Errors in cancer diagnosis common, often harmful

Key points
- In a review of patient specimens, errors in cancer diagnosis were seen in up to 11.8 percent of cases, according to a report in the medical journal Cancer.
- The frequency and clinical impact of pathology errors in cancer diagnosis have not been well characterized, lead author Dr.
- In the present study, the authors evaluated diagnostic errors in patients who were seen at one of four hospitals in 2002 for a cancer work-up.
- The frequency of errors varied between hospitals and ranged from 1.79 percent to 9.42 percent for gynecologics cases and from 4.87 percent to 11.8 percent for other cases, the researchers note.
In a review of patient specimens, errors in cancer diagnosis were seen in up to 11.8 percent of cases, according to a report in the medical journal Cancer. Moreover, in a substantial proportion of cases, the error caused some degree of harm for the patient.
The frequency and clinical impact of pathology errors in cancer diagnosis have not been well characterized, lead author Dr. Stephen S. Raab, from the University of Pittsburgh in Pennsylvania, and colleagues note.
In the present study, the authors evaluated diagnostic errors in patients who were seen at one of four hospitals in 2002 for a cancer work-up.
The frequency of errors varied between hospitals and ranged from 1.79 percent to 9.42 percent for gynecologics cases and from 4.87 percent to 11.8 percent for other cases, the researchers note. A significant link between the institution and the error cause was observed.
As for the cause of errors, up to 50 percent were due to misinterpretation with the remainder being due to poor tissue sampling.
The clinical impact of the error was significantly associated with the institution. On further analysis, it appeared that up to 45 percent of errors resulted in harm to the patient, ranging from further unnecessary diagnostic tests to loss of life or limb.
"It is exceedingly difficult to measure the true frequency of errors in cancer diagnosis because of the variety of detection methods used, bias, and the inability of institutions to secondarily review large case volumes," the authors state.
"As part of a multi-institutional, national effort to improve practice, we are in the process of standardizing methods, decreasing bias by sharing cases and data among institutions, and establishing more accurate error frequencies by detecting errors using multiple methods," they add.
SOURCE: Cancer, November 15, 2005.
Written and revised by
Gerald Hurowitz, M.D.
Our doctors write and review articles for accuracy and keep them up to date.
health.am provides general information, not medical advice. Always consult a qualified health professional about your own health.
Explore health topics
More in this topic
Cancer →
NewsSecond-most common breast cancer subtype may benefit from personalized treatment approach
The second-most common type of breast cancer is a very different disease than the most common and appears to be a good candidate for a personalized approach to treatment, according to a multidisciplinary team led by…
26 February 2014
NewsSmoking tied to increased risk of common type of breast cancer
Young women who smoke may have an increased risk of a common type of breast cancer, according to a new study. Researchers found that women between 20 and 44 years old who had smoked a pack of cigarettes per day for at…
11 February 2014
NewsLung and bladder cancers have common cell-cycle biomarkers
A University of Colorado Cancer Center study published in the journal PLoS ONE shows that bladder and lung cancers are marked by shared differences in the genetics that control the cell cycle. Measuring these genetic…
30 January 2014




