Case study: six-figure compensation for delayed non-Hodgkin lymphoma diagnosis

Our medical negligence solicitors helped a widow claim compensation for negligence suffered by her late husband following a delayed diagnosis of non-Hodgkins lymphoma.

Reporting symptoms to the GP

Our client’s husband, Mr N, a semi-retired technician in the music industry initially reported concerning symptoms typical of lymphoma to his GP who then referred him to hospital for further investigation.

Fatal delayed diagnosis of non-Hodgkin lymphoma

After being referred by his GP, a CT scan was undertaken at the hospital which showed that Mr N had prominent lymph nodes, but it was not considered abnormal by the hospital and lymphoma was ruled out.

Over the next 21 weeks, Mr N’s condition deteriorated, requiring a further CT scan which revealed significant malignant progression of lymphoma. Sadly, Mr N passed away almost nine months after first visiting his GP. Test results received after Mr N’s death revealed that he had non-Hodgkins lymphoma.

The NHS Trust responsible reported Mr N’s death as a serious untoward incident.

Why was the diagnosis delayed?

Negligent interpretation of the CT scan

Our specialist delayed diagnosis solicitors instructed a Consultant Radiologist who noted a clear breach of duty in the reporting of the first CT scan taken at the hospital.

Following the CT scan, the hospital’s Multidisciplinary team (MDT) met to discuss Mr N’s condition and concluded that there was no evidence of lymphoma. This hybrid meeting was described by the hospital’s investigation team as ‘rushed and dysfunctional’. The team met for 25 minutes to discuss eight patients

A failure in technology also meant clinicians at the hospital could not see what the MDT (based in a different hospital) was looking at, meaning the CT scan showing the enlarged lymph nodes likely could not be seen properly.

It was admitted in the SUI report (Serious Untoward Incident) that there was insufficient coordination and a lack of leadership following up to Mr N’s diagnosis.

Failure to check for lymphoma

Despite indications that lymphoma could be a differential diagnosis, the MDT went down many different paths; they tested to rule out other rare conditions but never thought to double-check for lymphoma.

Our expert’s view was that repeat Positron Emission Tomography (PET) scanning would have shown the presence of high-grade non-Hodgkin’s B cell lymphoma at the time and the Letter of Claim alleged that Mr N’s lymphoma would have responded well to treatment.

Hospital failings

Incorrect diagnosis and discharge from A&E

During one of Mr N’s admissions to hospital, he was incorrectly diagnosed with an autoimmune disease. He was readmitted again via Accident and Emergency where it was noted that he was unwell with fatigue, skin ulcers, painful mouth ulcers, widespread rash, and an ongoing dry cough. Over the following days, he was persistently very confused, suffering hallucinations, and feeling drowsy and weak.

Mr N was inappropriately discharged on one occasion during the final month of his life against the wishes of his family and without being seen by the Haematology department at any point during this admission.

Following this, Mrs N reported her concerns to the GP who visited Mr N in hospital. The GP found Mr N to be very lethargic, feverish, difficult to rouse and looking anaemic. He was also not eating or drinking. The GP arranged for an ambulance to be sent to A&E where a second CT scan took place showing clear, significant progression of the undiagnosed malignancy (cancer) since the first scan nine weeks before.

Claim for delayed diagnosis

Mrs N approached our medical negligence solicitors to pursue a claim for delayed diagnosis on behalf of her late husband.

Mrs N’s case was that the CT scan was negligently reported, and the clinicians failed to measure the lymph nodes which would have confirmed they were enlarged during the first scan. They also failed to take a biopsy of the lymph nodes and failed to alert clinicians to the potential condition.

The Defendant (hospital) admitted that the initial CT scan did show a lymph node that could have been biopsied. It is likely that a biopsy of the node would have been undertaken, and Mr N been diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma either at or before the MDT discussion which followed.

However, the Defendant contended that their failure only brought forward Mr N’s death by 17 months.

Loss of earnings

Our solicitors instructed a Forensic Accountant to comment on Mr N’s loss of income during his period of ill health as part of the claim. This was difficult to comment on due to the sporadic nature of his income, which peaked in the period before the bands he worked for were preparing for tours. There was therefore a considerable difference in opinion regarding the amount of compensation due for Mr N’s loss of earnings.

We organised an early exchange of medical expert evidence and served a draft schedule of loss along with Particulars of Claim (a document setting out the details of the claim).

Settlement of the claim

The Defendant made an early and very low-level offer to attempt to settle the case which was rejected by Mrs N.

The claim was settled for a six-figure sum in a joint settlement meeting.

How we can help

If you or a loved one has suffered because of a delayed cancer diagnosis, our medical negligence solicitors may be able to help you claim compensation.

Call our friendly on 0117 325 2929 for a no-obligation chat or fill out our online enquiry form.