Skip to main content
Annals of Surgery logoLink to Annals of Surgery
. 1999 Jan;229(1):91–96. doi: 10.1097/00000658-199901000-00012

Delay in diagnosis of breast cancer.

P I Tartter 1, D Pace 1, M Frost 1, J L Bernstein 1
PMCID: PMC1191613  PMID: 9923805

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess the consequences of physician delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer by comparing stage, treatment, and outcome of patients with and without delay, and to identify patient characteristics that may make diagnosis more difficult. SUMMARY BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Delay in diagnosis of breast cancer is the most common clinical scenario resulting in malpractice litigation. METHODS: The records of 1014 patients were reviewed and the events preceding the diagnosis were reconstructed. Accurate assessment of the physician delay in diagnosis could be made for 606 patients, 51 (8%) with physician delay >3 months. Patients with delay were comparable to patients without delay in terms of age, height, weight, age at menarche, pregnancies, children, proportion in menopause, age at menopause, and family history of breast cancer. RESULTS: Thirty-six percent of patients who had a delay in diagnosis had normal mammograms versus 7% of patients without delay. Cancers in patients with delay were significantly larger on average than in those without delay, but there were no significant differences in pathology, differentiation, nodal status, TNM stage, treatment, or outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Physician delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer is common, and patients with delay are similar to patients without delay, although they are more likely to have normal mammograms. The consequences of physician delay in terms of stage at diagnosis, treatment, and outcome were not statistically significant.

Full text

PDF
91

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Afzelius P., Zedeler K., Sommer H., Mouridsen H. T., Blichert-Toft M. Patient's and doctor's delay in primary breast cancer. Prognostic implications. Acta Oncol. 1994;33(4):345–351. doi: 10.3109/02841869409098427. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. CUTLER S. J., EDERER F. Maximum utilization of the life table method in analyzing survival. J Chronic Dis. 1958 Dec;8(6):699–712. doi: 10.1016/0021-9681(58)90126-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Charlson M. E. Delay in the treatment of carcinoma of the breast. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1985 May;160(5):393–399. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Chew F. S., O'Reilly M. A., Schuckenbrock C. M., Relyea-Chew A., Foley H. T., O'Reilly P. M. Medicolegal aspects of breast cancer in U.S. federal medical facilities: analysis of 80 claims. Mil Med. 1996 Jun;161(6):329–333. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Dennis C. R., Gardner B., Lim B. Analysis of survival and recurrence vs. patient and doctor delay in treatment of breast cancer. Cancer. 1975 Mar;35(3):714–720. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(197503)35:3<714::aid-cncr2820350326>3.0.co;2-v. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Dohrmann P. J., Hughes E. S., McDermott F., Price A. Symptom duration, tumor staging and survival in patients with carcinoma of the breast. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1982 May;154(5):707–710. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Fisher E. R., Redmond C., Fisher B. A perspective concerning the relation of duration of symptoms to treatment failure in patients with breast cancer. Cancer. 1977 Dec;40(6):3160–3167. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(197712)40:6<3160::aid-cncr2820400661>3.0.co;2-p. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Kern K. A. Causes of breast cancer malpractice litigation. A 20-year civil court review. Arch Surg. 1992 May;127(5):542–547. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.1992.01420050062008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Kern K. A. Malpractice litigation involving patients with carcinoma of the breast. J Am Coll Surg. 1996 May;182(5):462–464. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Machiavelli M., Leone B., Romero A., Perez J., Vallejo C., Bianco A., Rodriguez R., Estevez R., Chacon R., Dansky C. Relation between delay and survival in 596 patients with breast cancer. Oncology. 1989;46(2):78–82. doi: 10.1159/000226689. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Mitnick J. S., Vazquez M. F., Kronovet S. Z., Roses D. F. Malpractice litigation involving patients with carcinoma of the breast. J Am Coll Surg. 1995 Oct;181(4):315–321. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Porta M., Gallén M., Malats N., Planas J. Influence of "diagnostic delay" upon cancer survival: an analysis of five tumour sites. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1991 Sep;45(3):225–230. doi: 10.1136/jech.45.3.225. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Wallenstein S. A non-iterative accurate asymptotic confidence interval for the difference between two proportions. Stat Med. 1997 Jun 30;16(12):1329–1336. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19970630)16:12<1329::aid-sim567>3.0.co;2-i. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Zylstra S., Bors-Koefoed R., Mondor M., Anti D., Giordano K., Resseguie L. J. A statistical model for predicting the outcome in breast cancer malpractice lawsuits. Obstet Gynecol. 1994 Sep;84(3):392–398. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Annals of Surgery are provided here courtesy of Lippincott, Williams, and Wilkins

RESOURCES