Tag Archives: Johnson & Johnson

Once-a-day: Good Business, Unnecessary Risk?

10 Dec

I know that Levaquin has important uses. It is the “atom bomb” of antibiotics: Where others won’t get the job done, Levaquin will destroy everything in its sights. Unfortunately, we’re seeing all too often that this means your tendons are at risks. When other drugs aren’t effective, or when allergies prevent alternative meds, then Levaquin might be right for you. But I remember first hearing that you can now take “once-a-day” antibiotics and heal right up – I thought that was great. I mean, Amoxicillin’s been around for over 30 years, and who likes taking 2-3 pills a day? Especially when you can just take one?

levaquin - only once a day!

But this SHOULD NOT be used as a marketing tool. The convenience factor should not blur the other risks. If someone doesn’t need something as strong as Levaquin, then they shouldn’t be prescribed it. It’s not just the doctors’ fault: The drug companies promote the benefits of these (often costly) drugs without stressing the additional risks over alternatives. But it is also the consumers’ job to be vigilant. Especially now, when you know the dangers. Be aware and that will go a long way towards being safe.

Johnson & Johnson Fighting Attempts to Consolidate Levaquin Litigation

19 Nov

Johnson & Johnson (the manufacturer of Levaquin) is trying to prevent the first Levaquin lawsuits from being consolidated into a single trial. Plaintiffs’ attorneys want to have the first three “Bellweather” cases tried together. They claim that these cases are very similar; since the plaintiffs have similar injuries, claims, and situations, it is more efficient for the court to handle them as a single trial.

Attorneys for J&J disagree, arguing that the potential differences in the plaintiffs’ medical histories and their unique injuries suffered may confuse the jury.

There are now hundreds of cases pending against Levaquin in state and federal courts. The first cases to go to trial in products liability cases such as this are often the most important ones for both plaintiffs and defendants – if plaintiffs lose, future plaintiffs will find an emboldened defendent and face an uphill battle. However, if the first plaintiffs prevail, oftentimes the defendants may rethink their strategy and might find settlement to be a viable option. (Thus these first cases are referred to as Bellwether cases.)

The majority of the lawsuits allege that the antibiotic medication caused the plaintiffs tendon ruptures, tendonitis, and other tendon injuries.

In July of 2008, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration mandated the manufacturers of the fluoroquinolone class of antibiotics (including Levaquin, Cipro, Avelox & others) to include a “black box” warning label, which states clearly that there is significant risk of tendon injuries for users of these drugs. Prior to that date, any warnings of such injuries were not clearly displayed (allegedly buried in a long list of potential side effects. Currently, the language is clear:
WARNING
Fluoroquinolones, including LEVAQUIN®, are associated with an increased risk of tendinitis and tendon rupture in all ages. This risk is further increased in older patients usually over 60 years of age, in patients taking corticosteroid drugs, and in patients with kidney, heart or lung transplants [See WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS].

Source: http://www.injuryboard.com/printfriendly.aspx?id=274696 (Author: Scott Kappes)

Levaquin Side Effects and your Legal Rights

6 Nov

Here is a brief summary of the warning signs of tendonitis and tendon ruptures after taking Levaquin. If you or someone you know has taken Levaquin and would like to learn more about the possibility of joining a lawsuit against the manufacturers (Ortho-MacNeil and Johnson & Johnson), visit Legaltube or call our sponsor firm, Slater Rosenberger & Schulman, at 1-800-251-6990.

JOHNSON & JOHNSON LEVAQUIN SALES DOWN

14 Oct

According to Johnson & Johnson’s third quarter financial results: Sales of Levaquin our anti-infective were down 5.7% on an operational basis when compared to the same period a year ago. Total prescriptions in the US anti-infective market are estimated to be up slightly in the quarter.

This is indicative of a decrease in prescriptions and use. Let’s keep spreading the word of the dangers associated with this drug until it is off the market.

LAWSUIT FILED AGAINST JOHNSON AND JOHNSON FOR LEVAQUIN RELATED TENDON INJURY

12 Oct

Five Illinois residents have filed suit against Johnson and Johnson, Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceutical Research and Development and Walgreens after they say an antibiotic caused them severe tendon problems.

Plaintiffs Susan Price, Jerry Mahlandt, Johnna Woosley, David Force and Rachel Speiser say they took the antibiotic Levaquin, which is normally prescribed for upper respiratory infection, urinary tract infections, prostatitis and other bacterial infections.

What the plaintiffs claim they did not know at the time they took Levaquin is that it causes a higher incidence of tendon injuries, including tendon rupture, in people who are older than 60 or who are on corticosteroid therapy, according to the complaint filed Sept. 2 in St. Clair County Circuit Court.

“Levaquin-induced tendon injury involves the degradation of the tendon tissue, leading to severe and permanent injuries,” the suit states.

As a result of their taking the antibiotic, all the plaintiffs say they suffered severe and permanent tendon injuries.

Levaquin is part of a class of antibiotics known as fluoroquinolones and was originally introduced into the U.S. in 1997, the complaint says.

When Levaquin entered the market, warnings about tendon side effects were required on all fluoroquinolone labels, but were buried in a long list of potential adverse reactions, the plaintiffs claim. In addition, the warnings did not advise that tendon injury was tripled with fluoroquinolone use in people older than 60 and in those who are on corticosteroid therapy, according to the complaint.

In fact, Levaquin manufacturers marketed the drug toward the elderly, especially those with upper respiratory infections who were likely to be chronic corticosteroid users, the suit states.

“More disturbingly, Defendants’ promotional campaign was themed on Levaquin’s excellent safety profile and failed to disclose the risks of tendon injury,” the complaint says.

After world-wide studies revealed the tendon risks to Levaquin users, the defendants updated their label for the antibiotic, the plaintiffs claim. However, the new warning only included information about the risks to people who were on corticosteroid therapy and contained no warnings about risks to the elderly, according to the complaint.

“Accordingly, despite the 2002 label change, Levaquin prescriptions only increased and tendon injuries mounted,” the suit states.

Other European countries began discussing the requirement of heightened label change as early as 2001, and collaborated with Johnson and Johnson PRD to perform a study on the antibiotic’s effects, the complaint says.

The plaintiffs claim that Johnson and Johnson PRD, however, only analyzed achilles tendon ruptures in its study and did not assess the risk of Levaquin tendon toxicity. In addition, Johnson and Johnson PRD created an algorithm that excluded nearly 70 percent of health claims for the elderly who suffered Achilles tendon rupture, according to the complaint.

“The algorithm used CPT procedure codes that only related to surgical repair,” the suit states. “This algorithm thereby excluded all those Achilles tendon rupture cases where the patient was casted or booted, as is the case in the elderly population. By manipulating the data, Defendant Johnson and Johnson PRD was able to exclude the very group that was prone to tendon rupture.”

As a result, the Johnson and Johnson PRD study found no increased risk of achilles tendon rupture and found neither age nor corticosteroid use altered the findings, the complaint says.

As a result, the Levaquin label was not changed as had been recommended.

Because the defendants issued no warnings to doctors, physicians continued to prescribe the antibiotic, the plaintiffs claim.

However, Levaquin was responsible for 1,044 reports of tendon injuries and 282 reports of tendon ruptures from 1997 through 2005, according to the complaint.

Injuries continued to soar as Levaquin’s popularity increased, the suit states.

Even the Illinois attorney general took notice and in 2005 submitted a petition to the FDA requesting that a black box warning be placed on the antibiotic’s label, the complaint says.

Although the black box warning was not been placed on Levaquin’s packaging, a revised label was placed on the antibiotic in April 2007. However, the plaintiffs say the label continued to bury warning about tendon risks and did not contain a warning about Levaquin’s greater association with tendon toxicity as compared to other fluoroquinlones.

Finally, in July 2008, a revised Levaquin label contained a black box warning, but still fails to warn about its higher risk of tendon toxicity compared to other similar antibiotics, according to the complaint.

In the 10-count suit, the plaintiffs allege strict liability, negligence, breach of implied warranties, breach of express warranty, common law fraud, violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act, unjust enrichment, breach of warranty and failure to warn.

Johnson and Johnson and its subsidiary, Ortho-McNeil, are named as defendants because they test and manufacture Levaquin. Walgreens sold the plaintiffs the drug, the suit states.

The plaintiffs are seeking actual and compensatory damages, plus costs, pre- and post-judgment interest and other relief the court deems just.

By: Kelly Holleran

Source: www.madisonrecord.vom