Healthy Skepticism Library item: 11479

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

Publication type: news

Kershaw S.
New York State and City Sue Merck Over Vioxx
New York Times 2007 Sep 18
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/18/health/18vioxx.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Full text:

Seeking to recoup tens of millions spent by government-financed health programs on prescriptions for Vioxx, New York State and New York City joined yesterday in filing a lawsuit against Merck, the drug’s maker, which withdrew the painkiller from the market in 2004 because of dangerous side effects.

The lawsuit, filed yesterday in State Supreme Court in Manhattan, accuses Merck & Company of intentionally concealing the dangers of Vioxx, and therefore defrauding the state Medicaid program, which paid for the prescriptions. The drug was used to treat arthritis and migraines but led to a high risk of heart attacks and strokes.

Several other states have filed similar lawsuits against Merck – more than 25,000 suits have been brought so far – seeking reimbursement for taxpayer dollars spent on purchasing Vioxx and on treating patients for its side effects. The suits have focused on drug pricing and safety, involving both consumer and Medicaid fraud.

“Merck’s irresponsible and duplicitous conduct endangered the health of New Yorkers and wasted our tax dollars,” Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo said in a statement. “Even as evidence was piling up showing just how dangerous this drug was, Merck put profits above all else.”

New York was the seventh state – after Alaska, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Utah and Texas – to file suits seeking, essentially, a refund from Merck for Medicaid expenditures.

Between 1999, when Vioxx went on the market, and 2004 when it was withdrawn, Medicaid, the state insurance program for the poor, and the Elderly Pharmaceutical Insurance Program spent more than $100 million on prescriptions, state officials said.

If the manufacturer had informed doctors of the risks associated with Vioxx, they would not have prescribed the drug, according to the lawsuit.

Merck lawyers said that they were “vigorously defending” the Medicaid lawsuits, all of which are pending, and that New York’s allegations were unfounded.

“We are confident that our behavior has been responsible,” said Kent Jarrell, a spokesman for Merck’s legal defense team. “We believe that as a company, we have acted responsibly, from researching the drug prior to approval, to monitoring the drug while it was on the market and to voluntarily withdrawing the drug when we did.”

In 2004, New York City brought a federal lawsuit against 44 drug companies, including Merck, and their subsidiaries accusing them of overcharging the city’s Medicaid program by millions of dollars by inflating drug prices. That suit is pending, city officials said.