Lung Cancer

⇐ BACK TO SETTLEMENTS AND VERDICTS INDEX

CASE: Delayed diagnosis of lung cancer

FACTS: 60-year-old woman with a history of a nodule in the left upper lobe on CT was sent for follow up imaging. The radiologist reported: “No suspicious pulmonary nodule identified in the left upper lobe.” However, a 12 mm opacity in the right upper lobe was noted and the radiologist recommended “follow up to resolution.”

The decedent’s primary care physician reviewed the CT report and made note of the right lobe nodule. Contrary to the radiologist’s recommendation, the defendant told the decedent “no follow up is needed.” Nearly two years later the decedent was diagnosed with Stage III metastatic lung cancer.

DEFENSE: General denial of liability.

INJURIES: At the time of the CT scan identifying the right lobe lesion, the decedent was likely suffering from Stage I lung cancer with a survival rate of approximately 90%. When diagnosed nearly two years later the cancer had doubled in size, metastasized and her chances of survival were substantially reduced. The decedent died 13 months after diagnosis.

SPECIAL DAMAGES: Funeral expenses and medical bills.

SETTLEMENT: The parties agreed to settle for a confidential amount.

PLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL: Randolph J. Reis and Kimberly Kirkland (Reis & Kirkland, PLLC)

NAMES/COUNTY: Anonymous v. Anonymous

CASE: Lung Cancer

FACTS: 49-year-old plaintiff had a chest x-ray in connection with screening for a marrow donor program. Defendant radiologist #1 identified a “shadow” on the right lung but interpreted the abnormality as a nipple shadow and failed to recommend any follow up. The standard of care required that the chest x-ray be properly read as indicating a mass suspicious for malignancy. Further, when the mass on the chest x-ray was misread as a nipple shadow, the standard of care required that defendant radiologist #1 recommend it be re-run with nipple markers to confirm that the spots were indeed nipple shadows in order to exclude the possibility of a malignancy.

Sixteen months later plaintiff presented at defendant hospital’s emergency department with shortness of breath. Defendant emergency room doctor ordered a chest x-ray. The chest X-ray was read the following day by defendant radiologist #2 who identified an “opacity” in the right lung and interpreted it as probably a nipple shadow. The standard of care required that defendant radiologist #2 properly read the chest X-ray as indicating a mass suspicious for malignancy. In his report, defendant radiologist #2 did recommend that the chest x-ray be re-run with nipple markers to exclude the possibility of a malignancy. However, the ER doctor defendant and the defendant hospital failed to communicate this recommendation to the plaintiff or her primary care physician. As a result the chest X-ray was not repeated and plaintiff’s lung cancer continued to progress undiagnosed.

Three years and three months later, the plaintiff was diagnosed with Stage IV metastatic lung cancer.

DEFENSE: General denial of liability.

INJURIES: In the four and a half years between the first of the two misreads and the time plaintiff was finally diagnosed, her lung cancer had progressed from 1.5 cm, Stage 1 lung cancer to 4.5 cm, Stage IV metastatic lung cancer. The plaintiff has undergone two years of chemotherapy, has become totally disabled, and her prognosis is poor.

SPECIAL DAMAGES: The plaintiff incurred medical bills of approximately $700,000.00.

SETTLEMENT: The parties agreed to settle for a confidential amount.

PLAINTIFFS’ COUNSEL: Randolph J. Reis and Kimberly Kirkland (Reis Law, PLLC)

NAMES/COUNTY: Anonymous v. Anonymous