Double whammy for Merck in Vioxx case

Merck stocks have fallen sharply after the pharmaceutical manufacturer lost one Vioxx law suit in New Orleans to the tune of US$51m and had a second favourable verdict overturned in a New Jersey court.

A unanimous eight-man jury in New Orleans, USA, rendered a $51,000,000 verdict against Merck & Co Inc in a lawsuit arising out of Gerald Barnett's use of Vioxx.

Barnett, a 62 year-old retired special agent of the FBI, took Vioxx continuously for approximately 55 months for pain from osteoarthritis. While taking the drug, he suffered from blood pressure spikes and rapid progression of atherosclerosis, culminating in a heart attack on September 6, 2002.

As a result of his heart attack, Barnett underwent five-way bypass surgery and has suffered a re-occlusion of his vein grafts, requiring him to undergo angioplasty and stent placement in July 2006.

Vioxx is a drug known to cause an increase in cardiovascular events and was withdrawn from the market in September 2004 after Merck's study APPROVe showed more cardiovascular events on Vioxx as compared to placebo. Evidence also shows that Vioxx can accelerate the progression of atherosclerosis, leading to serious heart disease.

In this lawsuit, Barnett sought compensatory damages proximately caused by his injuries, and alleged that Merck should be held liable because it placed Vioxx on the market with inadequate warnings. In addition, Barnett claimed that Merck deceived his physicians by concealing the safety and effectiveness of Vioxx.

In another court in New Jersey, a judge threw out a Vioxx verdict that had previously favored Merck, citing new evidence.