A Hollywood Star And An Accutane Lawsuit
7 CommentsBy Ed Silverman // August 2nd, 2010 // 8:52 am
The usual interaction between Hollywood and the pharmaceutical industry takes place when a celebrity endorses a drug. Roche, for instance, has successfully employed Sally Fields to promote its Boniva med for osteoporosis. Now, though, Roche is about to encounter a Hollywood experience of an entirely different sort - James Marshall, who played a US Marine in the 1992 hit film ‘A Few Good Men,’ claims his acting career was derailed after he used the Accutane acne pill and developed inflammatory bowel disease. His colon was subsequently removed and he is suing the drugmaker for $11 million.
His trial starts this week in a New Jersey courtroom and the spectacle is likely to cause a side effect of its own - attention on product liability litigation in ways that previous lawsuits have not generated. How so? For all of the thousands of such lawsuits filed against drugmakers in recent years, the featured plaintiffs were, basically, John Doe or Jane Doe - ordinary people whose ordinary lives were allegedly disrupted by the use of a medication. Rarely, were their trials covered in the media. And even when this happened in a big way - such as the first few Vioxx lawsuits - these people faded back into oblivion, regardless of the outcome.
Marshall, however, was a star. And reports say the New Jersey-bred pretty boy will rely on testimony from even biggers names - Martin Sheen, Brian Dennehy and Rob Reiner. His Hollywood pals are expected to testify that Marshall, 43, was headed for stardom before his ailments upended his career. “The jury will hear that James Marshall had the potential to be the next James Dean-like star,” Marshall’s lawyer, Michael Hook, tells Bloomberg News. “That dream is gone because he took something to treat acne.”
At issue is whether Roche properly warned its drug, which has also been linked to psychiatric side effects and birth defects, could cause IBD (see this). Thousands of lawsuits have been filed against the drugmaker, which maintains proper warnings were issued and that “the science to this date questions whether such a link exists,” a Roche spokesman tells Bloomberg (see a list of lawsuits).
The drug, which lost patent protection in 2002, was once a huge seller and Roche continued to market its pill until last year, after losing several IBD cases - Roche has lost all seven Accutane cases and was ordered to pay at least $45 million in damages, according to Bloomberg (background here and here). However, Roche has won dismissals of Accutane cases filed in federal court and challenged state court verdicts by asking judges to throw them out or filing appeals.
This legal activity, however, has largely occurred off the collective radar screen. Now, though, the prospect of one Hollywood headliner after another taking the stand in Atlantic City, New Jersey, may just attract television cameras, celebrity bloggers and countless Tweeters - further underscoring the contentious debate over side effects and proper disclosure just as several other large drugmakers are scampering to settle thousands of lawsuits as quickly as possible (see here and here). Might Roche do the same?
Justice in MI
I’m essentially illiterate about “Hollywood stars,” but their misfortune, misfortunately, does seem to bring attention to issues about which there should already have been no shortage of attention.
This itself is an illness of sorts, but I don’t think there is a pharmaceutical solution.
Nancy Winlove-Smith
This is a tragic consequence for James Marshall. I hope other young people will consider the fact that not all drugs are produced to “help” you. Quite the opposite,(Elvis Presley and Michael Jackson may they rest in peace). Pharmaceutical companies have positioned themselves in every situation where there may be a patient that feels compromised without consideration as to where the boundaries are. Young people are particularly vulnerable. The fear of losing competitive edge because your “face” may not make the grade should not be an opportunity to provide something that is potentially life altering. Given the options; a full disclosure as to what the potential side effects were or advanced video editing, I sure Mr. Marshall could have made a educated informed decision.
ol cranky
I’m going to play devil’s advocate here. If James Marshall was prescribed and used accutane as clinically appropriate, one would have to assume he had extremely severe acne. Knowing Hollywood, one has to wonder what Mr. James’ star potential would have been had he not treated his severe acne because (much to Nancy’s and my chagrin) you do lose an extraordinary degree of competitive edge because your face does not make the grade. Some stars have had bad skin that make up artists have been able to cover up but the degree of severity needed to qualify for a prescription to accutane would be quite an impediment to the successful hollywood career Mr. James was allegedly on the cusp of. In other words, absent treatment, would he have qualified as the “pretty-boy” to be the next James Dean-like star?
Christopher
It is a shame when anyone’s career is derailed. I imagine that acting is probably amongst the highest risk:reward professions and that many promising actors unfortunately fail to make it. Justifying whether or not Mr Marshall would have made James Dean-like status will prove daunting, given all the other reasons that can kibosh a promising acting career. My money’s on Roche, unless Charlie Sheen’s giving out autographs.
pharmavet
I’m with Christopher. According to Imdb.com, Marshall has made 34 movies in 25 years, not bad for even a healthy actor, let alone one with IBD. With one or two exceptions he has made at least one movie/year since 1985. Many healthy actors would like that track record. My money’s on Roche, too.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0550929/
HMI Motorcycle Watcher
Roche goes through great lengths to cover up its criminal negligence in research. Beyond just stating side effects on the label, they blatantly hide fatal side effects of drugs in the pipeline to ensure the drug will be released, and in order to protect their massive investments. An ex-worker of Roche told me that they were appalled that one of their drugs had severe GI side effects but they were pushing it through the pipeline anyways. This was not Accutane but a different drug. Even more, they will hire hit men to silence or even kill dissenters.
NCC
I’ve created a comprehensive research report about Accutane’s history and pharmacology. Click on my link below and go to yousendit.com to download it as a PDF file.
https://www.yousendit.com/download/YWhPQ3Q2UEM1bmhFQlE9PQ
My research provides insight into why the side effects of Accutane can persist for a really long time after people stop taking it. Hoffmann-La Roche explicitly states in the Physician’s Desk Reference that they don’t know how Accutane works or how it causes an incredibly long list of side effects, but I believe that they do know. I also believe that through my research I have discovered Accutane’s true mechanism of action that Roche has been keeping secret from the public. My research dossier exposes the truth about Accutane, presents the scientific evidence, and is going to enlighten everybody about this drug’s history and pharmacology and the latent long-term effects it has on the body which will lead to more independent research being conducted to elucidate the cause of the side effects.
Not very many people know the full story behind Accutane and everything that’s happened with it. My report is going to change that. I’m in the process of building a case to identify exactly the type of damage Accutane causes to the human body down at the cellular level and when I do, the damage will be identifiable in everybody that has taken Accutane. Some of my ideas about Accutane and vitamin A are exclusive and cutting edge, nobody else in the world has ever discussed this topic as in-depth as I have in my research report.