Vioxx Personal Injury Lawsuits
By Matthew Keegan |
Personal injury attorneys representing clients who have allegedly been harmed
by the prescription drug Vioxx are congratulating themselves over a historic
judgment rendered recently. On August 19, 2005, a judge awarded the family of
Bob Ernst $253.4 million due to his death from the drug. Vioxx, which had been
prescribed most often for arthritis pain, was withdrawn globally by its maker,
Merck, after research trials showed it increased patients' chances of a heart
attack. Although Merck pulled the drug off the market in September 2004, legal
action against this leading pharmaceutical giant will continue and expand. Let’s
take a look at why Vioxx has become a litigation lightning rod.
In 1998
as Merck was running clinical trials for Vioxx, company reports to the FDA
stated that there were no cardiovascular signals apparent. This meant that there
were no telltale signs that the drug could cause heart problems for users.
Later, however, it was revealed that an internal study conducted by Merck around
the same time – Study 090 – revealed serious cardiovascular problems as compared
to patients not taking Vioxx. The study was never published by Merck as the
company insisted that it was not large enough to provide definitive
data.
The following year the FDA gave Vioxx its approval and the drug
became the second nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medication [or COX-2 inhibitor]
to hit the market. Celebrex, another problem drug, was the first.
Merck
widely and thoroughly launched a marketing campaign upon the introduction of
Vioxx to the marketplace. Indeed, by 2003 the drug had entered 80 nations with
sales exceeding $2.5 billion. Still, there were problems looming as ongoing
tests conducted by Merck hinted of potential deadly side effects.
As
early as 2001, the FDA recommended label warnings be put on prescriptions
warning users of potential side effects. In addition, Merck was warned by the
FDA to quit misleading physicians about potential side effects.
As
potential problems began to surface, they served as red flags to industry
watchdogs, to the FDA, as well as to personal injury attorneys who began to
gather evidence to show that Merck was negligent. Indeed, web sites and
advertising campaigns – meant to inform and attract patients harmed by the drug
– were launched and fairly soon the internet, radio, television, and print media
were flooded with advertisements asking those suspecting harm from Vioxx to come
forward.
With the September 2004 announcement that Merck was withdrawing
Vioxx, personal injury litigation was well on its way to being established. By
early 2005, the first cases were filed and the Ernst case became the first Vioxx
lawsuit to be settled.
Wrongful death lawsuits against Vioxx’s maker,
Merck, are expected to increase as the result of the Ernst decision. Personal
injury attorneys insist that thousands of former Vioxx users and/or their
families are due compensation for Merck’s neglect. It remains to be seen if
juries will render judgments as large as the Ernst judgment and whether courts
will uphold these amounts. Nevertheless, it is certain that Merck is in for a
long battle that will reach well beyond its US base.
About the Author
Matt Keegan
is The Article Writer who write on
issues of current appeal as well as aviation and business subjects.
Top of Page |
