A jury has awarded $8 million to the husband of a woman who died after chemotherapy that wasn’t necessary
“The attorney for Charles Pandrea says a private autopsy showed that his wife Janet did not have the cancer she was treated for.
Attorney Michael Ryan says Janet Pandrea had a benign tumor in one lung, which could have been operated on. He says she developed side effects from her chemotherapy that ultimately led to her death.”
If all doctors could have autopsy results when treating, it would make medicine so easy.
Related posts:
- Alternative medicine practitioners
- "Nothing to lose by getting a CT scan"
- Natural medications
- How screening for prostate cancer can be a gamble, and why either screening or not has consequences
- "A CT scan in hand is far better then no CT scan or biopsy at all"
- Out-of-control Florida jury strikes again
- Ovarian cancer
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 12 comments }
The tumor was, in hindsight, operable. Ok, autopsy makes diagnosis easy.
Aren’t there indicators that could be picked up prior to death that would indicate a benign vs. malignant mass?
I seems strange to me that chemotherapy was started without a tissue diagnosis of the cancer.
But….I’m not an oncologist. Maybe there’s some subtlety here that I’m not aware of.
Kevin,
I disagree with you on this one.
Your point that its absurd to expect doctors to unnerringly make definitive diagnoses that only death and an autopsy can provide is well taken.
In this particular case though, they were dealing with cancer, and cancers can often provide autopsy results before death. It’s called a biopsy. If these guys did one and it was read as malignant, I won’t fault them. But if they didn’t…
ZZ
Just ask Lance Armstrong, the goal of cancer treatment is to undergo the treatment and have the cancer go away. Just because no cancer was found at an autopsy which occurred after the chemotherapy does not mean that the cancer wasn’t there before the chemotherapy. An autopsy involves sectioning and sampling of tissue and if you don’t sample the right tissue and sample thorouoghly enough, then you won’t get a true picture of the situation when you look at the microscopic slides. In addition, I have been told by some pathologists that PRIVATE AUTOPSIES are somewhat notorious for producing the results which are desired by the family which is paying fo the autopsy. In some respects, the private autopsy business seems to me to be akin to the expert witness business.
Just because no cancer was found at an autopsy which occurred after the chemotherapy does not mean that the cancer wasn’t there before the chemotherapy. An autopsy involves sectioning and sampling of tissue and if you don’t sample the right tissue and sample thorouoghly enough, then you won’t get a true picture of the situation when you look at the microscopic slides.
What an excellent point, anonymous.
Chemo transforms malignant tumors into benign tumors . . . ?
No, gets rid of it, so it ain’t there anymore.
But who knows, I can’t really find details of the case anywhere. I find it intruguing that they did not have a tissue diagnosis before chemo. Or maybe they did, who knows?
Also find it interesting that they found a way to get the family doc involved in this judgment.
Good point about the private autopsies.
Can any docs here think of a scenario where chemo would be done without a tissue diagnosis of cancer?
Are they saying, maybe, that a tissue diagnosis WAS done, found to be cancer, but was later determined to be incorrect (benign) on review?
“In addition, I have been told by some pathologists that PRIVATE AUTOPSIES are somewhat notorious for producing the results which are desired by the family which is paying fo the autopsy.”
Well, then it must be true. Amazing how people believe anything they hear when it fits their preconceptions, but demand rigorous proof when it doesn’t.
Biased reporting by the private autopsy services has been alleged by more than the above poster.
Google the term and see for yourself.
No, they do not HAVE to be biased.
That they advertise themselves to attorneys makes me wonder about them.
Lie with the dogs, end up with fleas.
In any event, the whole story of this case has not been posted anywhere I can find.
Chemo has worked in a number of casesbut the failure rate for chemo is so high that it should be considered an 80 Year failure.
The only reason chemo is used when they know its going to fail,is because it a 50 to 100k
a pop. end of story
I wonder if she was part of a chemo trial. That is where the $ is!
This story makes me wonder about my diagnosis. I believe that I was pegged for a chemo trial study. i never had the chemo but both breasts were removed.
Comments on this entry are closed.