Changes in NHS Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment Targets

There has been news last week about changes in cancer diagnosis and treatment targets in the NHS. The NHS wants to simplify the system so that it is easier for patients to understand and this move has been cautiously welcomed by many cancer charities.

We regularly receive enquiries about compensation for delayed or missed diagnoses of cancer. Although cancer survival rates have improved dramatically in recent decades, and continue to improve, it is always a frightening diagnosis to be given and anxiety can be made worse if someone fears that their chances of recovery have been reduced because of delay. So how does the law approach such cases?

These can be difficult cases. It is often relatively straightforward to show that there has been negligence – what the law calls breach of duty – in not reaching the correct diagnosis soon enough. But that is not sufficient to be entitled to compensation. As well as showing that there has been delay, a claimant must also show that the delay has made a significant difference to the likely outcome. To put it very simplistically, a claimant needs to show that their chance of survival has been reduced from above 50% (probably will survive) to below 50%. The leading case in England and Wales is called Gregg v Scott [2005]. In this case the evidence was that a late diagnosis had reduced the claimant’s chance of surviving 10 years from 42% to 25%. Because the Claimant’s chances of survival for 10 years would have been under 50% even if there had been no delay, the claim failed.

We offer a free 30 minute consultation on most medical negligence cases. If you have a query, do get in touch.

The contents of this post do not constitute legal advice and are provided for general information purposes only.