British lawyers will be taking on an NHS trust after more than 40 cancer sufferers endured years of unnecessary chemotherapy at the hands of a “rogue” doctor, reports Daily Mail.
Medical experts have also pointed fingers at nurses and pharmacies, who ignored the years of continued prescription treatment without question or intervention.
One of the patients, who underwent 13 years of chemotherapy for what he was told was an aggressive, life-limiting tumour, was devastated when he heard that the treatment, which was started when he was just 29, may never have been necessary.
Andrew Whitehead said after surgery to remove a tumour from his neck at a hospital in Coventry in 2010, he was then told he had a high-grade aggressive tumour and that chemotherapy and radiotherapy were his only options.
Now 45, he said he was effectively told to prepare to die – and spent more than a decade organising his life around repeated cycles of chemotherapy.
The treatment only stopped after a new oncologist took over his care in 2024 and his case was reviewed.
Independent medical evidence obtained by his lawyers has since indicated that his tumour was a much lower grade and that he should not have received chemotherapy at all, according to law firm Brabners.
His case is among more than 40 being investigated by lawyers over claims of prolonged or allegedly unnecessary chemotherapy treatment at University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust of patients who were all under the care of Dr Ian Brown.
This comes as an interim review by the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) has found serious failings in the care of patients prescribed prolonged courses of the chemotherapy drug temozolomide at the Coventry trust.
The RCP examined 20 cases and found 15 were “unsatisfactory overall”, with none judged to represent good practice. Its preliminary findings said patients had been prescribed extended courses with “little or no evidence of benefit”, and described the failings as a “betrayal of patient trust'”.
The full review is expected to be published within weeks.
Whitehead was given 30 sessions of radiotherapy and chemotherapy at the beginning of his treatment.
For most of the next 13 years he took chemotherapy tablets for five days, followed by three weeks off, before starting another cycle.
Eventually, the routine became so entrenched that he could scarcely remember life before it.
Then came the news that turned his world upside down. He was told that the tumour was actually low-grade and that his original diagnosis had been wrong.
“I was told I was coming off my tablets, and that caused me a lot of stress, because I had been told the tablets were keeping me alive,” he said.
It was not until he drove home that the enormity of what he had been told began to sink in.
He says he had been forced to abandon almost every part of his former life. He had left a job he had worked at for nearly five years, gave up weight training, saw friends less often and stopped going out.
He continues to suffer from stomach problems, fatigue and difficulty concentrating. He has also been diagnosed with depression and illness anxiety disorder during assessments carried out for his legal case.
His case is part of a much wider investigation by lawyer Fiona Tinsley and colleagues at Brabners.
Tinsley said the first patient who approached the firm had taken temozolomide for 17 years after being told the drug was keeping him alive.
When a new consultant reviewed his case in April 2024, he was told there was no scientific or medical evidence supporting chemotherapy for anything approaching that length of time.
His family complained to the trust.
Tinsley said the trust subsequently acknowledged that the treatment should not have happened and was not in line with national or international guidance: it apologised to the patient and his family.
Crucially, she said, the trust referred to a “wider cohort of patients” who would also be contacted, which prompted lawyers to investigate.
Since January 2025, Tinsley said her firm has identified around 40 patients with concerns about prolonged temozolomide treatment – and believes there could be many more.
National guidance generally recommends six cycles of temozolomide after radiotherapy for the relevant brain tumours, with prolonged treatment requiring clear clinical justification.
The RCP review found repeated instances in which the drug was continued for years, despite limited evidence of benefit.
A Freedom of Information request showed that between 2007 and 2023, Coventry had spent £3.6m on temozolomide – around 10 times more than any other neuro-oncology centre they examined.
The investigation has also uncovered concerns about the original diagnoses in a number of cases. In some patients, independent experts reviewing tissue samples had concluded that the tumours were lower grade than originally diagnosed and that the patients may never have needed chemotherapy at all.
The lawyers are now pursuing claims involving both University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire and University Hospitals Birmingham in cases where they allege diagnostic errors occurred.
The wider RCP review has raised questions about how such treatment could continue for so long without being challenged.
Its interim findings criticised the consultant at the centre of the review, whom it referred to as “Dr Y” but whom the Daily Mail understands to be Brown.
The report said he did not participate in the review and did not attend an interview with investigators.
It also raised concerns about the role of a former clinical nurse specialist, saying patient care was primarily managed by him while the consultant had limited direct involvement.
Pharmacy teams were also criticised for failing to question the use of an oral chemotherapy drug continuously for 10 to 15 years.
The review said there had been “multiple opportunities for scrutiny and challenge” and described a failure to recognise the prolonged prescribing as highly unusual.
It also recommended consideration of independent reviews of living patients who had been treated by the consultant.
The legal cases are now being pursued against the NHS trust, with the lawyers seeking answers, accountability and compensation for patients they say suffered physical, psychological and financial consequences.
See more from MedicalBrief archives:
Nine years of chemotherapy for non-existent cancer
Brain-damaged cancer patient sues NHS after eight years of chemo
US doctor’s 59-year jail sentence for unnecessary procedures