This week, Pfizer, which recently acquired Wyeth, the makers of the hormone replacement therapies (HRT) Prempro and Premarin, were hit with more than $100 million in two punitive-damage awards from Philadelphia juries. The two plaintiffs, Connie Barton and Donna Kendall, claimed the drugs caused their breast cancer.

The evidence was startling. Plaintiffs attorneys proved that Wyeth launched a massive campaign to push the benefits of its HRT drugs to doctors and the general public while knowingly dismissing or downplaying other institutes’ data that revealed an increased risk of breast cancer with the use of combination hormone therapy. The company went to such lengths as to hire ghostwriters to write articles for reputable medical journals that minimized the breast cancer risk and exaggerated the benefits of HRT.

It wasn’t until the government-initiated Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) that everything changed. WHI was a 15-year study launched in 1991 that aimed to address the most common causes of death, disability and poor quality of life in postmenopausal women, including cardiovascular disease, cancer and osteoporosis. In 2002, WHI halted the estrogen-plus-progestin trial after investigators found that the associated health risks of the combined hormone therapy out weighted the benefits. The 2002 report showed there was a 24 percent increase in the risk for breast cancer due to estrogen-plus-progestin HRT.

Since then, more than 10,000 other product liability suits have been filed over the HRT drugs in across the country, 1,500 of which have been filed in the Philadelphia court. Many of the cases are filed in Philadelphia because Wyeth’s headquarters were located there.

“Wyeth had no concern whatsoever for the health of the patients. They were only concerned about their profits,” says Michael Richmond, a jury foreperson in a Prempro trial.

Sales of Prempro and Premarin exceeded $2 billion a year before 2002. Last year, $1.4 billion in estrogen drugs and $400 million in estrogen-progestin combination drugs were sold in the United States.

More Information
HRT Jury Verdict Chart

Sources:
Beasley Allen Law Firm
New York Times

SOURCE: Hormone Replacement Therapy › Two breast cancer survivors awarded $100 million in HRT lawsuits

According to court documents, ghostwriters for Wyeth wrote 26 articles that appeared in 18 different medical journals between 1998 and 2005 emphasizing that hormones protect against osteoporosis, heart disease and dementia and down-playing the risks. In 2001, Wyeth benefited by reaping nearly $2 billion in sales of its HRT drugs Premarin and Prempro, making them among of the most prescribed drugs in the U.S.

But at what cost did Wyeth benefit?

In 2002, the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI), a research initiative initiated by the National Institutes of Health to look into some of the major health problems of older women, was abruptly halted after researchers found that menopausal women who took certain hormones had an increased risk of invasive breast cancer, heart disease and stroke. One of the thousands of victims is Geraldyne Frambs of Sacramento, Calif.

In the mid-1980s, Frambs was prescribed and began taking HRT. In 2003, she was diagnosed with breast cancer. Now she wants justice. This week, attorney Ted G. Meadows with Beasley Allen Law Firm filed a lawsuit on behalf of Frambs against Wyeth Inc., Weyth Pharmaceuticals Inc., Pharmacia & Upjohn Company LLC, Pharmacia Corporation, Pharmacia & UpJohn LLC, Greenstone Ltd, Barr Laboratories Inc., Barr Pharmaceuticals and ESO Lederle Inc.

The lawsuit alleges that the cancer, subsequent surgery, treatment, injury and damage to Frambs were caused by her use of HRT. The complaint alleges that the defendants were negligent by not assuring that their products did not cause users to suffer from foreseeable unreasonably dangerous side effects and serious health problems, and that they should have known the serious risks women were put under by using drugs that were defective at the time of production. Furthermore, the complaint alleges that the defendants willfully deceived the plaintiff by concealing the true facts concerning the hormone therapy drugs, which the defendants, as manufacturers, marketers and distributors of the products, had a duty to disclose to the plaintiff.

The lawsuit seeks recovery of all monies the plaintiff paid for the products; to be compensated for the cost of medical care as a result of the use of the products including past medical expenses, wage loss, pain, suffering, disability and emotional distress.

Read Frambs’ complaint: Frambs v Wyeth (HRT Lawsuit)

Sources:
New York Times
Beasley Allen

SOURCE: Hormone Replacement Therapy › Wyeth paid ghostwriters to sway doctors to prescribe HRT