Cancer patients still facing ‘dangerous treatment delays', experts warn
It comes as new figures show the proportion of patients who had cancer diagnosed or ruled out within 28 days has declined for the third consecutive month, while those waiting no longer than 62 days for their first treatment also fell.
Monthly data published by the NHS shows 74.8% of patients urgently referred for suspected cancer were diagnosed or had cancer ruled out within 28 days in May, down from 76.7% in April and the third monthly fall in a row.
The Government and NHS England have set a target of March 2026 for this figure to reach 80%.
Elsewhere, the proportion of patients who had waited no longer than 62 days in May from an urgent suspected cancer referral, or consultant upgrade, to their first definitive treatment for cancer was 67.8%, down from 69.9% in April.
The target to reach 75% is also March 2026.
Professor Pat Price, oncologist and chairwoman of Radiotherapy UK, said: 'Today's cancer waiting times show yet another missed opportunity to put a stop to dangerous treatment delays.
' Patients should not be kept on the edge of their seats waiting for the chance to access the life-saving treatment they need.
'It's an unfortunate reality that these delays have become normalised.'
Kate Seymour, head of external affairs at Macmillan Cancer Support, said: 'Behind these delays in cancer diagnosis are thousands of people hoping for clarity, support and the chance to move forward.
'Right now, many people are experiencing differences in care depending on who they are or where they live, which is completely unacceptable.
'Everyone facing cancer deserves the very best care, as quickly as possible, no matter their postcode, background, or circumstances.
Ms Seymour added that the upcoming National Cancer Plan for England 'is a real chance to make things better'.
The Department of Health and Social Care launched a call for evidence to help shape a national cancer plan in February.
The blueprint is expected to be published later this year and will aim to transform cancer care by improving diagnosis, screening and treatment, as well as bolstering research and looking at ways to help prevent the disease.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scotsman
18 minutes ago
- Scotsman
My Dad had a stroke on a Sunday. On a weekday, he might have lived
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... On a quiet Sunday afternoon in June 2023, my Dad, Anthony James Bundy, collapsed whilst out shopping at Costco in Glasgow. He was 53. One moment, he was fine. The next, he couldn't stand. He was vomiting, sweating, his eyes struggling to focus. His brain was shutting down in real time. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad At first, stroke wasn't suspected due to the lack of the 'Fast' – face, arms, speech and time – symptoms. An ambulance wasn't initially dispatched. My Dad didn't improve. Finally, an ambulance was sent. Again, stroke was not suspected. Though my family raised concerns, the system, focusing on Fast signs, did not respond as it should have. My Dad spent five-and-a-half hours in Glasgow Royal Infirmary. Then a full-blown stroke struck, this time with clear Fast symptoms. When a scan confirmed a stroke caused by a blood clot, my Dad had to be transferred to the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital. Why? Because, as the Significant Adverse Event Report (Saer) confirmed, thrombolysis at Glasgow Royal is only available between 9am and 5pm, Monday to Friday. READ MORE: New research shows strokes are on the rise in young people James Bundy, left, with his late father Anthony Bundy, his mother Selena Bundy, and sister, Anthea Bundy, right | Photograph courtesy of James Bundy Blood clot did not fully dissolve Thrombolysis has been described by the NHS as the 'clot-busting drug'. It 'dissolves the clot, restoring blood supply to that part of the brain and reduces the amount of damage caused'. The NHS then explains that it 'must be given within four-and-a-half hours of the onset of symptoms, and the sooner it is given, the more effective it is likely to be'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad It's deeply concerning that this vital treatment remains unavailable at weekends in one of Scotland's major hospitals, something I believe can and should be addressed. Thankfully, it is available on a 24/7 basis at the Queen Elizabeth. My Dad finally received thrombolysis, but the blood clot did not fully dissolve. The next step in such a scenario is a thrombectomy: a surgical procedure where doctors physically remove the clot using a tiny device. A 17-hour wait But when my Dad arrived at the Queen Elizabeth, a thrombectomy was not available. The Saer report stated that, on the date he had his stroke, 'thrombectomies were only available to patients on the Hospital 2 site [the Queen Elizabeth], Monday to Friday 9am-5pm'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad My Dad waited 17 hours from the first 999 call to receive a thrombectomy because care wasn't available 24/7. The NHS states that thrombectomy is 'most effective when performed within six hours after stroke symptoms begin'. This, therefore, begs the questions: Why is thrombectomy not available everywhere in Scotland on a 24/7 basis? Why is thrombolysis not available at one of Scotland's major hospitals at the weekend? Sadly, my Dad passed away. We will never know if he would have survived if he got the emergency stroke care on time. Whilst the pain of losing your Dad is always immeasurable, the 'what if' question adds extra weight, like an anchor, to the grief. It's hard to move on when this simple, penetrating question keeps circling your mind. Hard to justify Knowing this pain, I don't want others to go through it. That's why I am campaigning to improve emergency stroke care in Scotland. If my Dad's death can result in Scots having 24/7 access to life-saving treatment, then some good will come from the pain my family continues to experience. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Since my Dad's death, thrombectomy services in Scotland have expanded slightly . In the best-equipped parts of Scotland, thrombectomy is only available between 8am and 8pm, with provision at the weekend still limited. It's hard to justify a situation where this lifesaving, time-sensitive treatment is simply unavailable for 12 hours each day, regardless of need. This doesn't reflect what we expect from an emergency service. Stroke care must be available whenever it's needed, not just part-time. Last year, Scotland's stroke charities highlighted that 'Scotland trails Ukraine in thrombectomy procedures', pointing to data showing that although around 1,000 people in Scotland qualified for a thrombectomy in 2023, just 153 received the treatment, meaning only one-in-seven stroke patients who needed it got it. Let's think about that. Imagine seven people in a waiting room, all needing the same life-saving treatment. Six of them will leave without it. If 1,000 Scots a year had a heart attack and only one in seven received the life-saving treatment in time, the front pages would be screaming. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad If 1,000 Scots needed emergency surgery and only one in seven got it, parliament would demand action. So why hasn't this changed yet for stroke patients? The NHS was founded on the principle of care at the point of need. Yet for many stroke victims in Scotland, that principle isn't being met. Cross-party support This campaign isn't about party politics. It's about patients. It's about fairness. It's about life and death. Over the past year, our campaign for 24/7 thrombectomy has gained cross-party support, from Labour, the Conservatives, the Liberal Democrats, and the Greens. There is a rare political consensus. A chance for Scotland to lead, not fall further behind. Now is the time for the Scottish Government to act, and with cross-party backing, I believe real progress is possible. I understand that 24/7 delivery can't happen overnight. It will take more trained specialists, interventional radiologists, and better coordination across services. But the first step is political will. I'm not asking for full delivery tomorrow. I'm asking for a commitment: that by the end of the next parliament, every Scot who needs a thrombectomy can get one: no matter the day or time. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad In parts of England, 24/7 thrombectomy is already becoming the standard. Services are expanding in Wales and Northern Ireland. Scotland must not lag behind. Your chances of surviving a stroke shouldn't depend on where you live or what time it is.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
The five-day doctors' strike will only do harm
Between 7am on Friday 25 July and 7am on Wednesday 30 July, there will be a significant deterioration in healthcare in England and Wales. Whatever else may be claimed about patient safety protocols and safeguards, people in pain and distress will suffer more than they would if the resident doctors were working and not going on strike. After all, if the coming five days of industrial action were likely to go unnoticed, the strike would not be taking place. It is hard to see how, over the next week or so, lives will not be put at more risk than if the hospitals and clinics were working normally – and that is still, sadly, an unsatisfactory situation to start from. Indeed, there will be unwelcome extra pressure on the NHS for some time to come, because of the backlog of postponed procedures that will have to be cleared. These may not be as severe as after past disputes, because this time hospital managers are not prioritising emergency care to the same extent, and are protecting scheduled, 'elective' surgery to a greater extent. There is clearly a will on the part of management to ensure that those who cause this interruption in service do not then go on to receive generous overtime for reducing the backlogs they themselves have created. None of this is anything that the striking doctors desire, and there's no reason to doubt that many feel they are being forced into this position. Those on duty will still do their very best for their patients. Nonetheless, the doctors should ask themselves whether all of the misery, and worse, that will inevitably occur is necessary this time. There are strong reasons why this round of industrial action will not be worth it. First, no group of strikers can succeed without public support. In the past, under the Conservatives, the incessant NHS strikes by resident doctors, nurses, support staff and consultants were, in fact, solidly backed by the public, who sympathised with their cause even if it meant that the medical treatment they needed might be postponed. Now, the support is much softer, and a majority of the population opposes the strikes. There have been major changes, too, since the previous round of strikes, all connected to the election of a Labour government committed to the survival of the NHS. One of the first things the new chancellor, Rachel Reeves, did on arriving at the Treasury last July was to pay the salary increases recommended by the independent pay review body in full – a 22 per cent uplift over two years, a startling settlement by comparison with most other workers. Not long after that, Ms Reeves raised taxes to pay for an immediate programme to reduce waiting lists, recruit and train more staff, and invest for the longer term in the NHS. The new health and social care secretary, Wes Streeting, also announced his plan to abolish NHS England, and to implement radical reforms to improve productivity. Taken together, these developments should have signalled to NHS staff that this was a government that wanted the best for the service. In this context, at the start of the journey to a renewed NHS, and with that sizeable pay rise having been implemented, it feels very wrong that the doctors should undermine these efforts, and the progress that has already been recorded, by setting things back again for weeks, if not months, to come. Worse than that, to many it will seem as though the NHS is unfixable, and that it needs more fundamental change. If it appears that Labour can't do much better than the Conservatives at making the NHS work, people will wonder whether it is time for a more radical approach. If they cannot get the treatment they need, when they need it, then they will be more receptive to the siren calls from figures such as Nigel Farage for a French-style insurance system (but, he never adds, without French-style funding). The doctors, in other words, may or may not win a bigger pay award, but they are gambling with the future of the very thing they profess to love – the National Health Service itself, free at the point of use, and paid for by general taxation. The striking doctors should also examine once again the merits of their claim – for a 29.2 per cent award. To everyone else, this looks like an outlandish figure, even as a starting point for talks. It is not part of any pay review recommendation. It is based on a calculation of how much doctors' pay scales would have to change (on a disputed measurement of inflation) to bring them back in real terms to levels prevailing in 2008, before they were eroded. But how many groups of workers would like their pay restored in real terms to some advantageous point in the past, when times were better? The doctors reply that they'd love for everyone to get such a rise, but everyone knows that's not possible – and, given public sentiment, it's not realistic for them either. In short, the chances are that the doctors will not win their strike. Any improvements they do secure will be modest when set against their tarnished reputation and the damage they will do to the trust the public want to place in the NHS. If the doctors do force a pay increase that requires another hike in taxes and causes a reduction in NHS services, then it is not going to be sustainable – because the public will not tolerate it, and the NHS won't survive for the coming decade. The more this strike hurts, the more chance there is that it will, in the long run, fail. It is not worth it.
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
Dermot Murnaghan 'fell through the gaps' with prostate cancer diagnosis
Former Sky News presenter Dermot Murnaghan has said he "fell through the gaps" with his prostate cancer diagnosis, calling it a "massive wake-up call". He revealed last month he has stage-four cancer, meaning it has spread to other areas of the body. However, he said he was responding positively to treatment. Speaking at an event for Prostate Cancer UK, Murnaghan urged men to get tested - and to insist on one if they're in a high-risk group. "For years I thought 'that will do me'. I'm getting tested basically once a year or every couple of years," he said. "It never occurred to me that they weren't testing for PSA (prostate-specific antigen) and I never went to my GP because I was getting other tests privately through the production company. "So that's how I fell through the gaps and that's how I had a massive wake-up call and want to share the message." A PSA test is a blood test that can indicate if there's a potential problem with the prostate but there's currently no national screening programme. The NHS says men over 50 can ask their GP for one, and Murnaghan, who's 67, said some people below that age should also push for one. "You can get to the stage I have with no symptoms," he said. "Get the test, insist on the test. You can insist on the test if you are in a high-risk group and under 50. If you are not, I'd still get the test at 50." Murnaghan - who worked at Sky News for 16 years - added: "Go to your GP and they say you don't need it, but say 'but I want it'. It is your right to have it. "Just keep doing that every year or couple of years. Once you've got that marker where your PSA is, keep monitoring it. "The earlier you find prostate cancer the easier it is to treat, so check your risk in just 30 seconds with Prostate Cancer UK's online risk checker to see if you are at risk and what you can choose to do about it." Those at higher-risk of prostate cancer include men over 50, black men and people with a family history of the disease. Murnaghan is currently preparing for a charity bike ride in September, the Tour de 4, organised by Sir Chris Hoy - who revealed his own diagnosis last year.
