A US jury has found that pharmaceuticals giant Merck failed to warn Vioxx users of the drug's heart risks and ordered it to pay a plaintiff (77) at least $4.5 million in compensation.
The jury determined that the company knew or should have known that its pain drug increased the risk of heart attacks and other cardiovascular events but did not adequately warn users or their doctors.
In a split decision, the jury said Vioxx had been a substantial contributing cause of a heart attack suffered by 77-year-old plaintiff John McDarby but determined that the drug was not a significant cause of a heart attack suffered by a second plaintiff, Thomas Cona.
Both men blamed the drug for their attacks.
Merck was also found to have misrepresented and concealed the heart risks of Vioxx when marketing the drug to doctors.
However, the jury found that Merck did not commit consumer fraud in its efforts to sell the drug. Jurors awarded $4.5 million in compensatory damages to Mr McDarby but nothing to Mr Cona.
Shares of the drugmaker fell 3 per cent in after-hours trade.
Merck voluntarily pulled the $2.5 billion a year drug from the market in September 2004 after a study showed it doubled the risk of heart attack and stroke among people who used it for at least 18 months.
Since then, the drugmaker has been hit with nearly 10,000 Vioxx-related lawsuits.