New Jersey jury says Merck told medical community about Vioxx benefits, risks

Orthopedics Today chief medical editor claims ongoing litigation is slowing vital research on risks.

A New Jersey jury recently ruled in favor of Merck & Co. in a Vioxx-related lawsuit.

The panel rejected a patient's claim that using Vioxx for 3 years caused her to suffer a heart attack, and found that Merck acted “responsibly” in informing the medical community about the drug’s risks and benefits.

The July 13 verdict was the third win for Merck in four New Jersey cases, according to a Merck statement. It was the seventh Vioxx trial. Merck is the focus of more than 9,600 suits.

“Merck is pleased with the jury verdict,” Merck senior vice president and general counsel Kenneth C. Frazier said in a company news release. “Today's outcome reinforces our commitment to defend these cases on a case-by-case basis.”

The plaintiff, Elaine Doherty of Lawrenceville, N.J., alleged taking 25 mg of Vioxx daily from June 2001 to January 2004, when she suffered a heart attack. She reportedly continued taking Vioxx until Merck voluntarily withdrew it from the market in September 2004, according to the Merck statement.

Legal logjam

Vioxx-related litigation is slowing the process of studying risk factors and patient selection, said Douglas W. Jackson, MD, chief medical editor of Orthopedics Today.

“COX-2 inhibitors as a class of drugs hold significant promise,” Jackson told Orthopedics Today. “We need to know more about specific risk factors in selecting the patients that would benefit from its use. It is unfortunate the court system is deciding the viability of this drug and slowing the scientific studies we need to make future decisions.”

Jackson noted how Vioxx relieved pain in patients suffering from symptomatic degenerative arthritis and postoperative pain.

“The population that benefited most from the drug was an older population,” Jackson said. “In this population, there is cardiovascular disease and cerebral vascular disease. It appears certain patients with hypertension and underlying risks for heart attacks and strokes had an increased incidence of problems with the drug.”

Ongoing court battles

In March, a New Jersey appeals court ruled that a nationwide class-action lawsuit against Merck should proceed. The decision opened the door for private health insurers and other plaintiffs to recoup billions of dollars they spent on Vioxx. Merck attorneys vowed to appeal the ruling to the New Jersey State Supreme Court.

In April, a New Jersey jury awarded $13.5 million in damages to one plaintiff and rejected another plaintiff’s claim.

A federal jury in New Orleans ruled in favor of Merck in February, ending the first federal Vioxx trial. The win was Merck's second overall. Last December, a trial in Houston ended in a deadlock. The retrial began in early February.

Also in December, the New England Journal of Medicine reported that Merck withheld data on three patients who suffered heart attacks while taking Vioxx. Merck officials denied the omissions.

For more information:
Merck Wins New Jersey VIOXX Product Liability Case. Available at merck.com/newsroom/press_releases/corporate/2006_0713.html
Also see “New Jersey court says class action Vioxx lawsuit should proceed” in Orthopedics Today, May 2006 issue (page 7). Articles are also available at our Web site: OrthoSuperSite.com