Preview Newsletter
Ethicon Media Monitoring 5/25/2017
-
Jury Readies To Mull 4th Philly Pelvic Mesh Case
May 24, 2017 | Law 360
By Dan Packel
A Philadelphia jury will begin deliberating Thursday whether a Johnson & Johnson unit is liable for a Pennsylvania woman's pain and inability to have sexual intercourse, after three consecutive eight-figure jury verdicts against the company in lawsuits over allegedly defective pelvic mesh. -
Senate Bill Restricts Gifts From Big Pharma
May 24, 2017 | Mesh Medical Device Newsdesk
A bill just passed the California state Senate that restricts Big Pharma gifts to medical professionals, with the goal of reducing conflicts of interest. -
This Federal Judge Is the King of Backlogs—But He’s Not the Only One
May 24, 2017 | The Am Law Litigation Daily
By Jenna Greene
... It's not his fault—he's overseeing the massive pelvic mesh MDL in the Southern District of West Virginia. Four other judges also had more than 1,000 cases..
Client Attorney Privileged/Attorney Work Product/At Request of Counsel
Online Sources
-
Jury Readies To Mull 4th Philly Pelvic Mesh Case
May 24, 2017 | Law 360
By Dan Packel
A Philadelphia jury will begin deliberating Thursday whether a Johnson & Johnson unit is liable for a Pennsylvania woman's pain and inability to have sexual intercourse, after three consecutive eight-figure jury verdicts against the company in lawsuits over allegedly defective pelvic mesh.
Kline & Specter PC attorney Tom Kline told a jury in closing argument Wednesday that J&J subsidiary Ethicon Inc. ignored the risks of its Prolift mesh product in its rush to get it on the market, and that plaintiff Sharon Beltz bore the costs of the company’s recklessness.
Beltz had the product implanted in 2006, one year after it was released. Ethicon stopped selling the mesh in 2012.
“It was on the market for seven years, and she is one of the casualties. It ended in 2012, other than the people who stockpiled this monstrous product,” Kline said. “But for Sharon Beltz, then 34, there was and is no turning back.”
Kline assailed Ethicon attorneys for bringing in just one live witness during the two-week trial and relying on “stale” depositions from 2012 and 2013.
He accused the company of hastily introducing Prolift in 2005 in order to preserve its market share when faced with a new product from a rival. He said that by August 2006, it knew the implant had a 26 percent rate of painful shrinkage among recipients and that by the time it was removed from the market, it had a 42 percent rate of dyspareunia, or painful sex.
Kline reminded jurors of the invasiveness of the polypropylene mesh, reiterating evidence introduced during testimony that if unspooled, Beltz’s implant would extend 780 feet, or more than two and a half football fields.
And he quoted harsh testimony from defense expert Dr. Michael Margolis, a urogynecologist who categorized Prolift as a “surgical grenade — something you put in, pull the pin and you get a result forever.”
Kline also pushed for punitive damages — which have been awarded in the first three Philadelphia trials — informing the newest jury to sit in judgment that J&J has a net worth of over $70 billion.
Beck Redden LLP attorney Kat Gallagher, arguing for Ethicon, called out the “drama and antics” of Belt’s counsel, asserting that the company had provided adequate warnings and that Prolift was not defective.
She noted that Beltz was facing serious complications from pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence following four pregnancies.
“This was not a minor quality-of-life issue. This was a big problem for her and she wanted to have something done,” she said. “She decides after weighing her risks and benefits that she wants to go forward.”
Gallagher urged the jurors to weigh the questionnaire Beltz completed after discussions with her implanting urogynecologist, Dr. Heather van Raalte, in which she acknowledged the risks of the procedure, as well as a consent form before the surgery.
“She was willing to accept all of these risks. You can look at these forms.” Gallagher said. “Consider that evidence rather than what her lawyers are telling you happened 11 years later.”
Gallagher also sought to refute evidence from Beltz’s witnesses that safer alternatives to Prolift existed and suggested that after Van Raalte performed a follow-up procedure, Beltz’s pain was mitigated until after a 2011 surgery that used a different, non-Prolift mesh to treat a new prolapse.
“Prolift was a doctor-designed, doctor-developed and doctor-tested medical device,” she concluded. “Ethicon didn’t design this product in a boardroom. It went out to experts and asked them how to make it.”
Litigation over Ethicon mesh products in Philadelphia has resulted in several hefty verdicts against the company, including a $12.5 million award in December 2015 in the first case to go to trial, a $13.5 million award in a second case in February 2016 and a $20 million award handed down late last month.
The trial in a fifth case began on Tuesday.
The case is being presented for Beltz by Tom Kline of Kline & Specter LLP.
The case is being presented for J&J by Kat Gallagher of Beck Redden LLP.
The case is Beltz v. Ethicon Women’s Health and Urology et al., case number 130603835, in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas.
--Editing by Breda Lund.https://www.law360.com/articles/927779/jury-readies-to-mull-4th-philly-pelvic-mesh-case
-
Senate Bill Restricts Gifts From Big Pharma
May 24, 2017 | Mesh Medical Device Newsdesk
Mesh Medical Device News Desk, May 24, 2017 ~ A bill just passed the California state Senate that restricts Big Pharma gifts to medical professionals, with the goal of reducing conflicts of interest.
SB 790 severely restricts pharmaceutical companies from providing consulting fees, entertainment, flights, speaking fees, all of which can make the recipient beholden to the provider. The motives and potential conflicts of interest were not studied.
The measure was sponsored by California State Sen. Mike McGuire who cited a University of California, San Francisco study that found the perks make doctors two to three times more likely to prescribe costly brand-name drugs over generics.
That study was published in JAMA Internal Medicine last year.
Using the U.S. Open Payment database, established under the Sunshine Act, it matched Medicare prescribing with more than 276,000 doctors, using means as the criteria.
They found when a generic drug was available for three cardiovascular drugs and one antidepressant, docs who received even one meal provided by industry, some of a value under $20, prescribed the brand- name drug.
Another study published by Harvard Medical School came to the same conclusion – that Massachusetts doctors would prescribe a brand-name drug over a generic when there were gifts involved.
In the Mass study, among the 2,444 physicians in the Medicare database, more than one-third (36.8%) received industry payments in the form most commonly of company-sponsored meals.
The independent journalism group, ProPublica, also found, in the case of statins, a drug to treat high cholesterol, prescriptions increased by 0.1 percent for every $1,000 of industry-spend money.
Since statins cost anywhere from two to four times the cost of generics, those numbers can really add up for drug makers.
All of this is occurring at a time when the U.S. is trying to rein in the cost of prescription drugs.
Big Pharma says it provides value in speaking programs that promote physician education.
SB 790 limits the amount drug makers could spend on a meal to $250.
Massachusetts passed a similar bill in that state curtailing speaking fees and travel, but pressure from restaurants had that state loosening the meal restriction.
Minnesota and Vermont both cap gifts and food at $50 per year. Speaking fees are allowed but they must be “reasonable” and for “bonafide” educational purposes.
California physicians receive more pharmaceutical gifts and payments than doctors in any other state, according to the senator’s office, taking in $1.4 billion in 2014.
SB 790 is opposed by industry groups including PhRMA.
SB 790 will move to the California Assembly.
Learn More:
University of California San Francisco study on industry gifts.
JAMA May 2016, Harvard
http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/article-abstract/2520680ProPublica survey May, 2016
https://www.propublica.org/article/another-study-finds-link-between-pharma-money-and-brand-name-prescribingUniversity of California, San Francisco, August 2016
http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/article-abstract/2528290http://www.meshmedicaldevicenewsdesk.com/senate-bill-restricts-gifts-big-pharma/
-
This Federal Judge Is the King of Backlogs—But He’s Not the Only One
May 24, 2017 | The Am Law Litigation Daily
By Jenna Greene
Poor U.S. District Judge Joseph Goodwin. The West Virginia judge had the biggest backlog of any federal judge in the country, with 20,139 cases pending for more than three years, according to a new report. Who else is in the slow lane?
Access to full text unavailable – subscription required. For full story:
http://www.litigationdaily.com/id=1202787430472/This-Federal-Judge-Is-the-King-of-BacklogsBut-Hes-Not-the-Only-One?slreturn=20170425021327
Client Attorney Privileged/Attorney Work Product/At Request of Counsel
Online Sources
Add recipients
Suggested