February 6, 2017

Xarelto Manufacturers Pay Physicians More Than Any Other Drug Company

According to a recently-released report by the news organization ProPublica, manufacturers of the anticoagulant (blood thinner) Xarelto made more physician payments than any other drug company in 2015. Physician payments were made for promotional speaking, travel, gifts, and meals. But not for research. Past studies have shown that when physicians receive payments from a drug manufacturer, they tend to prescribe more of that manufacturer’s drugs than those who do not. Considering the high risk of serious, potentially life-threatening side effects linked to Xarelto, this is certainly cause for concern.

Each year, ProPublica gathers information about payments made by pharmaceutical companies to physicians for promos, travel, royalties, etc. Across the board, pharmaceutical and medical device companies made approximately $2 billion in physician payments in 2014 and 2015, with Xarelto payments taking the cake in 2015. ProPublica’s study is not the only one to find that these payments result in higher prescriptions of related drugs. Researchers at Harvard Medical School had similar findings in 2016. In a study of medical industry payments to physicians in Massachusetts, they found that for every $1,000 a physician received, his or her rate of prescribing the associated drug increased by 0.1 percent. If you have been injured by a dangerous or defective pharmaceutical, contact a Boston drug injury lawyer today.

Xarelto Linked to Excessive Bleeding

There are currently more than 11,000 Xarelto lawsuits pending in the U.S. It goes without saying that plaintiffs in these cases will likely use the findings from the ProPublica report to support their claims that Xarelto’s manufacturers, Johnson and Johnson and AG Bayer, failed to warn physicians and patients about the risks associated with the drug. Marketed as a low-maintenance alternative to warfarin, Xarelto quickly rose in popularity. Due to high demand, Xarelto’s manufacturers may have rushed the product to market without adequate safety testing. Although all anticoagulants come with an increased risk of excessive bleeding (hemorrhaging), warfarin has an antidote to that bleeding, known as a reversal agent. To date, Xarelto has no such reversal agent. Excessive bleeding has resulted in thousands of injuries and some deaths. If you have been harmed by a defective prescription drug, contact a MA drug injury lawyer today.

Symptoms of Internal Bleeding

If you are currently undergoing Xarelto treatment, talk to your doctor about the risks of excessive bleeding. As internal bleeding may not be immediately apparent, it is important to look for possible signs. If the bleeding is rapid and severe, blood may collect under the skin, forming a bulge or discolored spot. Severe bleeding may result in shock or loss of consciousness. If you develop any of the symptoms below, seek immediate medical attention:

Uncontrollable bleeding
Dark urine
Dark stool
Unexplained bruises
Blood clots
Cough that produces blood
Blood in vomit
Unexplained pain
Joint pain
Headaches
Dizziness
Weakness
Fatigue

Lawsuits allege that Xarelto manufacturers failed to warn physicians about the risk of uncontrollable bleeding, that the drug was defectively designed, and that warning labels were not updated in a timely manner. Johnson & Johnson and Bayer AG are also under fire for not recalling Xarelto when the risks became apparent. Continue reading

January 30, 2017

Updates on Talcum Powder Lawsuits

by Altman & Altman

Lawsuits claiming that talc-based products have caused ovarian cancer in women who use them have been on the rise in recent years. According to research, women who use talcum powder for personal hygiene have a significantly higher risk of developing ovarian cancer than those who do not. Despite this risk, however, talcum powder products are still on the market. Even more disturbing is new evidence that manufacturers of talc-based products, such as Johnson & Johnson, may have known about the risk for decades.

The United States vs. Europe

In Europe, talc is banned from personal care products. In the United States, however, manufacturers are permitted to add minimal amounts of ingredients to personal care products with limited safety testing. In some cases, no safety testing is required at all. The difference between the US approach and that of the EU is night and day. Laws in the EU state that “chemicals linked to cancer and birth defects simply don’t belong in cosmetics.” To more clearly illustrate the difference, consider this: The EU has banned more than 1,300 potentially toxic chemicals from personal care products while the US has only banned 11. If you have been harmed by a dangerous product, contact a Boston injury lawyer today.

The Link Between Talcum Powder and Ovarian Cancer

In 2013, the journal Cancer Prevention Research published a study on the risk of talcum powder use. The Brigham and Women’s Hospital study reviewed data from nearly 2,000 women. Their results showed an increased risk of developing ovarian cancer of up to 30 percent for women who used talc-based products for personal hygiene. According to research, when used for personal hygiene, talc minerals can travel through the fallopian tubes to the ovaries. If the particles become lodged in the ovaries, they can irritate the tissue, resulting in inflammation which can, in turn, become tumorous.

Large Awards in Wrongful Death and Product Liability Lawsuits

After using Johnson & Johnson baby powder for 35 years, Jacqueline Fox was diagnosed with ovarian cancer. Last year, the pharmaceutical giant was ordered to pay $72 million for the wrongful death of the victim. Although Fox passed away a few months before the trial began, she expressed her desire to warn other women of the dangers of talcum powder. Another victim, Gloria Ristesund, was awarded $55 million last year for her talcum powder liability claim. Ristesund claimed that she used baby powder and Shower to Shower for more than three decades before being diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2011. If you have been injured by a defective product, contact a MA injury lawyer today.

Despite all of the above, the FDA claims there is insufficient evidence to support the link between talc and ovarian cancer. As such, the agency refuses to label talc-based products as carcinogens even though they agreed that talc has a similar behavior pattern as asbestos. Continue reading

January 27, 2017

Updates on Hernia Mesh Lawsuits

by Altman & Altman

Hernia mesh is a surgical product used to repair hernias. The screen-like material goes under or over the weakness, or it can act as a plug. Unfortunately, surgical mesh has been linked to serious, life-threatening complications. The most common risks associated with hernia mesh implantation are perforation, infection, and adhesion. Many of these devices contain polypropylene, a type of plastic commonly used in medical products. However, according to the Polypropylene Material Data Safety Sheet, permanent implantation is listed under “prohibited uses.” As hernia mesh is intended to be a permanent product, this statement has raised many questions.

FDA Warning

Last year, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released on article on the dangers of hernia mesh implants.

January 23, 2017

Update on Hip Implant Lawsuits

by Altman & Altman

Thousands of lawsuits have been filed against manufacturers of metal-on-metal hip implants, alleging that claimants suffered painful, debilitating complications from the devices. DePuy’s ASR and Pinnacle models are the focus of most lawsuits, with DePuy’s costs estimated at around $4 billion and growing. The cases involving the two models were recently consolidated into separate multidistrict litigation (MDL) cases. Thousands more remain in pending status. If you experienced severe pain or medical complications after receiving a metal-on-metal hip implant, contact a Boston injury lawyer today.

Complications Associated with Metal Hip Implants

Hip replacement surgery is one of the greatest medical innovations in decades. Millions of people have been able to improve their quality of life as a result. Unfortunately, as with all medical procedures and devices, hip implants come with risks. But some of these risks may be the result of defective design and failure to warn physicians and patients of associated complications. Risks include:

Blood clots
Metallosis
Infection
Bone fracture
Death

Metallosis

One of the main concerns with metal-on-metal hip implants is the debris that may be released into the body when metal components rub against one another. When this occurs, a condition called metallosis can result. This dangerous condition is caused by a buildup of metal debris in the body’s soft tissue. The effects of metallosis can be quite dangerous, resulting in death of the surrounding tissue and potential blood poisoning. If cobalt, titanium, or chromium ions are released into the bloodstream, toxicity, inflammation, and even cancer can result. Metallosis can also cause:

Failure of the implant
Joint pain
Tissue death
Bone deterioration
Blood poisoning
Toxicity
Formation of pseudotumors or cysts
The need for revision surgery.

Nearly 35 percent of retrieved hip implants have notable corrosion and other types of damage. Bone fractures, joint dislocations, improperly positioned components, infection, defective stem designs, and poor cementing techniques may contribute to the loosening of stem components and the need for a revision surgery. Unfortunately, revision surgery is a difficult, painful, and longer process than the initial hip replacement. Thigh and / or knee pain are usually the first indicators of a complication with a hip replacement. If you are experiencing any complications after receiving a hip replacement, contact your health care provider immediately.

DePuy Settlements Top $4 Billion

Plaintiffs in both MDL cases and pending cases allege that the medical devices had design defects and that DePuy knew about the risks but failed to adequately warn physicians and patients. In 2013, DePuy and its parent company Johnson & Johnson, agreed to a settlement in cases involving people injured by the manufacturer’s ASR models. At that time, the company set aside approximately $4 billion to settle the claims. Last year, the manufacturer agreed to an additional settlement of $420 million. If a defective or dangerous medical device has caused you harm, contact a MA defective medical device law firm today. Continue reading

January 12, 2017

The perils of power morcellators

by Altman & Altman

On the surface, a power morcellator is an intriguing and seemingly fantastic showcase of modern medical technology. The drill-like device is able to perform laparoscopic surgeries, such as hysterectomies and myomectomies, without being overly invasive, requiring a less than two centimeter incision, and reduces the patient’s recovery time and post-operative pain drastically.

A morcellator works by cutting large chunks of tissue, such as a uterus, into smaller chunks and then using suction to vacuum the flesh out of the body via its long tubular attachment. A majority of the devices were manufactured and distributed under the Johnson & Johnson umbrella through their subsidiary company, Ethicon.

Power morcellators may cause cancer

January 10, 2017

Suffering from Nexium side effects?

by Altman & Altman

The popular heartburn medication Nexium, released by pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca in 2001, has been used by millions around the globe to treat their chronic heartburn with relatively few side effects. Minor side effects include dry mouth, headaches and minor abdominal pain, which are certainly manageable.

However, more severe side effects have come to light in thousands of patients, side effects undisclosed by AstraZeneca and not mentioned on Nexium’s list of side effect, and hundreds of these patients have filed lawsuits seeking financial compensation for their pain and suffering as a result.

Serious side effects include…

January 10, 2017

Lipitor and link to diabetes

by Altman & Altman

Lipitor has the distinction of being the best-selling prescription medication of all time. Manufactured by pharmaceutical titan company, Pfizer, Lipitor is prescribed to help treat high cholesterol and reduce the risk of heart attacks and strokes. There is no doubt that Lipitor has helped millions of people since it was approved by the FDA in 1996.

However, recent studies have linked Lipitor to an increased risk of developing another serious disease: type 2 diabetes. In 2012, the FDA released a warning that cholesterol-reducing statin drugs, such as Lipitor, could elevate blood sugar levels in those who take it and lead to diabetes. Pfizer was ordered to add this warning on the Lipitor label.

This warning did not help people who had already developed diabetes while taking Lipitor, and it has led to lawsuits regarding inadequate warnings and a decreased quality of life as a result of this failure to warn consumers about all the potential risks.

About Lipitor

Lipitor is a prescription medication known as a “statin” drug, which means it works with the body to help stop the liver from producing too much “bad” cholesterol, which can lead to heart disease and blood clots (which can lead to strokes).

Lipitor was first approved by the FDA in 1996, and by 2012 had made over $130 billion in sales. Doctors continue to prescribe Lipitor and other statin medications today because of their proven track record of helping reduce the risk of heart disease and strokes.

However, there are other risks associated with statin medication, including muscle damage, memory loss and the aforementioned risk of developing diabetes. Doctors are less inclined to direct a patient to stop taking statin medication because of the former two symptoms (since heart disease and strokes are much more serious afflictions), but developing diabetes is obviously problematic also, so good awareness and consistent checkups and blood sugar testing should be standard when taking these medications.

If you developed diabetes while on Lipitor

You may have a good case for financial recompense if you developed type 2 diabetes while taking Lipitor prior to 2012. Whether or not it was known to Pfizer prior to the FDA demanding they place a warning on their bottles of Lipitor, it is still unacceptable that it took so long to find this link between Lipitor and another very serious disease.

Diabetes has life-altering effects on those who are diagnosed, including costly medical appointments, possible dialysis and surgeries, not to mention a complete change in lifestyle in order to constantly monitor their blood sugar levels. Further risks of diabetes include blindness, neuropathy and deadly kidney disease.

Hundreds of lawsuits regarding Lipitor and diabetes have been filed across the country, and the legal professionals at Altman & Altman LLP have the expertise to figure out the appropriate course of action if you or a loved one was diagnosed with diabetes as a result of taking Lipitor or other statin medications.

There are grounds for lawsuits based on negligence, failing to monitor the safety of a prescription medication, misleading consumers of the risks of a medication, inadequately labeling a prescription medication and ignoring potential risks of a prescription medication. Continue reading

January 6, 2017

Suffering from Nexium side effects?

by Altman & Altman

The popular heartburn medication Nexium, released by pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca in 2001, has been used by millions around the globe to treat their chronic heartburn with relatively few side effects. Minor side effects include dry mouth, headaches and minor abdominal pain, which are certainly manageable.

However, more severe side effects have come to light in thousands of patients, side effects undisclosed by AstraZeneca and not mentioned on Nexium’s list of side effect, and hundreds of these patients have filed lawsuits seeking financial compensation for their pain and suffering as a result.

Serious side effects include…

It has been revealed that Nexium can lead to severe kidney complications and even accelerated dementia in its patients. Lawsuits stemming from kidney damage have been filed against AstraZeneca as far back as 2004, and yet they have continued to release the product without mentioning the potential risk of kidney damage. On Nexium’s own website, there is no mention of these well-established risks.

Three studies from 2015 and 2016 showed evidence that patients who were currently taking Nexium were twice as likely to sustain an acute kidney injury, that patients had a 20 to 50 percent higher chance of developing chronic kidney disease, and that patients taking Nexium had a 44 percent higher risk of developing dementia.

Clearly, the risks are not insignificant. These side effects are not only dangerous to a person’s overall health and wellbeing, they can be incredibly costly as well.

Kidney disease sufferers may need to undergo dialysis, transplants or grafts, and will likely maintain consistent hospital visits throughout the rest of their lives to keep an eye on their condition. Kidney failure accounts for about $42.5 billion annually in private and Medicare costs according to the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.

Sufferers of dementia can lose their independence, their job, and more, as they may need to be moved into an expensive assisted living facility. Dementia can be extremely painful for both the individual and their families to go through, not to mention the fact that the average assisted living care facility can cost upwards of $70,000 or more per year.

History of legal action

Hundreds of patients who have been negatively affected by Nexium have sought financial recompense as a result of their pain and suffering, both individually and as a group through class action lawsuits. AstraZeneca has been sued over the past decade for negligence, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and product defects.

Three of these class actions suits were settled in 2015. One ended with a $24 million settlement, another ended with a $20 million settlement, and the last one settled for $7.9 million. More lawsuits are cropping up in recent years with yet another allegation – that Nexium causes bone density loss leading to an increased risk of bone fractures. Continue reading

December 5, 2016

Johnson & Johnson and DePuy Orthopedics Ordered to Pay More Than $1 Billion For Defective Hip Implants

by Altman & Altman

Following a rash of serious medical complications allegedly caused by defective artificial hip implants, DePuy Orthopedics has been ordered to pay more than $1 billion. A federal jury in Dallas found the company, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, negligent in its failure to adequately warn physicians and patients about the risks associated with their product’s defective design.

At least six patients had to undergo revision surgery to replace the defective implants with a properly-functioning implant and / or to repair damage to the tissue and bone. The Dallas jury awarded more than $30 million in damages to the six patients and more than $1 billion in punitive damages. The jury made the following ruling:

J&J and DePuy were negligent in their design of the implant
They failed to warn patients and doctors about known risks
They failed to recall the product when defects were discovered
They intentionally misrepresented the effectiveness of the product to both doctors and patients

If you have been harmed due to a DePuy hip implant, contact a Boston defective medical product attorney today.

Johnson & Johnson Appeals the Verdict

Following the verdict, Johnson & Johnson and DePuy announced that they will appeal the decision, denying any wrongdoing. “We have no greater responsibility than to the patients who use our products, and our goal is to create medical innovations that help people live more active and comfortable lives,” said DePuy spokeswoman Mindy Tinsley. “DePuy acted appropriately and responsibly in the design and testing of ULTAMET Metal-on-Metal, and the product is backed by a strong track record of clinical data showing reduced pain and restored mobility for patients suffering from chronic hip pain.”

Fourth Trial Scheduled for September 2017

This trial was the third bellwether trial for thousands of similar lawsuits. Earlier this year, a jury – also in Dallas – awarded more than $500 million in damages to a group who suffered medical complications from DePuy implants. However, the award was later reduced to $154 million. The companies are also appealing the reduced ruling in that case. The first trial, which took place in 2014, was decided in favor of J&J and DePuy. A fourth trial is on the horizon, scheduled for September 2017. If you have been injured due to a DePuy artificial hip implant, or any other type of defective medical product, contact a Boston injury attorney today.

Risks Associated with DePuy Hip Implants

Thousands of lawsuits have been filed against DePuy for medical complications arising from defective hip implants. The most commonly cited complications include:

Bone fractures – in many cases the bones surrounding the hip implant have weakened, resulting in fractures
Metallosis – this condition occurs when metal fragments release toxins into the body
Pseudotumors – the formation of tumor-like deposits have adhered to joints in some patients
Necrosis – the death of bone and tissue due to metallosis has been cited in multiple lawsuits
Revision surgery – due to defective implants, bone erosion, and tissue damage, thousands of patients have required revision surgery to replace implants and repair damage

November 18, 2016

Pradaxa lawsuits overview

by Altman & Altman

Since being approved in October of 2010, the prescription blood thinning drug, Pradaxa, has established itself as an upgrade to warfarin because it performed the same functions while also preventing strokes. Other competitors to warfarin, such as Xarelto, have also come onto the market. While these drugs netted gigantic profits for their manufacturers and were used by millions of patients, it has been revealed over time that these drugs can pose a serious, and deadly, risk to certain types of people. In May of 2014 alone, Boehringer Ingelheim, the German manufacturer of Pradaxa, settled more than 4,000 lawsuits for a combined amount of $650 million.

Just two years after its introduction, Pradaxa was blamed for over 500 deaths stemming from uncontrollable bleeding and internal hemorrhaging. The aforementioned settlement came under the condition that Boehringer Ingelheim would have to admit to no fault regarding the deaths, stating that the benefits of the drug far outweighed the negative side effects. While the benefits of the drug are certainly evident, should thousands of lawsuits and hundreds of deaths prompt, at the very least, more research, development, and awareness campaigns to ensure that the wrong people don’t take the drug and wind up in dire straits? Pradaxa costs about $3,000 a year and made $209 million in sales just in the first quarter of 2012, so it is not an issue of not having enough money.