duty to the client ("liability") but denied that this would have made any difference to her outcome ("causation"). The clinical negligence team at Bond Pearce therefore undertook research into the treatment of goblet cell carcinoma and also into the prognosis of patients following such treatment. We were able to show that this rare and aggressive tumour required early excision of the appendix, and in women a salpingo-oophrectomy. We were also able to show that had this been performed at the appropriate time, Clare's chances of a recurrence would have been substantially less than 50%.

The team continued to fight hard for Clare and their refusal to back down coupled with their diligent research enabled them importantly to settle Clare's case for her whilst she was still alive.

If you would like to seek expert legal advice relating to this case study or any other injury claim please complete the online enquiry form or call 0800 915 4650.

If you would like to seek expert legal advice relating to this case study or any other injury claim please complete the online enquiry form or call 0800 915 4650