Pharmaceutical Litigation Attorneys
Pharmaceutical Litigation
Helping the Injured Seek Justice and Financial Compensation.

Plavix

WE ARE NO LONGER ACCEPTING PLAVIX CASES

Plavix lawsuit doctor with prescription

PLAVIX LAWSUIT attorneys

Plavix® is taken to reduce the risk of heart attack or stroke. The anticoagulant medication, active ingredient clopidogrel, is recommended for patients who have recently suffered a heart attack or stroke, as well as those with certain heart or blood vessel conditions. Napoli Shkolnik a national law firm specializing in Pharmaceutical Claims of bad drugs.

Manufactured by Bristol-Myers Squibb, Plavix®, especially when taken with other blood thinning medications, can increase a patient’s likelihood of sustaining severe harm and death.

Plavix Attorneys

Over the last couple of years, there has been a lot of stories, lawsuits, and studies about the negative effects of Plavix. Commonly known in scientific circles as clopidogrel bisulfate, Plavix is a drug often prescribed to people with certain cardiovascular and blood vessel disorders. However, the life-threatening risks of the drug led countless Plavix victims to join the Plavix lawsuit after experiencing serious injuries due to this blood-thinning treatment.

Plavix Origin and Use

Did you know that about 735,000 Americans have a heart attack every year? And, the number continues to rise if we take into account other injuries to the heart, also known as cardiac events.

Millions of people in the United States suffer from heart disease and cardiac injuries that often have a fatal outcome. In order to prevent another cardiac event in the future, patients are prescribed the proper medical treatments to minimize the risk of further heart problems, and one of the most commonly prescribed solutions is a drug known as Plavix.

Since it was first approved by the FDA in 1997, Plavix was regularly prescribed to people with a higher risk of cardiovascular issues such as strokes or heart attacks. The Bristol-Myers Squibb medication soon became the top-selling drug on the market and made about $7 billion in sales over a decade of popularity.

Nevertheless, the good luck of Plavix eventually ran out and its sales dropped in 2012 after evidence showed that the drug caused a variety of health problems for thousands of its users. Approximately 2,000 injured parties gathered in the Plavix lawsuit, some of which had suffered from heavy internal bleeding and others from severe bleeding after an ordinary cut.

To make the matter worse, a number of plaintiffs had sustained significant brain injuries or died during the Plavix treatment.

The greatest danger of taking Plavix is the risk of severe bleeding. According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s medication guide for Plavix.

Plavix can cause bleeding which can be serious and can sometimes lead to death.

In addition to just bleeding though, Plavix has also been associated with:

●       Cerebral bleeding

●       Gastrointestinal bleeding

●       Internal bleeding

●       Bone Marrow Damage

●       Recurrent ulcers

●       Heart attacks

●       Strokes

●       Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Purpura (TTP)

●       Death

 

WHEN A DEFECTIVE DRUG CAUSES PATIENT HARM

Medications that are taken to improve a patient’s health and quality of life should do just that; when a medication is defective, putting a patient and undue risk of harm and serious health complications, someone needs to be held liable. Because Plavix was defectively designed, and may carry greater risks than benefits to a patient, Bristol-Myers Squibb may be held liable for damages.

 

man presenting Plavix lawsuit

 

ABOUT THE PLAVIX CASE

The safety of Plavix has been questioned for a while now. In fact, The New England Journal of Medicine published a study in 2005 that confirmed that users of Plavix have a higher rate of developing ulcers, internal bleeding, hemorrhages, strokes, and other serious conditions than patients who took other forms of medication.

The following year, another study startled the community as the journal proved once again that Plavix combined with aspirin offered no additional benefits to taking aspirin alone. These findings encouraged FDA’s warning in 2009 and 2010, stating that Plavix may have a reduced effectiveness for certain patients.

All of these claims began to unravel when Hawaii officials filed a suit against Bristol-Myers and their Sanofi partners in 2014. In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs claimed both companies failed to disclose the lack of Plavix’s effectiveness on 30% of the population, as well as the risks of gastrointestinal bleeding.

This course of action inspired the chain of lawsuits, once the New Jersey federal judge reinstated a Plavix whistleblower lawsuit after U.S. Supreme Court ruled that there is a basis for liability in such cases.

Plavix Lawsuit Side-Effects

Plavix has been linked to harmful side effects such as abdominal pain, chest pain, pneumonia, irregular heartbeat, headaches, and inflammations. However, Plavix’s most sinister effects include:

●       Cerebral bleeding

●       Gastrointestinal bleeding

●       Internal bleeding

●       Bone Marrow Damage

●       Recurrent ulcers

●       Heart attacks

●       Strokes

●       Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Purpura (TTP)

●       Death

Plavix Lawsuit Update

This June, the Supreme Court of California made a final ruling and stated that California Supreme Court doesn’t have the jurisdiction to oversee a case involving out-of-state plaintiffs. In other words, 575 of Plavix victims are left wondering what this means for their cases.

But the only hope to finally put a stop to Plavix is by joining forces as the Supreme Court opinion closes by offering specific options in which legislation could proceed in spite of the court’s decision:

“Our decision does not prevent the California and other out-of-state plaintiffs from joining together in a consolidated action in the States that have general jurisdiction over BMS. …. Alternatively, the plaintiffs who are residents of a particular State—for example, the 92 plaintiffs from Texas and the 71 from Ohio—could probably sue together in their home States. In addition, since our decision concerns the due process limits on the exercise of specific jurisdiction by a State, we leave open the question whether the Fifth Amendment imposes the same restrictions on the exercise of personal jurisdiction by a federal court.”

WE ARE NO LONGER ACCEPTING PLAVIX CASES