Eliquis Gastronintestinal Bleeding Injury Results in Lawsuit Against Drug Makers
A product liability lawsuit filed by a California woman indicates that she suffered severe gastrointestinal bleeding from Eliquis side effects, as well as an ischemic stroke, which was allegedly caused by the drug makers failure to adequately warn about the risk of uncontrollable bleeding problems associated with the controversial new-generation anticoagulant.
The complaint (PDF) was filed earlier this month by Carmen Flores in Delaware Superior Court, indicating that Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer, Inc. withheld important safety information from consumers and the medical community, which may have allowed Flores to avoid the severe gastrointestinal bleeding injury from Eliquis.
Eliquis is part of a controversial new crop of oral anticoagulants introduced in recent years, known as factor xa medications, which also include the blockbuster treatments Xarelto and Pradaxa. The drugs have been aggressively marketed as a replacement for Coumadin (warfarin), which has been the go-to anticoagulation treatment for decades.
Did You Know?
Millions of Philips CPAP Machines Recalled
Philips DreamStation, CPAP and BiPAP machines sold in recent years may pose a risk of cancer, lung damage and other injuries.Learn More
While the medication has been promoted as easier to use than warfarin, a large number of bleeding problems caused by Eliquis have been reported, since there was no safe and effective reversal agent available at the time the drug was introduced.
Flores indicates that her doctors prescribed Eliquis for the prevention of stroke due to atrial fibrillation. However, in February 2015, she suffered an ischemic stroke and severe gastrointestinal bleeding, which the lawsuit indicates was due to the side effects of Eliquis and the lack of a reversal agent.
Although the blood thinning effects of warfarin can be quickly reversed if hemorrhaging occurs, there was no antidote for Eliquis available for doctors treating Flores.
The case joins a growing number of similar Eliquis bleeding lawsuits being filed in courts nationwide, which raise common allegations that the drug makers knew or should have known about the risks associated with the medication, yet failed to provide the important safety information to users and doctors.
“The U.S. label approved when the drug was first marketed in the U.S. and at the time Plaintiff was using in 2014 it did not contain an adequate warning regarding the lack of antidote, and the significance of that problem for patients who began to bleed,” the lawsuit states. “After the drug was approved by the FDA, Defendants engaged in an aggressive marketing campaign for Eliquis, including extensive marketing directly to the public, via TV and print.”
Amid an increasing number of cases filed in courts nationwide, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer filed a request in October with the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) last month, seeking to transfer all Eliquis failure to warn cases to one judge for coordinated discovery and pretrial proceedings, suggesting that the number of complaints is likely to continue to increase over the coming weeks and months.
The JPML heard oral arguments on January 26, and last week decided that a multidistrict litigation (MDL) should be established for the Eliquis lawsuits.
Similar MDL proceedings have previously been established for all Pradaxa lawsuits and Xarelto lawsuits, which raised similar allegations about the same risks associated with these other new generation anticoagulants, which hit the market before Eliquis and were previously bigger sellers.
Following several years of litigation over the failure to warn about the bleeding risk with Pradaxa, which was the first member of this class of drugs to hit the market, Boehringer Ingelheim agreed to pay $650 million in Pradaxa settlements to resolve about 4,000 cases in 2014.
The Xarelto litigation is currently centralized in the federal court system, where about 15,000 complaints are pending before U.S. District Judge Eldon Fallon in the Eastern District of Louisiana. A series of early “bellwether” trials are expected to begin early next year, which are designed to help the parties gauge how juries may respond to certain evidence and testimony that will be offered throughout the cases filed against Bayer Healthcare and Janssen Pharmaceuticals over their anticoagulant.
The Eliquis lawsuit filed by Flores will be transferred to the recently established MDL, where it is expected that a similar bellwether program will be established to help the parties gauge the relative strengths and weaknesses of their cases, and potentially facilitate Eliquis settlements in the future.
annaAugust 29, 2017 at 11:58 pm
my husband is a heart transplant patient and has been taken Plavix now for 2 years.his doctor is going to change Plavix to Eliquis.are these lawsuits real>?I need to know.i've been taking Praxda for a year now and no internal bleeding.i already had two strokes from my past but not because of a blood thinner.
ElizabethMarch 15, 2017 at 10:34 pm
Read that plavix and Eliquois should not be taken together. Can any one give me advice on this ,I have both prescribed
MarieMarch 1, 2017 at 12:45 am
My husband just had a Gastrointestional Bleed last week he was hospitalized for 3 days, scope were ran down his throat and into his esophagus, and into his stomach, it was found to be bleeding from his stomach, he also had a Colonoscopy. He has taken Plavix for 15 plus years.
LucyFebruary 26, 2017 at 12:43 am
I have just started to taking eliquis and I am very concerned about bleeding, especially since seeing that is a big side affect. And also chance of stroke.
"*" indicates required fields
More Top Stories
More than 775 Exactech lawsuits have been filed in federal and state courts as parties work toward a plan for bellwether early test trials.
A federal judge has announced he will soon begin remanding 3M earplug lawsuits back to their originating districts for trials over claims of veteran hearing loss.
Lawyers are working to register and file Philips CPAP lawsuits, as the manufacturer may argue the June 14 anniversary of a massive recall triggered the start of the statute of limitations in certain states