Abnormal Mammogram Follow-Up FAQs

An abnormal mammogram does not necessarily mean that a patient has breast cancer. Mammograms may identify calcifications, masses, asymmetry, architectural distortion, dense tissue, or other findings that require closer examination. Radiologists commonly use the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) to classify findings and recommend an appropriate next step. Depending on the result, a patient may need additional mammographic views, a diagnostic mammogram, an ultrasound, an MRI, short-interval surveillance, or a biopsy. A radiologist may also compare the current study with earlier images to determine whether an area has changed. The appropriate response depends on the finding's appearance and classification, the patient’s medical and family history, the presence of symptoms, and other relevant circumstances. Screening identifies abnormalities, but additional diagnostic evaluation may be necessary to determine whether an abnormality is benign or malignant.

Errors can occur at several points after an abnormal result. A radiologist may misinterpret an image, assign an inappropriate BI-RADS category, or fail to recommend further evaluation. A primary care physician, obstetrician and gynecologist, or other provider may overlook the report, misunderstand its significance, or neglect to place the necessary order. A medical office may fail to contact the patient, arrange an appointment, track an outstanding referral, or respond when the patient misses a scheduled test. In other cases, the patient may be told that the result is normal even though the report recommends further imaging or a biopsy. Abnormal mammogram follow-up may also break down when records are transferred between providers or when each medical professional assumes that someone else is responsible for communicating with the patient. Determining where the process failed generally requires a close examination of reports, office notes, referral records, electronic messages, appointment histories, and the systems used to track abnormal findings.

A delay does not automatically prove medical malpractice. Under New York law, a patient generally must show that a healthcare provider departed from accepted medical practice and that the departure proximately caused additional injury. This usually requires evidence that the provider should have acted differently after receiving the mammogram result and that proper care likely would have led to an earlier diagnosis or better outcome. Qualified medical experts commonly review the relevant imaging, reports, records, and treatment history to determine whether the provider’s conduct met the applicable standard of care. Experts may also evaluate the likely stage and characteristics of the cancer at the time follow-up should have occurred. If the cancer probably would have been detected earlier, the patient may have a claim when the delay caused the disease to advance, required more aggressive treatment, reduced the likelihood of breast-conserving surgery, or otherwise worsened the patient’s condition.

A patient harmed by negligent follow-up after an abnormal mammogram may be able to pursue compensation for economic and non-economic losses. Economic damages can include past and future medical expenses, diagnostic procedures, surgery, medication, rehabilitation, counseling, lost wages, and reduced earning capacity. Non-economic damages may address physical pain, emotional distress, scarring, disfigurement, loss of enjoyment of life, and the personal burden of undergoing more aggressive treatment. When a delayed diagnosis results in death, the patient’s estate and eligible family members may have remedies under New York’s survival and wrongful death laws. Attorneys may work with medical, vocational, and financial experts to determine how the delay affected the patient’s health, employment, future care needs, and quality of life.

New York generally requires a medical malpractice action to be commenced within two years and six months of the alleged negligent act or omission or, when the legal requirements are met, the conclusion of continuous treatment for the same condition. The law also provides a special discovery rule for certain claims involving a negligent failure to diagnose cancer or a malignant tumor. Under that rule, the filing period may be measured from when the patient knew or reasonably should have known about the alleged negligence and resulting injury, although an outside limit generally applies. Shorter deadlines and special notice requirements may govern claims involving public hospitals or government entities. Because limitation issues depend heavily on the facts, anyone who suspects negligent abnormal mammogram follow-up should consult an attorney promptly.