Prostate cancer misdiagnosed after misread test result — $1.2M settlement

Type of action: Medical malpractice

Date resolved: 7/20/2023

Verdict or settlement: Settlement

Amount: $1,200,000

Attorneys for plaintiff: Lee Livingston and Anthony Greene, Charlottesville

Description of case: On Jan. 20, 2021, the plaintiff, a 48-year-old male, presented to a Central Virginia-based family practice with complaints of erectile dysfunction. The defendant, a family practitioner, ordered standard labs and a prostate-specific androgen (PSA) test. The plaintiff’s lab results revealed a high PSA level of 20.0, well above the reference range of 0.0-4.0. Despite this red flag, which is an indication to perform a biopsy to investigate prostate cancer, the defendant misread this score, believing it to be a “2.0” rather than a “20.0” and opted to administer testosterone therapy to treat plaintiff’s erectile dysfunction.

After nine months of testosterone injections, plaintiff still experienced persistent erectile dysfunction, and defendant referred plaintiff to a urologist for treatment of erectile dysfunction. The treating urologist ordered a second PSA test, which returned a critically high score of 69.7. A subsequent biopsy confirmed the presence of prostate cancer with a concerning Gleason score of 4 + 5 = 9, revealing cancer in both sides of the prostate.

The defendant initiated the correct protocol during the plaintiff’s visit by ordering a PSA test but failed to appreciate and act on the elevated PSA levels. In addition to his failure to notice the elevated PSA score, defendant ordered and performed testosterone injections, which are contraindicated for patients with prostate cancer. Treatment of prostate cancer typically involves the deprivation of testosterone.

The defendant argued that the PSA score plaintiff initially received suggests strongly that he was already battling late-stage prostate cancer prior to the defendant’s negligence. The defendant argued that the nine-month delay in treatment was insufficient for plaintiff’s prognosis to worsen significantly as prostate cancer is known to progress very slowly. The defendant also provided literature supporting the assertion that certain prostate cancer patients can receive testosterone injections without negative side effects and also presented literature and arguments that testosterone has not been confirmed to cause or accelerate prostate cancer. The plaintiff countered with literature that took the opposite view and argued that the defendant’s literature was out of the mainstream.

The case was settled confidentially for $1.2 million after the plaintiff’s deposition but before the parties’ designation of experts.

Lee Livingston, counsel for the plaintiff, provided case information.

[023-T-171]