Trust Me I’m a Doctor: Part 2

By Tuesday morning, after a sleepless night, I’d decided. Unless I got some answers, I was going to pull out of the radiotherapy.

I rang the hospital and asked for an urgent appointment with Dr Carnell, to try and get those answers. She agreed to see me at 1 pm, before my scheduled 2nd treatment at 1.30.

Because of my NHS experience, I’ve met loads of doctors over the years. Most of the doctors I’ve met have been extremely bright and totally committed to doing the best for their patients. Many have been funny, warm, and thoughtful as well. Many are also big-headed: but personally, I accept that as part of the package. You need a certain amount of self-belief if you’re going to cut people open or prescribe poisons for a living.

Being bright, committed and even a bit egotistical doesn’t make them infallible. Every week in the press there’s stories about clinical mistakes. Of course, I do understand that the reason these stories make good copy is that mistakes are relatively rare. I also understand that in RT more than almost anywhere else there’s controls: double checking of plans, calibration of machines, routine monitoring of dosages, regular scans: all possible steps are taken to eliminate error.

I've absolutely no doubt about the skills, knowledge and experience of Dr Carnell. Still though, at heart the decision to treat or not to treat, to handle things this way as opposed to that way, these are all judgements. I want to be included in those judgements. No-one (except Godfrey) has my interests at heart as much as I do. The chances are that I’ll agree with whatever decisions are being made, but I want to be part of the decision up front. I don’t want to wait till afterwards and then complain.

The thing is, I've thought a lot about life, and death, and that grey area in between. I spent a year working as a care assistant for severely physically disabled people. I'm talking about people who, in the main, were fully aware, had normal cognitive ability but no motor control. Think 'locked in syndrome'. Most couldn't speak, couldn't move their arms or legs, and were doubly incontinent. Most couldn't swallow so couldn't eat. Some had degenerative conditions and would die young, some had a normal lifespan. They were there because of MS, or strokes, or an anaesthetic accident, or head injury. I'd rather die than live like that.

So when it comes to clinical outcomes, I'm not interested in pure survival rates. I'm interested in quality of life. I would rather live well for the next 10 years then die prematurely of cancer, than live out a normal lifespan with severely compromised breathing..

I can understand doctor-speak, at least a little. I’m used to being treated by doctors as a colleague, and can’t and won’t accept being treated as a know-nothing patient. Doctors however, are not used to treating patients as colleagues. So Dr Carnell and I might have a communication problem. I’m sure it will be resolved, but there’ll be some difficult moments in the meantime.

I sensed that Dr Carnell and I could be heading for one of those difficult moments.

Godfrey and I had decided that we wanted 4 other options to at least be discussed:

• Watch and wait. 
• Treat just the pedicle: the surgical margin - where we know there are cancer cells. 
• Treat the pedicle and the area immediately adjacent, and maybe the biopsy site. 
• Seek a second opinion. 

 It all sounds so reasonable, in writing, but on the journey in, I was a mess.

Was I being a fool, everyone else in the world would just shut up and take what was on offer, what did I know, who am I to question a consultant, did I know how lucky I was to even be able to access treatment, supposing I do refuse treatment and it comes back: I’ll kick myself ………………..and

Not inspirational

I’d rather live well and die young than risk being a respiratory cripple, why hadn’t Dr Carnell known at the start what the potential problem was, how come the physicists had to tell her, UCH has a reputation for treating aggressively which is good when you have a carcinoma but maybe doesn’t apply to me, conformal radiation is going to harm me just as much as IMRT maybe more, maybe………… and....


I can’t cope with this, I’m going to make a fool of myself, I haven’t had to strut my managerial stuff in years and don’t know if I can still hack it, I’m panicking, I’m going to cry.


When I got there, Dr Carnell was in a clinic room with another of her registrars, Dr Ball. “Need another witness, do you?” I thought.

I started off by explaining that I knew UCH, and the Oncology department, was on top of its game. That the excellent results they produced were a direct consequence of the aggressive approach they took to cancer, and that it was precisely for that reason I had wanted to be treated there. Then I said “You seem to be treating my tumour as aggressively as if it were lung cancer. If it had been lung cancer, then the risk of side effects such as Radiation Pneumonitis (RP) might be worth it. But it’s not. I had a slow growing, semi-malignant thymoma, which has been excised. Why can’t we just keep an eye on me, and if the tumour comes back, excise it again?”

Dr Carnell explained that it was precisely because the tumour was slow-growing that it needed to be treated so soon, and so aggressively. Where the residual cells are, right up against major blood vessels and my heart, would make future surgery very problematic. The best option is preventative. RT works best on fast growing cells: thymomas do not respond well to RT. Waiting for it to grow and then zapping it would not be straightforward. “The time to treat it is now, when there’s only a few cells involved.”

“But the standard treatment for Thymoma is excision, not excision plus adjuvant RT.”

“Yes, but yours could not be completely excised, there are still cells at the margin. And because you are so young, it will re-grow enough to cause problems later in life.”

I knew about the incomplete excision and regrowth, of course. Hadn’t realised about the complexities of future surgery.  So it looked like ‘watch and wait’ was not as simple as it sounded. But still, the innocently named “side effects” terrified me.

“So, if we need RT, I’m very worried about the potential for severe RP. This hasn’t been mentioned before. I’d rather not be treated and take my chances, than have any risk of that.”

“Yes,” Dr Carnell replied  ”It’s precisely to avoid that that the treatment protocol has changed. The revised approach is to irradiate just the tumour site and a very narrow column of lung immediately in front. There’ll be 3 beams of radiation precisely targeted towards the same area and the rest of your lung will be left clear. YOU WILL NOT GET RADIATION PNEUMONITIS”.

She said, “I don’t know what you’ve been reading, but really, you need to have studied oncology for six or seven years to understand properly what we are proposing to do. You just have to learn to trust me.”

I got cross. I don’t take well to being patronised. I’d heard the ‘years of training’ line before, and I wasn’t impressed. If the CERN Physicist Prof Brian Cox can explain the creation of the solar system with perfect clarity using a pepper pot, a sugar bowl and an ashtray, then I’m sure Dr Carnell could explain my treatment to me. Frankly, it's her job to explain things to non-specialists. That's what all professionals have to learn to do. Also, there's plenty of people like me, who want to understand what's going on and who don't want nursey reassurance. I'm quite capable of reassuring myself, if I have the information.

I said, “I’ve knocked around the NHS system for far too long to take any doctor on trust. Also, as to what I’ve been reading: I’ve not been in the chat rooms, I’ve been reading proper medical journals: the Journal of Thoracic Medicine, Journal of Oncology, BMJ: that sort of stuff. Probably some of the same stuff you’ve been reading.”

“I’m not stupid” I said, “I will understand if you explain”

Then she told me something I didn’t know: that UK treatment protocols were considerably more conservative than international standards. Therefore, a lot of the stuff I’d seen wasn’t comparable. OK, that was news, and reassuring news, to boot.

I asked for a drawing, and Dr Ball said he’d try to pull up the actual planning picture on the computer, if that would help. Very much, yes. In the meantime Dr Carnell drew a sketch, and I began to see what she was talking about. She was proposing to just treat the pedicle and the area immediately adjacent, in a slim column alongside my sternum. That’s OK. That was one of our preferred options. The big sweep across the whole lung had gone. I’m not sure what the plan is for any further microscopic tumour cells elsewhere in the pleural cavity, but I guess if they exist, and re-grow, they will be away from major vessels and will be operable. That’s for another day.

Why couldn’t she have said all this yesterday? The grief, the stress, the time spent reading medical journals, the sleeplessness, the worry, all could have been avoided with a full explanation up front. This extra appointment could have been avoided. Instead, we’ve had to spend half an hour having a meeting which must have been difficult for each of us, and I’m sure we both had better things to do.

Dr Ball couldn’t get the planning pictures up on the system, and suggested taking me to the planning offices to look at my images on their computers. Yes please. I felt the nerd in me rising up, excited. A chance to look at the RT planning process! Yippee!

Red Line Encircles Target Area: Excision Site, Heart and Anterior Chest Wall.

He showed me the pictures, and they demonstrated clearly the treatment zone and the angled beams. He explained, again, that the risks of RP were very low, “less than 5%”, and that most people who got it, only had a very mild form.

I said, “Yes, but that means for every 1000 people you see with cancers in the chest, 50 of them will get RP. For each of them, they’ll get it 100%.” I know I’m stroppy. That doesn’t mean I’m wrong.

“But nearly all in a mild form, which is treatable. In all my years as a doctor, and all Dr Carnell’s years, neither of us has seen or heard of anyone getting it severely. You don’t need to worry about it.”

“Why’s it on the consent form, then, as a known side effect? Can it be taken off?”

“No, it still needs to be there because it is a risk. But a very small risk.”

OK then. now I understand what's intended and I'm less anxious, I’ll accept a very small risk.

I’m going to remember the words of Dr Carnell :
"YOU WILL NOT GET RADIATION PNEUMONITIS".

We’ll see.

Meantime, I’ll work on my trust issues.