Pfizer Sets Aside $772M To Pay For Prempro Suits
2 CommentsBy Ed Silverman // May 13th, 2011 // 7:42 am
In the latest indication that Pfizer hopes to resolve burgeoning litigation over its Prempro hormone replacement therapy, the drugmaker has now set aside a total of $772 million to cover an estimated 8,000 cases in federal and state courts around the country, according to a filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission.
Specifically, Pfizer recently placed $300 million in reserves on top of $172 million in the first quarter of the year and another $300 million in previous quarters (see page 57 of the filing). The drugmaker disclosed that about one-third of all Prempro lawsuits have been resolved, suggesting another 3,000 or more remain in various dockets.
Of course, the reserves could go still higher; Pfizer notes the set asides cover “the minimum expected costs to resolve all of the other outstanding hormone-replacement therapy actions.” A big clump of lawsuits - roughly 2,200 - were recently settled for a reported $330 million (see this).
For those who may not recall, the litigation stems from charges that Prempro and simliar meds caused thousands of women to develop breast cancer. The drugs were widely used, though, until a 2002 study by the Women’s Health Initiative, which was sponsored by the National Institutes of Health, highlighted a link.
“We are pleased to see Pfizer finally accept responsibility for the injuries this drug caused to women and hope the company will compensate each woman fairly and reasonably,” Zoe Littlepage, a lawyer who serves as lead counsel for Prempro patients whose lawsuits are being heard in Arkansas, tells Bloomberg News.
For those keeping score, Pfizer has lost eight of 15 Prempro cases that were decided by juries since trials began five years ago. However, Pfizer has succeeded in having some verdicts tossed after a trial or had awards reduced. Some verdicts, meanwhile, were settled and some are on appeal. Pfizer also won dismissals of more than 3,000 cases before these went to trial.
think pink pic thx to sca on flickr
ellen
Is anyone connecting the dots between this brilliant marketing strategy—of combining in one package 60-70 year old hormones—and its touted strategists: Hassan/Essner/Cox? Regardless of small benefits versus greater risks? Their fingerprints are on this drug’s dubious marketing as well many other endeavors. Think Redux, Celebrex. . .
Each and all have moved on to bright futures unclouded by the drawbacks of their big ideas. Essner teaches the glories of his strategic vision at Columbia University and is a consultant on healthcare strategy at the Carlyle Group. Hassan has forged an even more promising path. And Cox is a professional board member with little of substance to support such fiduciary trust.
Pfizer shareholders, not to mention Merck’s, have reason to question the deals that left them with such outcomes.
Again, doesn’t anyone see a pattern?
Insider
Dear Ellen, I worked for Fred and his team actually trained us as to what would be illegal in the marketing of Celebrex and Bextra. WHen we brought that to the attention of Pfizer managers, they laughed at us and stated Pharmacia did not know what they were talking about. THen the Pfizer managers went on to train us exactly what Fred’s people said would be grounds for immediate termination and also train us to use off-label material to market Celebred and Bextra. Some of us refused and we were all fired even after we testified before an internal investigation with all sorts of written documentation supporting the illegal marketing. Covington and Burling had copies of all the illegal documents and did nothing much with it.