Articles Posted in Misdiagnosis of Breast Cancer

by

Ms. Doe, who had a history of breast cancer, underwent regular breast MRIs. After a tumor was identified on an MRI, her treating radiologist reviewed previous scans and allegedly confirmed that they had been misread as normal for several years. By the time the correct diagnosis was issued, Ms. Doe’s breast cancer had spread to her lymph nodes.

Ms. Doe required chemotherapy and radiation and now has a reduced life expectancy. Furthermore, she incurred $341,000 in medical expenses and $19,000 in lost income.

Ms. Doe sued undisclosed defendants for choosing not to timely diagnose and treat her breast cancer. Had Ms. Doe received an earlier diagnosis, it was claimed that she could have been treated successfully with surgery.
Continue reading

by

A New York Appellate Court has held that the plaintiff in a breast cancer negligence case failed to raise a triable issue of fact and opposition to a defendant’s summary judgment motion.

Merlinda Paglinawan underwent a screening mammogram and ultrasound. The interpreting radiologist recommended a follow-up diagnostic mammogram and ultrasound. Paglinawan discussed this with her obstetrician-gynecologist, Dr. Ing-Yann Jeng, who agreed.

The report of the follow-up test recommended a targeted ultrasound in 6-12 months. The following year, Dr. Jeng referred Paglinawan to a breast surgeon, leading to a diagnosis of Stage II breast cancer. That diagnosis was made several months later.
Continue reading

by

The defendants, Gregg Coccaro, M.D., and Associated Saint James Radiologist, S.C., appealed from the $6.5 million jury verdict in this medical malpractice lawsuit. The appeal raised the following two issues:

(1) Did the trial court abuse its discretion in making a series of rulings related to evidence, argument and instruction that unfairly prejudiced defendants and thus warranted a new trial; and

(2) Did the trial court err in awarding prejudgment interest because the General Assembly’s 2021 amendment mandating prejudgment interest in personal injury and wrongful death cases (735 ILCS 5/2-1303(c) (West Supp. 2021)) violated the Illinois constitution?
Continue reading

by

Robin Mann underwent a screening mammogram at the McGuire Veterans Affairs Medical Center. A doctor there allegedly noted a previously seen mass in Mann’s left breast but did not order an ultrasound.

Approximately two years later, Mann underwent another screening mammogram that revealed no new masses. The following year, she noticed a mass in her left thigh, a small lump in her right buttock and a palpable lump in her left breast. A physician at McGuires Women’s Health Center allegedly diagnosed a benign fibrocystic condition and ordered another mammogram. After undergoing this test, Mann was advised to continue with routine screening mammograms.

The lump in Mann’s breast grew larger. She underwent a diagnostic mammogram, but this allegedly was not compared to the previous images. When an ultrasound did show an abnormal mass, Mann underwent a breast biopsy, which led to a diagnosis of high-grade invasive mammary carcinoma.
Continue reading

by

Kerri Downes, 22, discovered a lump in her right breast while showering. She went to Axia Women’s Health, where she was seen by a nurse practitioner, Eileen Carpenter. Carpenter diagnosed fibrocystic breast changes, and a follow-up exam was scheduled for two weeks later.

At this appointment, Carpenter again diagnosed bilateral fibrocystic changes. Approximately nine months later, Downes experienced itching and burning of the skin over her breast. She consulted a physician, who noticed that Downes’s right breast was larger than her left and that she had a mass in her right breast.

An ultrasound and a biopsy led to a diagnosis of Stage IIB breast cancer, with metastasis to three lymph nodes. Downes underwent a bilateral mastectomy with lymph node dissection, chemotherapy and radiation as well as breast reconstruction. Downes is now 26 and has a reduced chance of survival.
Continue reading

by

Maya Cotton underwent a mammogram after she developed a lump in her right breast. The interpreting radiologist allegedly reported that her condition was “probably benign.”

Approximately 16 months later, she was diagnosed as having Stage IIIB breast cancer, which required a bilateral mastectomy, radiation, chemotherapy and hormone therapy.

Cotton sued the radiologist and the radiology group, alleging that they chose not to properly interpret the mammogram, perform an ultrasound and perform a complete examination of her breast lump. The lawsuit claimed that this lack of affirmative action allowed her cancer to spread and become more advanced.
Continue reading

by

Melissa Avilez suffered from breast lumps and pain. She consulted a certified nurse midwife, Kerry-Ann Dacosta, who worked for Urban Health Plan, a federally funded clinic.

Although Avilez sought treatment from Nurse Dacosta nine times in 2015 and 2016, she was not referred to a breast surgeon.

In 2017, Avilez was diagnosed as having metastatic cancer. Before she died at age 26, Avilez sued Nurse Dacosta and the United States under the Federal Torts Claims Act (FTCA) alleging that the nurse midwife, Dacosta, chose not to follow up on her breast findings, perform a breast exam; refer Ms. Avilez to a breast surgeon; or order radiological testing, including an ultrasound.
Continue reading

by

When Lana Burton went in for a routine mammogram and later developed a lump in her breast, she went back for another mammogram and an ultrasound. The radiologist, Dr. Sanford Limpkin, interpreted the mammogram and ultrasound as being normal.

Fifteen months later, she was diagnosed as having triple negative cancer of the right breast. She underwent a mastectomy, chemotherapy and radiation. Sadly, she died within three years. Burton was 56 when she passed away; she was survived by her husband and adult daughter.

The Burton estate sued Dr. Limpkin and his employer, Advanced Radiology, alleging that they chose not to timely diagnose and treat breast cancer. The Burton family asserted that Burton’s mass was observable on the second set of tests that were done and that Burton should have therefore undergone spot compression imaging.
Continue reading

by

Ms. Doe, 47, had a family history of breast cancer. When she discovered a mass in her right breast, she consulted with Dr. Roe, a family practice physician. The doctor aspirated the mass with an 18-gauge needle but did not send the aspiration collection to cytology for analysis.

Cytology is the examination of cells from a patient’s body under a microscope to determine the presence of disease or illness. Instead, Dr. Roe referred Ms. Doe for a mammogram and ultrasound, which reported the presence of a hematoma.

Ms. Doe’s mass continued to grow. Dr. Roe allegedly attributed this to an enlarging hematoma during Ms. Doe’s multiple later visits.
Continue reading

by

Dawn Kali was 36 when she was diagnosed with Stage I breast cancer. She was being treated by Robert Young at pH Miracle Living, an inpatient treatment center.

Kali flew to San Diego, where she paid more than $2,000 per night at the pH Miracle Living ranch. She also paid $500 for each round of an intravenous infusion treatment that was later learned consisted of baking soda. She did not pursue other cancer treatment. Her condition deteriorated. At the present time, Kali has been diagnosed with Stage IV cancer with just a four-year life expectancy.

Kali sued Young, alleging negligence and fraud. She presented testimony from pH Miracle Living’s accountant that she had overheard Young promise patients he could cure their cancer, even though Young was not a medical doctor. From the reporting of this case, it is not clear whether Young represented to individuals at pH Miracle Living that he was in fact an oncologist, a doctor or in the medical profession at all.
Continue reading