Posts Tagged ‘litigation’

Glaxo Failed to Warn About Paxil Risks, Lawyer Says at Philadelphia Trial

Tuesday, November 9th, 2010

Note from CCHR: Also see attorney Karen Barth Menzies interview on Paxil withdrawal effects and documents withheld from the public http://www.youtube.com/cchrint#p/c/B9EA75455D155D89/3/Mpex0n0DXuc

Bloomberg News

by Jeff Feeley, November 9, 2010

GlaxoSmithKline Plc,  the U.K.’s largest drugmaker, failed to properly warn consumers that its antidepressant drug Paxil could cause birth defects, a lawyer for the family of an injured teenager told jurors.

Glaxo officials had research from the 1980s showing Paxil caused deaths among the offspring of animal test subjects and didn’t provide clear warnings about those deaths, Kimberly Baden, a lawyer for Anna Blyth and her family, told a Philadelphia jury. Baden said the drug caused a narrowing of the aorta leading from the heart of Anna, now 14 years old.

“We believe the evidence will show Paxil caused Anna’s birth defects,” Baden said in opening statements in the trial. “We believe the warnings and instructions put out in 1995 weren’t appropriate and reasonable.”

The Blyth family’s case is the first over Paxil’s birth- defect risks to go to trial since the company agreed in July to pay more than $1 billion to settle 800 cases alleging the company failed to adequately warn consumers and their doctors about the drug’s hazards. The Blyth case wasn’t part of the settlement.

In the first Philadelphia trial, a jury ordered Glaxo in October 2009 to pay $2.5 million to the family of a 3-year-old boy born with heart defects his mother blamed on the drug.

$11.7 Billion in Sales

Glaxo officials contend Paxil played no role in Anna’s heart defects. They were most likely caused by genetics or the fact that her mother became pregnant late in life, Chilton Varner, a lawyer for the drugmaker, told jurors in her opening statement.

The deaths of Paxil animal test subjects had nothing “to do with Anna Blyth’s heart defects,” Varner said.

Approved in 1992 for U.S. use, Paxil generated about $793 million in sales in 2009, or about 1.8 percent of Glaxo’s total revenue. The company had $11.7 billion in U.S. Paxil sales over nine years starting in 1997, according to documents made public last year in a Pennsylvania trial over birth-defect claims.

Chief Executive Officer Andrew Witty has moved to replace revenue lost to generic versions of drugs such as Paxil. The drugmaker said in May it plans to double revenue from India and China by 2015 as it cuts prices to match competitors in emerging markets.

The company has paid out more than $2 billion to resolve a wave of litigation over Paxil, including claims the anti- depressant caused suicides in some users and withdrawal symptoms. In July, Glaxo set aside $2.4 billion to resolve litigation over Paxil and its Avandia diabetes drug.

Second Wave

After announcing its settlement of Paxil suits this summer, the company faced a second wave of suits over the drugs, said Carl Tobias, a University of Richmond law professor who teaches classes about mass-tort cases. That’s not unusual once a big- dollar settlement is on the table, he said.

“You’ll have plaintiffs lawyers who hope to get in on a settlement by going out and finding some new cases,” Tobias said. “Glaxo probably feels it had to litigate this case to send a signal that it’s not going to settle every one of these birth-defect cases, especially if they are weak.”

Sarah Alspach, a Glaxo spokeswoman, didn’t immediately return a call for comment on how many Paxil birth-defect cases remain outstanding.

In Anna’s case, the Summerville, South Carolina, resident had to undergo two rounds of open-heart surgery within nine months of her birth, Baden told jurors.

Her mother, Marsha Blyth, had taken Paxil for a short time during her pregnancy to deal with depression, Baden noted.

Glaxo’s Paxil warning label didn’t make it clear that offspring from animals on which the drug had been tested died, she said.

Read the rest of the article here: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-09/glaxo-failed-to-warn-about-paxil-risks-lawyer-says-at-philadelphia-trial.html

« Return to news items


Share

Glaxo To Pay $1Billion To Settle Paxil Birth Defect Cases

Wednesday, July 21st, 2010

Pharmalot
By Ed Silverman
July 21, 2010

In an effort to get its arms around massive litigation, GlaxoSmithKline has agreed to settle yet another wad of product-liability lawsuits involving one of its popular meds. The latest deal involves an agreement to pay more than $1 billion to settle some 800 cases alleging its Paxil antidepressant caused birth defects in children borne to women who took the drug, Bloomberg News writes.

The move comes after a Pennsylvania state court jury last October awarded a woman $2.5 million in damages for failing to properly warn docs and pregnant women about the risks of the antidepressant. This case, which was filed by the family of a three-year-old boy who was born with heart defects his mother blamed on the drug. It was the first of 600 such lawsuits and was seen as a test of Glaxo’s vulnerability (background).

Last week, Glaxo disclosed plans to take a $2.4 billion charge in its second quarter to settle product-liability lawsuits over its Avandia diabetes pill, litigation involving the Paxil antidepressant and a US government investigation into its manufacturing site at Cidra, Puerto Rico.

The Paxil deal, which would provide an average payout of more than $1.2 million to families of the affected children, leaves more than 100 similar cases pending. The birth-defect settlements bring to more than $2 billion the amount Glaxo has agreed to pay to resolve a variety of Paxil-related suits, including claims the pill caused suicides or attempted suicides and addiction problems, Bloomberg writes.

Read the entire article here:  http://www.pharmalot.com/2010/07/glaxo-to-pay-1b-to-settle-paxil-birth-defect-cases/

See all international studies/warnings on Paxil: http://www.cchrint.org/psychdrugdangers/drug_warnings.php

See what doctors, pharmacists, health care providers and others have reported to the US FDA on Paxil side effects (such as birth defects): http://www.cchrint.org/psychdrugdangers/medwatch_psych_drug_adverse_reactions.php

« Return to news items


Share

BNET: ‘The Dog Ate AstraZeneca’s Homework! Evidence on Misleading Drug Ad Disappears From Company’s Files’

Wednesday, July 7th, 2010

BNET
By Jim Edwards
July 7, 2010

AstraZeneca (AZN) says it has lost a crucial internal document that would explain how an ad for its antipsychotic Seroquel misleadingly claimed there was “no weight gain” with the drug and described its “favorable weight profile.” But the company admits it kept the six-year-old envelope that once allegedly contained the ad’s approval certificate, according to a ruling by the U.K.’s Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority.

The drug industry watchdog also alleges AZ’s Seroquel management team “pressured and manipulated” executives around them in order to make sure negative data on Seroquel was buried. The PMCPA ruled that AZ had breached its code of practice, which requires companies to operate in “a professional, ethical and transparent” manner.

If there’s a lesson here for managers, it’s this: Simply winning the legal war isn’t good enough. Consumers — and your own employees, as the Seroquel case shows — expect companies to go above and beyond. (AZ has mostly won the litigation filed against it which alleges the company failed to warn patients that Seroquel causes weight gain and diabetes. It settled with the Department of Justice for $520 million.)

Many of the allegations in the PMCPA case are familiar, but what’s new is the source: One of the complainants was an unnamed male former AZ executive, employed at the company from 1992 to 2001, who from 1995 to 2000 was responsible for the medical aspects of the U.K. launch and subsequent marketing of Seroquel.*

In terms of the ad, the BBC reported in January that AZ had published a misleading ad in the British Journal of Psychiatry in April 2004. The PMCPA asked AZ to produce all the documentation behind the ad. Here’s its characterization of AZ’s response:

… for a product that had been marketed for more than 12 years in the UK, the company did not believe that it could reasonably investigate and respond to such a broad request in relation to specific clauses of the code.

The Code requires companies keep relevant documents for three years, AZ argued, and the ad itself was at least five years old, thus, “AstraZeneca had been unable to produce the certificate approving the advertisement from its archive.” But:

The Appeal Board noted from the AstraZeneca representatives at the appeal that although the job bag for the advertisement at issue still existed, it did not contain the relevant certificate.

How unfortunate!

More seriously, the PMCPA appeared to take seriously the ex-employee’s allegation that AZ buried or manipulated data on Seroquel long after the company became aware of weight-gain effects on its patients. The executive alleged that in 1997 he was told by a colleague…

Read entire article here:  http://industry.bnet.com/pharma/10008835/the-dog-ate-astrazenecas-homework-evidence-on-misleading-drug-ad-dissappears-from-companys-files/

« Return to news items


Share