Articles Posted in AstraZeneca

Nexium, or esomeprazole, is a drug that is used to treat heartburn and excessive amounts of acid in the stomach. Specifically, it is used to treat duodenal and gastric ulcers, esophagitis, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and Zollinger-Ellison syndrome. Nexium is a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) that decreases the amount of acid produced in the stomach. Other drugs that are in the same class as Nexium include Prevacid and Prilosec. Approximately 15 million Americans use PPIs that are sold both as prescription and over-the-counter.  Nexium sales exceed $3 billion a year.

• 2019 Update: These drugs have had a troubled history.  Zantac, which was long considered a great and safe drug, has now been associated with cancer.

Nexium is a controversial drug.  At one point, bone fracture lawsuits were all the rage because there was data suggesting Nexium, particularly the long-term use of Nexium, would cause bone fractures and breaks.  We believed many of these cases were meritorious.  But the litigation did not get very far.

Continue Reading

Our attorneys are investigating potential lawsuits involving Crestor and its possible side effects. There are two types of Crestor cases in particular that have gained the interest of many mass tort lawyers: Crestor induced cardiomyopathy and Crestor induced diabetes.

Crestor is a statin that treats dyslipidemia. Crestor is intended – and probably does – reduce “bad” cholesterol while increasing “good” cholesterol. But Crestor lawsuits allege that Crestor can cause cardiovascular injuries leading to cardiomyopathy and diabetes.

As if that was not a problem enough, rhabdomyolysis has also been linked to Crestor which may lead Crestor patients to suffer kidney injuries.

According to a new study in Cancer published Monday, tamoxifen (Nolvadex, Istubal, and Valodex) may prevent breast cancer in women who are at risk. The study found that tamoxifen, which reportedly causes only minor sides for most patients, may prevent 29 breast cancer cases and nine breast cancer deaths for every 1,000 women.

AstraZeneca has gotten a lot of heat on this blog and elsewhere from drug injury lawyers. But this may be one where they deserve a lot of credit (even if they bought the company that developed the drug).

This is something every blog must struggle with. What voice should the blog have? First-person (or the blogger variant–the royal first-person, where everything is about “we” and “us,” though the blog is written by one person), or third-person?

Corporations frequently choose a corporate voice, making everything about the corporation. The voice of the blog is often the “voice” of the corporation (corporations are legal entities with rights, of course). But this can be tough to read sometimes and still loses the personal flair of a first-person narrative.

So, when my Google Reader blog-feed listed AstraZeneca’s recent post, “Connections for Cardiovascular Health,” I was interested to see that they are gravitating toward a first-person voice. The side panel shows that the main contributor and “voice” is Earl Whipple, the blog editor and senior director in the AZ corporate communications group. The sidebar mentioned that others would contribute (the CEO had a post on March 23), but perusing the posts, it looks like Earl is the only contributor except for occasional guests.

The Seroquel cases are not going well for plaintiffs. On April 6, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the summary judgment ruling of the Massachusetts federal trial court in a Seroquel case. The plaintiff alleged that Seroquel caused her to gain weight and develop diabetes, but at the trial level (and affirmed on appeal), she lost her specific causation expert on a Daubert ruling. The trial record showed that the excluded expert did not have sufficient medical history upon which to base her conclusions—at deposition, she lost points by not knowing the full history of the plaintiff’s weight gain and loss. The Court stated:

In fact, Guinn’s weight fluctuated before, during, and after her use of Seroquel, with her highest recorded weight during each period being roughly equivalent. Guinn also had a sedentary lifestyle, a poor diet, a significant family history of diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, schizophrenia, and prediabetes, all of which, in addition to her age of 61, put her at an increased risk for developing diabetes.

Tellingly, the plaintiff’s expert commented that the plaintiff would have likely developed diabetes, even absent taking Seroquel.

The New Jersey Superior Court Case (Middlesex County) of Baker v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP is now focusing on the drug manufacturer’s advertising strategy. The plaintiff, in that case, is alleging that he should have been better warned about the risks for weight gain and developing diabetes.

On the plaintiff’s side is Dr. Wayne Geller, a former AstraZeneca employee—a global safety officer—who testified that the company rebuffed his efforts to strengthen internal documents describing the weight gain issue. He testified that “I found out there were people from the commercial side” who opposed the changes. This is another indication of marketing trumping. AstraZeneca is defending the case, noting that it adequately warned about the risk of diabetes and that Seroquel doesn’t cause diabetes, anyway. They rely on several studies that showed favorable data, but other reports show average weight gain for users on Seroquel is 27 pounds.

Continue Reading