Articles Posted in Pharmaceutical Injuries

by

The Pennsylvania State Supreme Court has dismissed appeals by Wyeth Pharmaceuticals in its attempt to reverse a jury verdict of $8.6 million, which included a very sizable sum for punitive damages. A lawsuit originated in a claim against Wyeth as to its menopause drug, Prempro, which has been associated with women developing breast cancer.  Wyeth had asked the state’s Supreme Court to overturn the September 2013 punitive damages verdict. Wyeth argued that the verdict should be invalidated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) earlier approval of the drug for safe use. 

Wyeth maintained that the appellate court had erred in reinstating the jury verdict that was entered by a Philadelphia jury in 2007 for Mary Daniel, who claimed that the Prempro menopause drug caused her breast cancer. 

Following that jury verdict, the punitive damages were tacked onto a compensatory damage award of $1.7 million.  Ms. Daniel and her husband were the plaintiffs in the case. 

Continue reading

by

Metal-on-metal artificial hips were originally thought to be more durable and longer lasting than the traditional hip implants. It was believed that the mechanical hip implants would reduce wear and lower the rates of failure and dislocation. With the advent of multiple medical studies, it was found that metal-on-metal hips were no more reliable than the traditional hip implants. However, danger of metal-on-metal hip implants subjected patients to severe side effects. One of those side effects is metallosis poisoning.

Many of the metal-on-metal hip implants contain cobalt and chromium;  when broken down in the blood stream, these can cause irreversible damage to patients. The metal-on-metal hip implants, when in regular use, grind or shred metallic particles into the surrounding body tissues  and spread throughout the bloodstream. It was found in 2010 that cobalt and chromium ions were frequently found in the blood and urine of hip implant patients. Metallosis destroys the surrounding tissue. 

In addition, the metallic particles can lodge in other organs of the body. It has been reported that metallic particles have been found in bone marrow, in the liver, kidneys and bladder. In fact, studies have revealed that high levels of metallic ions in the body can increase the risk of different cancers.

Continue reading

by

According to a recent study and a New York Times report, dietary supplements containing high concentrations of green tea extract result in up to 20 percent of liver injuries in patients who turn up in hospitals. This new data was analyzed by a national network of liver specialists. 

Dietary supplements are regularly purchased at nutrition stores promising weight loss or build up of muscle mass.  Many who take dietary supplements are young, but the studies show that middle-aged women and men are also often buying these products. 

Americans spend $32 billion a year on dietary supplements. The dietary supplement distribution is by and large unregulated. 

Continue reading

by

Nursing home residents often develop pneumonia. Pneumonia is a common infection that is too often deadly in the elderly. Pneumonia is just one of the many medical ailments that afflict nursing home residents. Family practice physicians taking care of elderly residents often prescribe a variety of different medications with different dosages. 

Administrations of medication is the responsibility of the nursing home and its personnel. Frequently, the medication prescribed is not given in the correct dosages, which can be harmful or deadly to residents. Some residents can develop toxicity symptoms from overdosing with prescribed medication. The overdosing of prescription medicine can lead to side effects such as shortness of breath, other complications and even death.

Nursing home residents and families must be aware of all medication prescribed to the resident. To double check what nursing home personnel is prescribing, it would be appropriate to ask if the medicine given is correctly dosed.  That question should be posed often, especially if family members notice a change in dosage or in the medication itself.

Continue reading

by

Those who would prefer that court records remain secret have a higher burden in trying to keep filed pleadings, court orders, minute entries, hearing transcripts, trial exhibits and discovery documents filed with the court as attachments to motions. For those who wish to have court records secret, the proponent must demonstrate that sealing is warranted under both the federal common law and the First Amendment, which serves as independent grounds for challenging secrecy orders. Lawyers who motion to seal court records and files must demonstrate to the court and the opposition a very strong reason why public access should be denied. 

Under the federal common law, courts begin with a presumption in favor of public access. Under the federal law, the presumption of public access can be overcome if the proponent of this secrecy effort demonstrates “compelling reasons” for secrecy that are supported by “specific factual findings.” Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) and Union Oil Co. v. Levall, 2020 Fed. 3d 562, 567-68 (7th Cir. 2000).

One of the standards and a compelling reason to seal or make secret court files may be found when disclosing the court records would result in “improper use of the material for scandalous or libelous purposes or infringement upon trade secrets,” but not much beyond that.  Hagestad v. Tragesser, 49 F. 3d 1430, 1434 (9th Cir. 1995). 

Continue reading

by

There are more than 3,000 active Actos bladder lawsuits pending nationwide.In one of the first to go to trial, a jury returned a $6.5 million verdict against Takeda Pharmaceuticals American, Inc., the company that makes and markets the diabetes drug, Actos.  The plaintiff in this case developed bladder cancer after being prescribed Actos for his diabetes.

The jury found that Takeda chose not to warn patients and physicians of the risks associated with using Actos. The jury’s verdict of $6.5 million was made up of the following damages: $5 million to the plaintiff and $1.5 million to his wife for loss of consortium.

The plaintiff was prescribed Actos for his diabetes by his family physician. The plaintiff took Actos for more than 4 years before developing bladder cancer in 2011. The presiding judge ordered that this case go to trial when it was found that the plaintiff was very ill and not likely to survive even another year. The trial, which started in February, lasted nearly 2 months. 

Continue reading

by

A $5 million jury verdict was handed down in the first of the federal multidistrict litigation cases involving patients claiming injury from the body scan contrast agent gadolinium. The Ohio jury found GE Healthcare chose not to provide the necessary health risk warnings with patients with impaired kidney function when gadolinium is used in a body scan. The gadolinium product is a contrast dye used in MRI and other radiographic scanning.

The plaintiff in this case developed an untreatable skin disease called nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF) as a result of being injected with the Omniscan for magnetic resonance angiogram. Omniscan is the prescription medication with gadolinium as a product that is used to screen patients for acute kidney injury or other conditions related to reduced renal function.

The drug makers of the Omniscan product, GE Healthcare, Bayer and Covidien have defended hundreds of lawsuits claiming injuries from the gadolinium-based contrast agent products. 

Continue reading

by

A February 25, 2013 study published by the Journal of the American Medical Association Internal Medicine has reported a connection between acute pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer with the use of the diabetes drug, Januvia. The study also noted that there was increased risk of thyroid cancer. The JAMA Internal Medicine journal report found that hospitalized patients with pancreatitis were two times more likely to be taking either Januvia or Byetta than diabetic patients who did not have pancreatitis.

The reported side effects to Januvia are similar to those reported earlier for Byetta, made by Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. Byetta is another type II diabetes medication. Lawsuits have been filed in California against the maker of Byetta, alleging patients were not adequately warned about the risks associated with the drug.

Consumer Reports published an article warning patients to speak to their physicians about switching from Januvia to another diabetes medication. The drug manufacturer of Januvia denies that there is any harm in taking its product. However, independent studies indicate a high risk of injury from Januvia. The Federal Food & Drug Administration has not yet issued a warning about the potential harm associated with the taking of Januvia and thyroid or pancreatic cancer.

Continue reading