Confidential

Facts

In early to mid-2004, when breast cancer was diagnosed in the plaintiff’s left breast leading to a modified radical left mastectomy, several lumps were palpated in plaintiff’s right breast. After an ultrasound and and MRI evaluation, biopsies were taken of these lumps. One of these was interpreted as showing carcinoma in situ by defendant pathologist. Because of the prior history of proven breast cancer on the contralateral side, this pathology finding led to surgical evaluation, and, after chemotherapy had been completed for the proven left sided breast cancer, to mastectomy on the right side.

At the time of the right mastectomy, no carcinoma or carcinoma in situ was found.

When the plaintiff was referred for radiation therapy for the right side, the radiation oncologists, seeing that the operative specimen showed no cancer or cancer in situ, asked to review the right-sided biopsy slides. Neither their pathologist nor a second opinion pathologist could find any carcinoma in situ on the initial right breast biopsy slides, though this interpretation had led to a right mastectomy.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff contended that the right breast biopsy slides were misread by defendant pathologist, and led to the unwarranted loss of plaintiff's right breast. When the defendant doctor acknowledged this misread, the defendant hospital was dismissed from the case for waiver of costs.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Liability was essentially undisputed, though the defendant noted that many women chose to have the contralateral breast removed after the finding of a highly malignant cancer in one breast because of the possibility of spread, the higher incidence of a second breast primary in such patients and better cosmetic results if breast reconstruction surgery was done on both sides and at roughly the same time.

Settlement Discussions

The case was settled for $175,000.