Plaintiffs in three bellwether trials involving bleeding risks with the blood thinner Xarelto that resulted in wins for the defendants have asked an appeals court to vacate the decisions arguing that the judge overseeing the trials improperly excluded key evidence and gave jurors incorrect instructions, The National Law Journal reported.
The cases were the first three to go to trial among more than 20,000 pending in a multidistrict litigation in the Eastern District of Louisiana. Plaintiffs accuse Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen Pharmaceuticals and Bayer of not adequately warning of the risks involved with using Xarelto, including bleeding risks like gastrointestinal bleeds and brain bleeds. Plaintiffs have argued, among other things, that the drug companies failed to instruct doctors that patients could get a blood test to assess their risk of bleeding while taking Xarelto.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs argued that jurors in the trials were not allowed to hear evidence that the safety label of Xarelto in other countries – like Canada and New Zealand – acknowledge the blood test assessment. They also argued that jurors in the third trial were never informed about new evidence of a study conducted by Bayer scientists that reported that the blood test “probably would have changed the outcome of trial if it had been available for presentation to the jury before the evidence was closed.”
Another 1,700 Xarelto lawsuits are pending in Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, where plaintiffs attorneys plan to appeal reversal of a $28 million verdict. The second trial is currently underway.
Source: National Law Journal