Anti-Smoking Drug Suicide Risks Questioned by New Study

Published: October 15th, 2013

Following concerns over psychiatric side effects associated with some anti-smoking drugs, researchers indicate that a new study was unable to find a link between and use of Chantix, Wellbutrin or Zyban and an increased risk of suicide.  

According to findings published last week by the British Medical Journal, researchers from the University of Bristol could not identify a link between smoking cessation drugs and an increased risk of suicide.

The study comes after the makers of Chantix have settled thousands of lawsuits over claims that the drug caused users to experience psychological problems, including suicidal tendencies and violent, irrational behavior.

Researchers looked at data on 119,546 men and women who used a smoking cessation product between September 2006 and October 2011. Of those, 6,741 used bupropion, sold under the brand names Wellbutrin and Zyban, and another 31,260 used Chantix. The rest used some other smoking cessation products, such as nicotine replacement therapy (NRT).

The study found that there was no evidence that patients prescribed Chantix, Wellbutrin, or Zyban were at higher risk of fatal or non-fatal self harm or depression. The researchers determined that according to their findings there was no such risk.

Similar findings were reported last month in the Annals of Internal Medicine by researchers from the University of California and the Department of Veterans Affairs, which also failed to find a link between Chantix side effects and an increased suicide risk.

Chantix Suicide Concerns

Chantix (varenicline) is a Pfizer drug designed to help smokers quit. The drug works by reducing the positive feelings that come from cigarettes, blocking the receptors in the brain commonly stimulated by nicotine. However, a few years after the drug was introduced and heralded as a potential blockbuster medication in 2006, reports began to surface of users committing suicide or engaging in sudden, unusual behavior.

In June 2009, the FDA added a 

View the Original article

OxyElite Pro Liver Problems, Hepatitis Cases Highlighted by CDC

Published: October 15th, 2013

Federal health officials have issued a new report that provides further details about an outbreak of acute hepatitis and liver failure linked to the recalled OxyElite Pro dietary supplement.

According to the latest issue of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, at least 29 people have been diagnosed with liver problems after using OxyElite Pro.

Concerns about the dietary supplement were first raised after at least seven reports of acute hepatitis were reported in Hawaii in September. However, since then, nearly 45 cases have been reported to health officials with at least 29 confirmed diagnoses.

The FDA issued a warning about the potential risk of OxyElite Pro liver injury on October 8, indicating that the weight-loss and muscle-building supplement had been identified as the likely cause an outbreak of acute hepatitis and liver failure.

Late last week, the Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH) called on all stores in the state to recall OxyElite Pro from their shelves. The largest retailer, GNC, held out but has finally agreed to do so and the product is no longer available for sale in Hawaii. The HDOH has also embargoed shipments of the supplement until further notice. USPLabs, the manufacturer, has ceased sales of OxyElite Pro on its website.

The first known OxyElite Pro case was identified in April, after a user showed signs of liver problems after having taken the supplement within the last two months. HDOH was notified after seven patients were diagnosed with acute hepatitis and fulminant liver failure. All seven had used OxyElite Pro. A public health alert went out and the other cases were discovered.

To date, at least one OxyElite Pro users has died, two received liver transplants, 11 were hospitalized and two remain hospitalized.

Health officials used data from the National Poison Data System and the United Network for Organ Sharing. Only four cases have been detected outside of Hawaii, but all four used either OxyElite Pro or another weight loss or muscle-building supplement. One of the four was a resident of Hawaii who obtained the product in Hawaii but was diagnosed in a different state.

The FDA is currently analyzing samples of OxyElite Pro and the results of the tests are pending, the CDC report notes.

“While the investigation is ongoing and these data are preliminary, clinical data, laboratory tests, and histopathology of liver biopsy specimens collected thus far suggest drug- or herb-induced hepatoxicity,” the CDC reports.

The CDC notes that similar findings have been linked to exposure to a number of dietary supplements, but the liver toxicity side effects usually resolves after the subject stops using the product. The CDC urges doctors treating patients with acute hepatitis to ask about dietary supplement use and report patients meeting case definition to local or state health departments and to the FDA.

Weight Loss and Body Building Supplement Problems

This is the latest body building supplement linked to cases of severe liver damage and liver failure. In May 2012, researchers presented a study at the Digestive Disease Week conference in San Diego that found that about 18% of all liver injury cases may be caused by dietary and herbal supplements. Body building supplements accounted for 34% of those, while weight loss supplements represented more than a quarter of the liver injury cases.

Herbal and dietary supplements are often not regulated by the FDA unless they have previously been found to be dangerous. This often means that there is little information on potential side effects and manufacturers often conduct little, if any, clinical trials to establish the safety and effectiveness of the products.

Dietary supplements in particular came under increased scrutiny by federal regulators in the wake of a Hydroxycut recall issued in May 2009, after the FDA identified a number of reports where users suffered serious and potentially life-threatening liver damage. In July of that year, the FDA warned consumers not to take dietary supplements which contained ingredients identified as steroids. The agency recommended that anyone taking dietary supplements containing steroids should immediately see a doctor if they showed signs of liver problems.

Related ArticlesOxyElite Pro Supplement May Be Linked to Hepatitis Cases: FDA, CDC (10/9/2013)Side Effects of Dietary, Body Building Supplements Linked to Liver Damage (5/31/2012)Hydroxycut Liver Damage Cases Highlighted in New Study (2/15/2010)M-Drol Lawsuit Filed Over Liver Damage From Dietary Supplement (12/16/2009)Hydroxycut Liver Failure Lawsuit Filed Following Recall (6/16/2009)Tags: Dietary Supplement, Hawaii, Hepatitis, Hydroxycut, Hydroxycut Recall, Liver Failure, OxyElite

Post Your CommentsYour Name:(required)Email:(valid email required)Shared Comments:Share information you wish to be published on this page...I authorize the above comments to be posted on this page?YesNoPlease Enter Verification Code:

View the Original article

Effexor Lawyers Seek Leadership Roles in Federal Birth Defect Litigation

Published: October 15th, 2013

In advance of an upcoming status conference in the federal Effexor litigation, several attorneys have submitted applications for leadership roles in the coordinated pretrial proceedings established for lawsuits brought by families throughout the country who allege that their children were born with birth defects following Effexor exposure during pregnancy.

In August, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) consolidated all Effexor birth defect lawsuits brought in U.S. District Courts nationwide as part of an MDL, or Multidistrict Litigation. The cases are centralized before U.S. District Judge Cynthia M. Rufe for coordinated handling in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

An initial status conference in the Effexor MDL is scheduled for October 26, at which time lawyers involved in the litigation will meet to discuss the organization and structure of the issues.

On October 1, Judge Rufe issued a Case Management Order (PDF) appointing Mark S. Cheffo to serve as interim Liaison Counsel for the Defendants and Stephen A. Corr to serve as interim Liaison Counsel for all plaintiffs, charged with ensuring that orders and notices from the Court are transmitted to various lawyers representing families who have brought a claim in the MDL.

The Interim Liaison Counsel have also been ordered (PDF) to submit written position statements before the hearing, outlining each parties’ understanding of the facts involved in the litigation and the critical legal and factual issues.

In the meantime, a number of different attorneys have submitted applications to serve in various leadership roles in the litigation, including as Plaintiffs Lead Counsel or a member of a Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee.

Following the initial status conference later this month, Judge Rufe is expected to appoint a group of plaintiffs lawyers to take various actions throughout the pretrial proceedings and any bellwether trial process that would be for the benefit of all families who have brought a case. These Effexor lawyers will conduct and coordinate discovery and take various actions on behalf of plaintiffs at hearings and meetings before the court, as well as negotiate and enter potential stipulations or settlements with the Defendants.

Effexor Birth Defect Lawsuits

There are currently about 50 product liability lawsuits pending in the MDL involving families who allege that Pfizer failed to adequately warn about the risk of birth defects from Effexor pregnancy use. However, given the widespread use of of the medication, it is expected that there will ultimately be hundreds of claims centralized before Judge Rufe as Effexor lawyers continue to review and file additional cases.

The Effexor MDL was established to reduce duplicative discovery across a large number of cases, to avoid inconsistent rulings from different judges and to serve the convenience of the parties, witnesses and the courts.

Effexor (venlafaxine) belongs to a class of antidepressants known as serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), which are very similar to the more popular selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) such as Zoloft. SNRIs are known to have many of the same side effects as SSRIs.

All of the lawsuits involve similar allegations that Pfizer’s Wyeth subsidiary failed to adequately warn consumers or the medical community about the pregnancy risks with Effexor and the impact the medication may have on unborn children.

Plaintiffs claim that there were signs of the potential pregnancy side effects during clinical trials on animals and that there were indications that Effexor may affect children during pregnancy following post-marketing data as well. The lawsuits allege that Wyeth aggressively marketed the drug as safe for pregnant women, when no such assertion could be justified when looking at the scientific data.

Following the coordinated pretrial proceedings in the MDL, including potential

View the Original article

Pomalyst Side Efffects May Include Birth Defect Risk, U.K. Doctors Warned

Published: October 16th, 2013

The makers of the cancer drug Pomalyst are warning doctors in the U.K. that the drug, known there as Imnovid, could result in birth defects that put newborns’ lives at risk.  

According to report by PharmaTimes, Celgene Corp. sent a letter to healthcare professionals in the U.K. warning that the active ingredient, pomalidomide, is structurally similar to thalidomide; a drug known to cause birth defects. The drug was approved in the U.K. in August. It has been on the U.S. market since February.

It does not appear that any similar letter has been sent physicians in the U.S. However, the drug, approved to treat multiple myeloma, was released in the U.S. with a black box warning that it is a chemical analogue of thalidomide. The FDA warned that women of a child-bearing age who could get pregnant must be tested to confirm that they are not pregnant before taking Pomalyst and requires both men and women taking the drug to comply with contraception requirements.

Because of the risk of birth defects, Pomalyst is only available in the U.S. through a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS).

Thalidomide was first released as a morning sickness drug in 1957. Four years later, it was removed from the market after it was determined that the thalidomide caused major birth defects when used during pregnancy. It was the first product that established medications could cross the placental barrier and cause harm to a fetus.

It is estimated that between 10,000 and 20,000 children were born worldwide with birth defects from thalidomide. It’s impact was limited in the United States because the FDA denied the drug approval, saying that it needed to be more thoroughly tested. However, the drug was given to doctors in the U.S. during its clinical testing phase and it is unclear how many children it affected.

Thalidomide is sold under the brand name Thalomid and is used for the treatment of multiple myeloma. In September 2012, the German company that initially marketed the drug issued an apology to those affected by thalidomide birth defects and commissioned a statue in Stolberg, Germany in honor of the drug’s victims.

Related ArticlesBirth Defect Rates Increasing Among Twins, Triplets: Study (2/11/2013)Thalidomide Birth Defect Risks Result in Apology 50 Years Later (9/5/2012)Prenatal Use of NSAID Painkillers Linked to Birth Defect Risk: Study (3/27/2012)Birth Defect Class Action Lawsuit To Move Forward in Australia (12/28/2011)Painkillers Linked to Birth Defects When Used During Pregnancy: Study (12/15/2011)Tags: Birth Defects, Pomalyst, Thalidomide

Post Your CommentsYour Name:(required)Email:(valid email required)Shared Comments:Share information you wish to be published on this page...I authorize the above comments to be posted on this page?YesNoPlease Enter Verification Code:

View the Original article

Cefepime and Dextrose Injection Recall Issued Due to Particulate Matter

Published: October 16th, 2013

Particulate matter contamination has led to the recall of one lot of Cefepime and Dextrose injection fluid, due to a potential risk that the injections could cause severe and life threatening health consequences.  

A Cefepime and Dextrose injection fluid recall was announced by the FDA on October 15, after the manufacturer found visible organic particles had entered the fluid during production. No injuries or reports of illnesses have been reported to date.

Cefepime and Dextrose injection is an antibiotic combination used to fight off microorganism infection such as fungus and other strong forms of bacteria.

The recall includes 1g Cefepime for injection USP and Dextrose injection USP with lot number H3A744 and catalog number 3193-11. The affected lot was packaged in a DUPLEX single dose intravenous plastic container with 24 units in each case and has expiration date January 2015.

The injections were manufactured by B. Braun Medical Inc., and distributed to licensed distributors, hospitals, pharmacies, and customers between February 4, 2013 and March 1, 2013.

Use of the contaminated injections may cause several health consequences such as phlebitis, weakened immune systems, and both chronic and acute inflammatory responses. The risk to the consumer is heightened if the debris travels throughout the body posing a risk of inflammation in the lungs, respiratory failure, renal failure, and even strokes if a left cardiac shunt is present.

B. Braun has started to notify all known distributors and customers by mail with a return receipt letter to be filled out and returned along with all remaining product. Customers should stop issuing or taking the affected injection fluid immediately and contact B. Brauns Customer Support Department at 1-800-227-2862 for instructions on how to receive a replacement product.

Related ArticlesSagent Vecuronium Bromide Recall Issued Due to Impurities (6/11/2013)Hospira Injection Recall Issued Due to Particulate Matter (4/29/2013)Gilead Vistide Recall Issued Due to Particulate Matter (2/18/2013)Hospira Recalls Caloric Fluid Due to Mold Contamination (1/29/2013)Particulate Matter Leads to Indomethacin, Sodium Chloride Recalls (6/16/2011)Tags: Antibiotics, Drug Recall, Kidney Failure, Particulate Matter, Respiratory, Stroke

Post Your CommentsYour Name:(required)Email:(valid email required)Shared Comments:Share information you wish to be published on this page...I authorize the above comments to be posted on this page?YesNoPlease Enter Verification Code:

View the Original article

Using Byetta With Avandia May Negate Heart Attack Risks: Study

Published: October 16th, 2013

Researchers say that the diabetes drug Byetta may help reduce the risk of heart attacks from Avandia, another diabetes drug that has been heavily restricted due to cardiac concerns. The findings suggest that using the drugs in combination may negate the risk of heart problems, and the researchers hope the study may show how possible solutions to drug side effects could be gleaned from FDA data on adverse events.  

The study was published last week in the medical journal Science Translational Medicine, using data from the FDA’s Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) to identify a possible link between taking the diabetes drugs Byetta and Avandia together and a reduced risk of heart attack.

Avandia (rosiglitazone) is a GlaxoSmithKline diabetes drug that has been found to increase the risk of heart attacks. Once a blockbuster drug, it is now used by only a few thousand patients, and has been banned in a number of countries. In the U.S. it is only available via a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) designed to restrict its use to lower the chances of patients suffering heart attacks.

Researchers from the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York analyzed FAERS data and found that patients who were taking Byetta and Avandia together were less likely to suffer a heart attack than those just taking Avandia. They looked into how this could be possible and determined that incretin mimetics, a class of diabetes drugs that includes Byetta, Januvia, Janumet and Victoza, could reduce Avandia’s chances of increasing blood clotting.

The discovery led to the researchers looking for other possible drug combinations that could mitigate adverse events, known as polypharmacology, and they found another 19,133 possible drug combinations that could be studied.

“We conclude that this type of crowdsourced approach of using databases like FAERS can help to identify drugs that could potentially be repurposed for mitigation of serious adverse events,” the researchers stated.

Diabetes Drug Concerns

Since concerns about the heart risks of Avandia surfaced in 2007, confidence in the safety of diabetes drugs has been shaken, with several other medications also being linked to serious side effects.

Although the drug may help mitigate the risk of heart attacks when used with Avandia, recent reports have raised concerns about an increased risk of pancreatic cancer from Byetta and other similar drugs that are part of the incretin mimetic family. Other popular diabetes drugs that have also been linked to a possible risk of pancreatic cancer and pancreatitis include Januvia, Janumet, Victoza and others.

A growing number of Byetta lawsuits, Januvia lawsuits, Janumet lawsuits, and Victoza lawsuits are now being filed in courts throughout the U.S. alleging that the manufacturers of the medications failed to properly research the side effects or warn that they increased the risk of pancreatic cancer.

Concerns about the potential side effects of Actos have also emerged in recent years, including indications that users may face an increasd risk of bladder cancer following long-term use of this other popular type 2 diabetes medication. Actos (pioglitazone) is a member of the same class of medications as Avandia, and sales of the drug took off after Avandia use was restricted. However, concerns about the Actos bladder cancer risk began to emerge in 2010, after interim data from an ongoing study found that users may face an increased risk.

About 2,500 former users are now pursuing Actos bladder cancer lawsuits against the drug’s manufacturer, alleging that inadequate warnings were provided about the risks associated with long-term use of the diabetes drug.

Related ArticlesSulphonylurea Diabetes Drugs May Increase Heart Attack Risk: Study (9/19/2013)Actos Side Effects May Raise Bladder Cancer Risk: Study (5/17/2011)Actos Bladder Cancer Risk Being Reviewed by FDA (9/20/2010)Actos Heart Side Effects Similar to Avandia: Study (8/26/2010)Avandia Heart Attack Risk Twice as High as Other Diabetes Drugs: Study (2/9/2010)Tags: Avandia, Byetta, Diabetes, Diabetes Drugs, GlaxoSmithKline, Heart Attack, Janumet, Januvia, Pancreatic Cancer, Victoza

Post Your CommentsYour Name:(required)Email:(valid email required)Shared Comments:Share information you wish to be published on this page...I authorize the above comments to be posted on this page?YesNoPlease Enter Verification Code:

View the Original article

Craze Performance Fuel Contains Amphetamine-Like Ingredients: Report

Published: October 16th, 2013

A new report indicates that the popular pre-workout supplement Craze “Performance Fuel” contains an amphetamin-like compound that is similar to meth, leading the manufacturer to suspend production.

In a study published this week in the medical journal Drug Testing and Analysis, researchers from Harvard Medical School, NSF International, and The National Institute of Public Health and the Environment in the Netherlands indicated that the Craze bodybuilding supplement tested positive for the compound n-alpha DEPEA, which is chemically similar to methamphetamine and an analog, or chemical cousin, to meth.

Two independent labs tested three samples of the product from three different lots. All tests revealed the same results, a meth-like ingredient was present in Craze.

Researchers call the compound a

View the Original article

BPA Exposure Linked to Miscarriage Risk: Study

Published: October 16th, 2013

A new study raises further concerns about the safety of the controversial chemical additive Bisphenol A (BPA), indicating that it could be linked to an increased risk of miscarriage among pregnant women.  

At the American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM)’s annual conference on Monday, researchers presented a study that shows an association between BPA and miscarriage among women who have had difficulty getting pregnant.

BPA is commonly found in many plastic products, food containers and bottles.

The study was a follow up to data from an earlier study that demonstrated mice exposed to BPA had trouble getting pregnant. However, this latest investigation looked at 115 newly pregnant women who had a history of either miscarriages or infertility. During the study, 68 miscarried and 47 had live births.

The researchers discovered that women with the highest BPA levels in their blood had an 80% higher risk of miscarriage than those with the lowest levels of BPA in their blood. The researchers warned that due to the small study size there could be other factors increasing the women’s miscarriage risk and cautioned that the study does not show a causal link between BPA and miscarriage.

The study has not yet been published in a medical journal or peer-reviewed.

BPA Health Concerns

The findings are the latest in a series of studies by researchers around the world that raise concerns over BPA’s effects on the body. A study published this summer in the medical journal Human Reproduction found that BPA may have a direct effect on the maturation of human eggs in the female body. Miscarriages are often the result of problems with the egg.

BPA is a chemical additive used in plastics to preserve food freshness. It is used in some drink bottles, and in the lining of some cans of preserved food. It used to be found in baby bottles as well, but the FDA banned BPA from baby bottles several years ago once concerns regarding BPA side effects began to grow.

Originally designed to be an artificial form of estrogen, BPA can impact the hormone system. Because of its widespread use, it is detected in the urine of virtually every person in the U.S. and many other countries.

A number of studies have linked the chemical with increased risk of obesity and other problems, particularly among children.

In a study published in August in the medical journal Pediatrics, researchers from the University of Michigan found an association between BPA exposure and the risk of childhood obesity and childhood diabetes.

Another study published in June found a link between heightened levels of BPA in the urine of children was linked to obesity in adolescent girls. In fact, girls with high levels of BPA faced a two-fold risk of being obese, compared to girls who had normal levels of BPA.

That study followed research published in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology this Spring that found exposure to BPA during pregnancy was associated with an increased risk of asthma in children.

Related ArticlesStudy Links BPA to Childhood Obesity, Diabetes Risk (8/22/2013)Study Links BPA Exposure to Fertility Problems (8/2/2013)Bisphenol-A Levels Linked to Childhood Obesity: Study (6/17/2013)Bisphenol A (BPA) During Pregnancy Linked to Asthma in Children: Study (3/5/2013)Exposure to BPA May Be Linked to Childhood Obesity: Study (9/21/2012)Tags: Bisphenol A, BPA, Fertility, Plastic

Post Your CommentsYour Name:(required)Email:(valid email required)Shared Comments:Share information you wish to be published on this page...I authorize the above comments to be posted on this page?YesNoPlease Enter Verification Code:

View the Original article

Pradaxa Lawsuits in MDL Being Prepared for Early Trial Dates Next Year

Published: October 16th, 2013

In the federal litigation over claims that Boehringer Ingelheim failed to adequately warn about the bleeding risks with Pradaxa, the parties are continuing to prepare a small number of claims for early trial dates, which are expected to begin in August 2014.

More than 1,500 Pradaxa lawsuits filed in U.S. District Courts throughout the country are currently consolidated for pretrial proceedings as part of an MDL, or Multi-District Litigation, The cases are centralized before U.S. District Judge David R. Herndon in the Southern District of Illinois.

As part of the coordinated litigation, a small group of cases are being prepared for early trial dates, known as “bellwether” cases. These early trials are designed to help the parties gauge how juries may respond to certain evidence and testimony that may be repeated throughout a large number of other cases.

According to the minutes (PDF) of a status conference held before Judge Herndon on October 8, the parties recently updated the Court on the progress of the preparations for the bellwether cases, including the status of discovery depositions involving plaintiffs, doctors and sales representatives.

Shortly after the Pradaxa litigation was centralized in August 2012, Judge Herndon indicated that he intended to move the cases toward an “expeditious resolution” for the factual allegations, which is designed to benefit both plaintiffs and the maker of the drug.

In October 2012, a case management order was issued establishing an aggressive bellwether trial schedule that will result in the selection of four Pradaxa suits for early trial dates. The first case is scheduled to begin on August 11, 2014, and the subsequent cases are expected to begin approximately six weeks apart.

Judge Herndon is expected to select the four specific cases that will serve as the first bellwether trial cases next month.

Pradaxa Bleeding Problems

All of the cases centralized in the Pradaxa MDL involve similar allegations that plaintiffs suffered serious or fatal injuries when doctors were unable to reverse the blood thinning effects of the anticoagulant. Plaintiffs argue that Boehringer Ingelheim failed to adequately warn about the hemorrhage risk or disclose that there is no reversal agent for Pradaxa to allow doctors to stop bleeding events that may develop.

Pradaxa (dabigatran) was introduced by Boehringer Ingelheim in October 2010, as the first member of a new class of anticoagulants promoted as a superior alternative to warfarin for stroke prevention, as it is easier to take and requires less medical monitoring.

Warfarin, sold under the brand name Coumadin, has been the go-to anticoagulant for decades. While Pradaxa does require less monitoring, concerns have emerged about the lack of an effective reversal agent to stop the blood thinning effects of the medication.

Unlike warfarin, which can be quickly reversed with a dose of vitamin K and plasma, there is no available reversal agent for Pradaxa. While some studies have shown that the chances of bleeding may be about the same with the two drugs, evidence continues to emerge highlighting how Pradaxa bleeding problems may pose a more serious risk, since hemorrhages are typically harder to stop.

During the first full year the drug was on the market in the United States, the Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP) found that adverse event reports involving Pradaxa problems surpassed all other medications regularly monitored by the group. FDA received at least 3,781 reports involving serious injuries associated with the use of Pradaxa during 2011, including 2,367 reports of hemorrhage and 542 patient deaths.

Pradaxa Bleeding Litigation

The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation centralized all Pradaxa cases before Judge Herndon in August 2012, to reduce duplicative discovery, avoid conflicting rulings from different judges and to serve the convenience of the parties, witnesses and the courts.

At the time the MDL was established, there were only 21 cases pending in 11 different U.S. District Courts. However, as Pradaxa lawyers have continued to review additional lawsuits for individuals who suffered severe injuries from uncontrollable bleeding events, the number of complaints has continued to increase. More than 200 cases have been added to the MDL over the past three months.

As the parties continue to prepare for the early bellwether trials, settlement negotiations continue between plaintiffs and the drug maker. In July, Judge Herndon appointed a mediator and ordered the parties to meet at least once a month to discuss possibly settling Pradaxa lawsuits to avoid individual trials.

If agreements are not reached before the first trial dates, the outcomes of the bellwether trials may help the parties better gauge the relative strengths and weaknesses of their cases and may facilitate a Pradaxa settlement agreement involving a large number of cases.

Following the bellwether trial process, if Boehringer Ingelheim fails to settle or otherwise resolve the Pradaxa litigation, Judge Herndon could begin remanding hundreds of cases back to U.S. District Courts throughout the country where they were originally filed for individual trial dates.

Related ArticlesMediator Appointed to Oversee Negotiations to Settle Pradaxa Cases (7/19/2013)Process Established for Selection of Pradaxa Cases for Early Trials in MDL (4/16/2013)Boehringer Ingelheim Marketing Practices Fair Game in Pradaxa Litigation (1/28/2013)Pradaxa Settlement Negotiations To Be Held In Advance of First Trials (1/4/2013)Pradaxa Lawsuit Trials Scheduled To Begin in August 2014 (10/11/2012)Tags: Bleeding, Blood Thinner, Coumadin, Pfizer, Pradaxa, Warfarin

Post Your CommentsYour Name:(required)Email:(valid email required)Shared Comments:Share information you wish to be published on this page...I authorize the above comments to be posted on this page?YesNoPlease Enter Verification Code:

View the Original article

Another DePuy ASR Lawsuit Settles Right Before Trial Set to Begin

Published: October 16th, 2013

It appears that Johnson & Johnson’s DePuy Orthopaedics subsidiary has agreed to settle another lawsuit over their recalled ASR hip replacement, once again reaching a resolution only days before trial was scheduled to begin.  

Nearly 12,000 DePuy ASR lawsuits are pending in state and federal courts throughout the country involving allegations that design defects with the metal-on-metal hip replacement increased the risk that users would experience problems with their artificial hip within a few years after it is implanted.

DePuy recalled their ASR hip implanted in August 2010, amid reports that suggested a higher-than-expected number were failing during the first five years. As the first trials approach in state and federal courts, at least two case have now resolved for undisclosed amounts.

A complaint filed by Debora MacDonald was scheduled for trial to begin on October 21 in New Jersey state court, where cases are centralized for coordinated proceedings as part of an MCL or Multi-County Litigation.

According to a Case Management Order (PDF) issued by New Jersey Judge Brian R. Martinotti, the parties have informed the court that the MacDonald case “has been resolved,” resulting in the cancellation of the upcoming trial date.

Earlier this month, a similar DePuy ASR settlement agreement was reported in California state court, where a complaint filed by Robert Eugene Ottman was also set for trial to begin in late October.

Details have not been reported for the terms of either settlement.

DePuy ASR Settlement Negotiations and Early Trials

Prior reports have suggested that Johnson & Johnson was considering an offer of more than $3 billion to settle the DePuy ASR litigation, which would average out to about $300,000 per case. According to a report by Bloomberg News in January 2013, plaintiffs previously rejected an offer that averaged about $200,000 per case because it did not provide sufficient compensation for injuries caused by the recalled hip implant.

While thousands of cases are pending, a small number of lawsuits have been set for early trial dates in state and federal courts to help the parties gauge how juries are likely to respond to certain evidence and testimony that may be repeated throughout a large number of claims.

Earlier this year, a California jury awarded $8.3 million in damages in one case. However, a second trial held in Illinois state court resulted in a defense verdict for the manufacturer.

In the federal court system, all DePuy ASR lawsuits are consolidated for pretrial proceedings before U.S. District Judge David A. Katz in the Northern District of Ohio, where the first “bellwether” trials are expected to begin in January 2014. That case was originally set to begin in September, but has been postponed at least two times, leading to speculation that the parties may be considering a settlement.

In New Jersey state court, the next DePuy ASR trial is also expected to begin in January 2014, involving a consolidated trial for two different individuals who have experienced similar problems following DePuy hip replacement surgery.

Related ArticlesCalifornia Bellwether Trial for DePuy ASR Hip Replacement Settled: Report (10/3/2013)Bellwether Trial for DePuy ASR Lawsuit in MDL Postponed Again (9/23/2013)DePuy ASR Hip Replacement Trial in MDL Set to Begin Sept. 24 (9/9/2013)Bellwether Trial for DePuy ASR Hip Implant Scheduled for October in N.J. (6/12/2013)Trials Set to Begin in Lawsuit Over DePuy ASR Hip Replacements (1/7/2013)Tags: Depuy ASR Hip, DePuy Hip Replacement, Johnson & Johnson, Metal Hip Replacement, New Jersey

Post Your CommentsYour Name:(required)Email:(valid email required)Shared Comments:Share information you wish to be published on this page...I authorize the above comments to be posted on this page?YesNoPlease Enter Verification Code:

View the Original article