Breaking bad news — the abnormal chest X-ray
A 55-year-old smoker returns for a chest X-ray result. The report describes a mass. He is hoping to be told it is nothing.
Reviewed and kept current
Station family: Breaking bad news / explanation · 8-minute station · 1 min 30 s reading · Last editorial review: 19 September 2026.
Read this as you would outside the room
You have 1 minute 30 seconds to read, then 8 minutes. Candidates: everything below this section is folded away — leave it closed until you have finished the station.
| Information | |
|---|---|
| Your role | Foundation Year 2 doctor in a general practice |
| Patient | Mr John Edwards, 55, office worker |
| Background | Seen two weeks ago by a colleague with a three-month cough, about 5 kg of weight loss and occasional streaks of blood in his sputum. A chest X-ray was arranged. |
| Result in front of you | Chest X-ray report: “Right upper lobe mass, suspicious for malignancy. Urgent CT and respiratory referral advised.” |
| Records | Hypertension, on amlodipine 5 mg. Smoker. No known allergies. |
Your task
For the actor and the examiner
1 · Actor script — role player only
Candidates: do not open until you have consulted.
Persona and manner
- John Edwards, 55, office manager for a haulage firm. Married to Carol; two teenagers, 14 and 17.
- Friendly, slightly jokey on the surface; underneath you are anxious. You have been telling yourself it is “just a smoker’s cough”.
Opening line — say this verbatim
- “Doc, have you got my results? Tell me I’m all right.”
Volunteer freely if given the space
- The cough has been there about three months and is not shifting.
- You have lost weight — your belt is two notches tighter — without trying.
- You have seen streaks of blood in your phlegm four or five times.
Only if asked
- You smoke 20 a day and have done since you were 20 (about 35 pack-years). You have tried to stop twice.
- No chest pain. Slightly more breathless on the stairs. No hoarse voice, no swallowing problems, no bone pain, no headaches.
- Hypertension only; amlodipine; no allergies.
- Your father died of lung cancer at 62. You watched him go through chemotherapy and “it was the treatment that finished him”.
- Carol does not know you have been coughing blood.
Ideas, concerns and expectations
- Idea: a chest infection that needs stronger antibiotics.
- Concern (only if the doctor asks what is worrying you, or after the news): “Is it cancer? Am I going to die?” — and what happens to Carol and the children. You are frightened of chemotherapy because of your father.
- Expectation: antibiotics and reassurance.
Cues to deliver, timed
- Around minute 1–2, if the doctor launches straight into the result without checking what you know: look confused and say “hang on — what are you saying?”
- When you hear “mass”, “shadow” or “growth”: go silent for several seconds, look down, then ask quietly “Is it cancer?”
- Around minute 5: “My dad had this. I watched what the chemo did to him.”
How to respond to the doctor
- If the doctor gives a warning shot, goes slowly, tolerates your silence and is honest that cancer is a possibility that must be checked urgently: you are upset but you trust them — “Right. So what happens now?”
- If the doctor says it is definitely cancer, or definitely not: challenge — “How can you know that from an X-ray?”
- If the doctor gives false reassurance (“I’m sure it’s nothing”): brighten — “So I don’t need to worry then?” — and do not raise your fears again.
- If the doctor uses jargon (“malignancy”, “lesion”, “two-week wait”): “What does that mean?”
- If asked whether you would like someone with you or to be phoned: you would like Carol told, but you want to do it yourself tonight.
- If smoking is raised kindly: “I suppose I’ve got a reason now.” If it is raised as blame: go quiet and defensive.
Do not
- Volunteer your father’s lung cancer or the fear of chemotherapy before minute 4 unless asked what worries you.
- Ask about treatment details (surgery, chemotherapy regimens) — accept “the specialists will go through that once the tests are back”.
2 · Examiner mark sheet — generic scheme, identical at every station
Domain marks
| Domain (GMC wording) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 · Data gathering, technical and assessment skills | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | /4 |
| 2 · Clinical management skills | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | /4 |
| 3 · Interpersonal skills | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | /4 |
| Station total | /12 |
Examiner's overall judgement (standard-setting only — it does not decide your result): ☐ Unsatisfactory ☐ Borderline ☐ Satisfactory ☐ Good
What each mark means
| Mark | Acumen training descriptor — applies to each domain | Typical picture |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Complete, prioritised and fluent. Every key task for the domain achieved; nothing unsafe; the patient's agenda visibly shapes the consultation. | A confident F2 you would be happy to have on your team. |
| 3 | Competent. Most key tasks achieved; omissions are minor and do not affect safety or the patient's understanding. | Safe and sound, with small gaps. |
| 2 | Borderline. Some key tasks achieved but important gaps, poor prioritisation or a disorganised approach. Nothing dangerous. | Would be safe with supervision; the station could go either way. |
| 1 | Poor or unsafe. Few key tasks achieved; major omissions or incorrect reasoning; communication that damages rapport — or a safety-critical action missed, harmful advice given, or disrespectful behaviour, whatever else was done well. | Below the standard expected of an F2; patient safety or trust compromised. |
GMC feedback statements — where underperformance was identified
A feedback statement marks where underperformance was identified in the consultation. With PLAB 2 results the GMC may attach any combination of the ten statements to a station — none, one or several. Tick every statement that applied; leave all blank if none did.
| Tick | GMC feedback statement | Underperformance it signals |
|---|---|---|
| ☐ | 1 · Consultation | Disorganised or unstructured consultation |
| ☐ | 2 · Issues | Key issues or priorities not recognised |
| ☐ | 3 · Time | Poor time management |
| ☐ | 4 · Findings | Abnormal findings or results, or their implications, not identified |
| ☐ | 5 · Examination | Physical examination or use of instruments not competent |
| ☐ | 6 · Diagnosis | Working diagnosis or differential diagnoses not correct |
| ☐ | 7 · Management | Management plan not reflecting current best practice |
| ☐ | 8 · Rapport | Rapport and sensitivity to the patient’s feelings and concerns not shown |
| ☐ | 9 · Listening | Verbal and non-verbal cues not used; poor active listening |
| ☐ | 10 · Language | Language or explanations not understandable; understanding not checked |
Timing checkpoints (observer)
| Timing checkpoint (8-minute station) | Done | Minute |
|---|---|---|
| Name and GMC number confirmed; patient greeted and identified; patient opens without interruption | ☐ | |
| Presenting problem characterised and red flags screened by 3:30 | ☐ | |
| Ideas, concerns and expectations elicited by 4:30 | ☐ | |
| Examination requested / findings obtained and a summary offered by 5:30 | ☐ | |
| In management — explanation started — by 6:00, with two minutes left (no warning bell is guaranteed in the real examination) | ☐ | |
| Specific safety-net, follow-up and understanding check before 8:00 | ☐ |
Full explanation: the mark scheme and how PLAB 2 is passed · anatomy of the 8-minute station.
3 · Station-specific marking standard — what earns 4, 3, 2 and 1 here
Use with the generic sheet. The top row lists what a competent F2 would do at this station; lower rows describe how performance falls away. Acumen training standard — the GMC does not publish station mark sheets.
| Mark | Domain 1 · Data gathering, technical and assessment skills | Domain 2 · Clinical management skills | Domain 3 · Interpersonal skills |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4 |
|
|
|
| 3 | Perception checked and ICE largely elicited; one element thin (e.g. smoking not quantified, or support not explored). | Accurate explanation and urgent referral arranged; one of smoking support, safety-net or follow-up missing. | Empathic and clear; one missed cue or a rushed ending. |
| 2 | Either the patient’s starting point or his concerns explored, not both; or re-takes a full history and runs short of time. | Referral mentioned but timescale or tests vague; drifts into treatment detail; safety-net generic (“come back if worse”). | Kind but formulaic — stock phrases, talks through the silence, or over-explains clinically while under-responding emotionally. |
| 1 | Goes straight to the result; no exploration of understanding, concerns or support. Or unsafe: no data gathered at all, or wrong patient / result not checked. | States a definite diagnosis or prognosis from the X-ray, or plan is routine rather than urgent. Or unsafe: false reassurance / antibiotics and no urgent referral; or no plan. | Abrupt delivery, jargon, or the patient’s distress ignored. Or unsafe: dismissive, blaming (“well, you do smoke”) or dishonest. |
4 · Examiner points of fact and guidelines
Points of fact the examiner should have to hand
- A chest X-ray suggesting lung cancer in an adult warrants a suspected cancer pathway referral (appointment within two weeks). Unexplained haemoptysis at 40 or over is itself a referral criterion (NICE NG12).
- In England the Faster Diagnosis Standard aims for cancer to be diagnosed or ruled out within 28 days of urgent referral.
- A chest X-ray cannot diagnose cancer. The honest position is “this could be cancer and needs urgent tests”. Diagnosis rests on contrast CT and tissue sampling (NICE NG122).
- He is 35 pack-years (20 a day × 35 years ÷ 20). Stopping smoking improves outcomes whatever the diagnosis; offer behavioural support plus pharmacotherapy (NICE NG209).
- An F2 in general practice would tell the supervising GP the same day. Saying so earns credit; it is not a weakness.
- SPIKES is a scaffold, not a script: Setting · Perception · Invitation · Knowledge · Emotions · Strategy and summary.
Where candidates lose marks at this station
- Re-taking the whole history and reaching the result at minute 5.
- “I’m sure it’s nothing to worry about.”
- Filling the silence after the word “cancer”.
- Explaining chemotherapy instead of the next fortnight.
Guidelines for this station
5 · MLA content map tags for this case
| MLA content map | This station |
|---|---|
| Domain 1 · Areas of clinical practice | Cancer · Respiratory · General practice and primary healthcare |
| Domain 3 · Clinical and professional capabilities | Communication with patients, relatives and carers · Investigations: request, interpret, act · Complexity, uncertainty and prioritisation |
| Domain 5 · Patient presentations | Cough · Haemoptysis · Weight loss |
| Domain 6 · Conditions | Lung cancer |
| Station family | Explanation, counselling and breaking bad news — Breaking bad news / explanation |
6 · My marks and reflection — practice log form
Record your three domain marks, your station total, the GMC feedback statements that applied (where underperformance was identified), and what you will keep and change. The form is already labelled with this case and its web address; a copy of your entry is emailed to you, so your practice log builds up in your inbox and can be downloaded.
Record my marks and reflection for P2-01
Revision link for this case: acumenprimarycare.com/plab-2-osce/case-01-breaking-bad-news-chest-x-ray
Independence & scope. Independent, formative training material from MD Acumen Ltd. Not affiliated with, endorsed by, or delivered on behalf of the General Medical Council. The GMC does not publish its station mark sheets: every mark scheme and descriptor on these pages is an Acumen training tool calibrated to the GMC's published marking domains, feedback statements and the MLA content map. Practice scores are not a prediction of examination performance. Clinical content reflects UK guidance at the date of editorial review — always check the current guideline. All patients are fictional.
© 2026 MD Acumen Ltd · Acumen Institute of Primary Care · An MD Acumen school · Registered in England and Wales · 16538952PLAB 2 OSCE course · Practice cases · IMG roadmap · Observership · Legal & Regulatory · enquiry@mdacumen.com
