Invokana Lawsuit Filed Over Right Leg Amputation

|

Although plaintiffs claim Johnson & Johnson knew or should have known about the amputation risks from Invokana, a recently filed product liability lawsuit alleges that the drug maker withheld warnings from consumers and the medical community, causing a Louisiana woman to lose her right leg. 

Josefa Sarmiento filed the complaint (PDF) late last month in the U.S. District Court of the District of New Jersey, naming Johnson & Johnson and it’s Janssen Pharmaceuticals subsidiary as defendants.

According to the lawsuit, Sarmiento began taking Invokana for the treatment of diabetes in 2015, However, in March 2017 she had her right leg amputated above the knee, which she indicates was caused by side effects of Invokana.

Sports-Betting-Addiction-Lawsuits
Sports-Betting-Addiction-Lawsuits

Invokana (canagliflozin) was introduced in March 2013, as the first member of a new generation of diabetes drugs, known as sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, which works in a unique way by impacting some normal kidney functions. Other members of this class include Invokamet, Jardiance, Farxiga, Xigduo and others, but Invokana has remained the biggest seller, amid aggressive marketing.

In May 2017, just two months after Sarmiento’s surgery to remove her right leg, the FDA required an Invokana warning update regarding the risk of leg and foot amputation, which manufacturers of other similar diabetes drugs claim is a unique risk with Invokana.

The lawsuit claims that the manufacturers hid the risks for years, putting patients at unnecessary risk of amputations.

“Plaintiff’s injuries were preventable and resulted directly from Defendants’ failure and refusal to conduct proper safety studies, failure to properly assess and publicize alarming safety signals, suppression of information revealing serious and life-threatening risks, willful and wanton failure to provide adequate instructions, and willful misrepresentations concerning the nature and safety of Invokana,” the lawsuit states. “Their conduct and the product defects were substantial factors in bringing about the Plaintiff’s injuries.”

Sarmiento’s complaint will be consolidated with other Invokana lawsuits pending in the federal court system, which are currently consolidated for pretrial proceedings before one judge in New Jersey.

Following coordinated discovery and any bellwether trials held to help gauge how juries may respond to certain evidence and testimony that is likely to be repeated throughout the litigation, if Invokana settlements or another resolution for the claims is not reached, Boren’s case and hundreds of others may later be remanded back to U.S. District Courts nationwide for individual trial dates.

Written by: Irvin Jackson

Senior Legal Journalist & Contributing Editor

Irvin Jackson is a senior investigative reporter at AboutLawsuits.com with more than 30 years of experience covering mass tort litigation, environmental policy, and consumer safety. He previously served as Associate Editor at Inside the EPA and contributes original reporting on product liability lawsuits, regulatory failures, and nationwide litigation trends.

Image Credit: |test caption



0 Comments


This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Share Your Comments

This field is hidden when viewing the form
I authorize the above comments be posted on this page
Post Comment
Weekly Digest Opt-In

Want your comments reviewed by a lawyer?

To have an attorney review your comments and contact you about a potential case, provide your contact information below. This will not be published.

NOTE: Providing information for review by an attorney does not form an attorney-client relationship.

MORE TOP STORIES

Ocaliva, promoted as a treatment to prevent liver injury, has been recalled following reports of high rates of liver damage and patient deaths.
Women are sharing alarming reports of pain, infections, and reconstruction failures caused by internal bra mesh implants like GalaFLEX, as the FDA confirms these devices were never approved for breast surgery and lawsuits now allege manufacturers failed to warn about the risks.