Viagra Melanoma Case Filed By Man Who Had Skin Removed From Cheek

With the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) scheduled to hear oral arguments later this month over whether to centralize and consolidate all Viagra melanoma lawsuits, new cases continue to be filed throughout the federal court system. 

In one complaint (PDF) filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on March 3, plaintiff Terrence Hayes indicates that he developed the serious and deadly form of skin cancer after using Viagra for more than two years.

The lawsuit raises similar allegations to those presented in dozens of other cases filed in recent months, indicating that Pfizer has failed to adequately warn about the potential side effects of Viagra.

Hayes notes that he was prescribed Viagra for treatment erectile dysfunction in January 2013, and continued to use it until June 2015. However, in March 2015, Hayes had a biopsy performed on a skin lesion on his left cheek, which was subsequently diagnosed as superficial spreading malignant melanoma, which the complaint blames on use of Viagra.

In April 2015, a surgeon performed a wide local excision of Hayes’ left cheek to remove the malignancy. However, Hayes indicates that he must remain vigilant in monitoring for the cancer’s return for the rest of his life.

Viagra Melanoma Risks

Viagra (sildenafil citrate) was introduced by Pfizer in 1998, and it has become one of the most widely recognized brand-name medications on the market in the United States, used by millions of men to treat impotence and sexual dysfunction, including the inability to develop or maintain an erection.

Since its approval, Viagra has been prescribed to an estimated 35 million men, and is generally considered safe by most consumers. However, recent studies suggest that the medication may reduced the body’s ability to resist the spread of melanoma.

The Viagra melanoma cases have been filed in courts nationwide since a study was published in the medical journal JAMA Internal Medicine in April 2014, in which researchers from Harvard Medical School found that men who took Viagra were 84% more likely to be diagnosed with melanoma than men who do not use the drug.

Plaintiffs allege that Pfizer knew or should have known about the link between Viagra and melanoma for years before this, indicating that studies published as early as 2011 suggested that the erectile dysfunction drug may promote melanoma cell invasion. Another study published in the Journal of Cell Biochemistry in 2012 also found that PDE5 inhibitors like Viagra could exacerbate melanoma development.

Like many other Viagra cases, Hayes’ complaint notes that erectile dysfunction is not a life-threatening illness, and that it’s treatment through Viagra is not worth the risk of a potentially fatal form of skin cancer.

“At the time Viagra was formulated and manufactured, Pfizer knew or should have known that the drug posed a significantly heightened risk to users, specifically through increased likelihood that those users would develop melanoma because of the chemical reactions inherent to the drug’s functioning,” the lawsuit states. “The risk presented by the use of Viagra through PDE5 inhibition – a characteristic inherent to the drug’s potential efficacy – was unquestionably far more significant than the benefit provided to its users.

Centralization of Viagra Cancer Litigation

With a growing number of Viagra cases filed in U.S. District Courts nationwide, a motion was filed with the U.S. JPML late last year, seeking to centralize the complaints before one judge for coordinated discovery and pretrial proceedings.

Pfizer has responded to the motion, indicating that it agrees that all Viagra lawsuits over melanoma should be consolidated to reduce duplicative discovery into common issues, avoid conflicting pretrial rulings from different courts and to serve the convenience of the parties, witnesses and the courts.

While few objections have been raised to the call for a federal MDL, or multidistrict litigation, to be established, the U.S. JPML is scheduled to consider the motion during an upcoming hearing session scheduled for March 31, at the U.S. Bankruptcy Court Federal Building in Santa Barbara, California.

One of the preliminary considerations that will be evaluated by the panel are whether there are a sufficient number of Viagra cases pending, or likely to be filed, to justify the coordinated proceedings. If the Viagra MDL is established, the MDL panel will determine what is the most appropriate forum for the cases and just to preside over the coordinated proceedings.

While such centralized litigation is often confused with a Viagra class action lawsuit, each case will remain an individual claim. Following discovery into common discovery and potential bellwether trials, which are designed to help gauge how juries may respond to certain evidence and testimony that is likely to be repeated throughout the cases, if Pfizer fails to reach Viagra settlements for men with melanoma cases or otherwise resolve the litigation, each lawsuit may ultimately be remanded back to the U.S. District Court where it was originally filed for an individual trial date.