Twenty women had breasts removed unnecessarily during NHS cancer care

Twenty women have been told that life‑changing mastectomies they underwent at the County Durham and Darlington Foundation Trust (CDDFT) were unnecessary, a revelation that has added a fresh wave of outrage to an already sprawling scandal at the trust’s breast unit. The disclosures come as the trust continues an internal review covering cases from January 2023 to February 2025, and as the National Crime Agency, alongside Durham police, probes whether criminal offences have been committed. The scale of the failings – hundreds of patients harmed, dozens severely – raises profound questions about governance, clinical oversight and the duty of care owed to women battling breast cancer.

The scope of the breach

The trust’s own figures, supplied to the BBC, show that of the 514 breast‑cancer cases examined so far, 315 patients have been found to have suffered some form of harm. Within that cohort, 77 were classified as “significantly harmed”, and at least one patient is known to have died as a result of the shortcomings. The review also encompasses 640 former patients who have contacted a special helpline set up after the scandal first broke in the media last year.

While the exact number of unnecessary mastectomies remains undisclosed, the fact that twenty women have now been identified as having had their breasts removed without medical justification underscores a pattern of mis‑diagnosis and over‑treatment that extends far beyond isolated errors. The trust acknowledges that in some instances cancer was missed initially, only to spread later, a failure that directly contributed to the decision to perform radical surgery.

Personal stories: the human cost

For the women affected, the impact is not merely clinical but profoundly personal. One patient, who asked to be identified only as Jo on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, described the shock of learning that a small tumour in a large breast had been mis‑interpreted, leading to a full mastectomy she never needed. “The fact that this part of your body is now gone, and you know part of what makes a woman’s gone,” she said, “It just makes you not your whole self, really.” Her words capture the emotional devastation that accompanies the physical loss.

Denise Howarth, a 51‑year‑old mother of two from Consett, was diagnosed with stage‑one cancer in February 2023. After a lumpectomy and lymph‑node removal, she was told a mastectomy was still required. She complied, endured chemotherapy and radiotherapy, only to be called months later and told the removal had been unnecessary. “They called me at home to say I needn’t have had my breast removed and it was something which really knocked me off my feet,” she recalled, adding that the news arrived “like a bolt out of the blue” after a year already marked by personal loss.

Trust leadership’s response

Steve Russell, appointed chief executive of CDDFT last year, issued a public apology, acknowledging that the trust had “failed to listen more carefully and act sooner”. He stressed that “significant changes have since been made to the breast service and are bringing improvements for patients”. Russell also highlighted the ongoing “look‑back” exercise, which will continue to identify patients who may have been harmed and ensure they receive appropriate information and support.

He announced that the trust board will meet on 24 September in public to consider the future scope and timetable of the look‑back, though he stopped short of committing to any definitive outcome. “No final decision has been made and it would not be right to pre‑empt the board’s discussion,” he said, underscoring the delicate balance between transparency and procedural prudence.

Legal and investigative dimensions

The BBC’s earlier reporting flagged that the National Crime Agency is working with Durham police to investigate alleged criminal offences. While no charges have yet been announced, the involvement of a national law‑enforcement body signals the seriousness with which the allegations are being treated. Meanwhile, Hudgell Solicitors, representing several of the affected women, have begun advising clients and are pressing for a public inquiry.

Rachel O’Connor, a member of the firm’s medical negligence team, warned that the failings at CDDFT are “deep‑rooted” and “systematic”, suggesting that the problems are not confined to a few rogue clinicians but reflect broader institutional weaknesses. She called for an inquiry that would not only address individual grievances but also examine the governance structures that allowed such a breach of care to persist for years.

Systemic failures in breast cancer services

The scandal at CDDFT sits within a wider context of concerns about NHS breast‑cancer pathways. The trust’s own admission that “opportunities when, as a trust, we should have listened more carefully and acted sooner” points to a culture where patient concerns may have been dismissed or inadequately investigated. The reliance on a “special helpline” after the fact suggests that routine feedback mechanisms were insufficient to surface issues early.

Moreover, the fact that the trust is reviewing cases dating back to early 2023 indicates that the problematic practices may have been entrenched for at least two years, if not longer. The scale of the review – hundreds of cases, dozens of patients harmed – hints at systemic gaps in diagnostic protocols, multidisciplinary review, and perhaps in the training and oversight of radiologists and surgeons.

Implications for NHS oversight

For the NHS as a whole, the CDDFT case raises urgent questions about the robustness of national quality‑assurance frameworks. If a single trust’s breast unit can mis‑diagnose and over‑treat to the extent that twenty women undergo unnecessary mastectomies, what safeguards exist elsewhere? The involvement of the National Crime Agency may prompt a review of how criminal investigations intersect with clinical governance, potentially leading to tighter reporting requirements for adverse events.

Patient advocacy groups are likely to demand clearer pathways for raising concerns, faster investigations, and more transparent reporting of harms. The trust’s dedicated support line, operational at 0191 333 2126 and via email, is a step toward remediation, but the scale of the breach suggests that more structural reforms will be needed to restore public confidence.

Looking ahead: what patients can expect

For the women directly affected, the road to restitution will be long and emotionally taxing. The trust has pledged to keep its support line open and to provide updates following the board meeting on 24 September. However, as Denise Howarth’s testimony illustrates, an apology alone does not repair the loss of confidence or the physical and psychological scars left by unnecessary surgery.

Legal recourse remains a viable avenue, with Hudgell Solicitors already advising clients. A public inquiry, if granted, could pave the way for compensation schemes and, crucially, a thorough examination of how such failures were allowed to occur. Until then, families and survivors will continue to grapple with the reality that a part of their identity was taken away on the basis of flawed medical judgement – a stark reminder of the profound responsibility borne by those who deliver cancer care.

This article was produced with AI-assisted research and editorial support. Reporting is based on the source material cited below. Sources: The Guardian UK; theguardian.com; Global1.News (18 September 2026).

By Erica Thornton, Staff Writer