Merck was victorious yesterday in the second trial over injury claims on its withdrawn painkiller Vioxx, as a jury decided it was not liable for an Idaho man's heart attack.
Giving its verdict in a state court in Atlantic City, New Jersey, the jury decided 8-1 that the US drugmaker did not fail to warn of Vioxx's risks. This defeated claims by Frederick Humeston, a 60-year-old postal worker who said taking Vioxx for two months helped to cause his heart attack in 2001.
The jury also ruled unanimously that Merck had not defrauded consumers and had neither misrepresented nor intentionally concealed or suppressed Vioxx's heart risks.
The victory is the first good news in Merck's attempts to fend off a wave of litigation over Vioxx. The group withdrew the controversial anti-inflammatory drug a year ago after finding the medicine, used by possibly 70 million patients, increased heart risks.
Merck needed a win to bolster its strategy that the scientific evidence was on its side, and on the strength of that it would fight each case. It lost the first trial in August when a Texas jury awarded a widow $253 million (€210 million) in damages, likely to be reduced to $26 million due to state law.
The group faces at least 6,400 lawsuits over Vioxx. Substantial trial losses could leave Merck facing billions of dollars in liability. The first case in federal court is to begin November 28th.
Merck's shares rose 3.85 per cent to $29.48 in New York. - (Financial Times Service)
