By Marjory Inglis, health reporter

CANCER PATIENTS across Scotland could lose their right to a maximum wait for urgent treatment.

A leading Dundee doctor, backed by a top management executive, claims the targets are unachievable and not necessary in all cases.

Professor Stewart Forsyth, medical director of NHS Tayside’s acute services division, was speaking in the wake of publicity surrounding NHS Fife’s performance on meeting cancer waiting time targets.

The Scottish Executive has stipulated that patients with suspected cancer urgently referred by their GP should wait no longer than two months for treatment. The target is that 100% of patients will be treated within the maximum waiting time.

While NHS Tayside has been achieving 100% for some cancer sites over set periods of time, Prof Forsyth and the division’s chief executive Gerry Marr insist there are legitimate reasons, some relating to patients’ own choice when they attend for treatment, that mean the 100% target is not realistic.

Prof Forsyth said his medical colleagues were petitioning the Scottish Executive for a change in the targets.

“Clinicians across the country are expressing some concerns about these targets and I suspect there may be some variation in this in the not too distant future,” he said.

To be clear, Prof Forsyth and his colleagues are not advocating delays in treating people with cancer. He insisted that “progress has been made” in meeting the targets in Tayside. But they do wish to reflect that there are legitimate reasons why 100% of patients might not be treated within the two-month target.

Late last year Mr Marr said he was trying to persuade the Executive that 100% was an unachievable target.

He said homeless people were diagnosed and then went missing, presenting a challenge to health service staff trying to contact them and offer treatment. Some patients have other diseases that affect their cancer treatment and mean the timescale cannot be met. In some cases, a patient’s own choice precludes having treatment within the timescale.

“There is a whole series of very legitimate reasons why 100% is a target to fail on,” said Mr Marr.

The latest available audit data on Tayside cancer treatment targets relates to November. At first glance it appears Tayside performed poorly in relation to treatment of urological cancers. Only 33% of patients were treated within two months.

“The urology figure relates to three patients,” said Prof Forsyth. “One patient was treated well within the (target) time, another required a longer period of time to stage their disease and the other was an issue with the patient themselves.

“A waiting time guarantee for all cancers doesn’t make sense.

“Some of the prostatic cancers are very slow growing and often there is an arrangement with the clinician and the patient to fit treatment around other commitments they have.

“Generally we are making progress (on meeting waiting time targets) but clearly there is always room for improvement.”