iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Johnson & Johnson Subsidiary Hid Risks Associated With Risperdal, Drug That Made Company Billions

By CHUCK BARTELS 04/10/12 07:05 PM ET AP

Johnson And Johnson Risperdal Risks

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. -- A Johnson & Johnson subsidiary downplayed and hid risks associated with the antipsychotic drug Risperdal, a jury determined Tuesday in Arkansas' billion-dollar lawsuit against Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel's office is seeking fines of at least $1.2 billion for the 250,000 Risperdal prescriptions the state's Medicaid program paid for over 3 1/2 years. The penalty will be decided in a separate hearing Wednesday before Circuit Judge Tim Fox, who presided over the trial.

Risperdal, introduced in 1994, is a "second-generation" antipsychotic drug that earned Johnson & Johnson billions of dollars in sales before generic versions became available years ago. It is used to treat schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and irritability in autism patients. Risperdal and similar antipsychotic drugs have been linked to increased risk of strokes and death in elderly dementia patients, seizures, weight gain and diabetes.

The 12-person jury returned its verdict after about three hours of deliberations. Jurors, who heard 10 days of testimony, weren't told about the financial stakes, beyond that Janssen could have seen a $200 million swing in its revenues if it issued alarming warnings that the drug could cause weight gain, diabetes and other health effects. The award would go toward the state's Medicaid fund.

Janssen and Johnson & Johnson face dozens of similar lawsuits in federal court and in other states.

McDaniel said he pursued the case to protect consumers from "fraud and deceptive trade practices."

"Today, an Arkansas jury confirmed that Johnson & Johnson and Janssen Pharmaceuticals lied to patients and doctors because they cared more about profits than people," McDaniel said in a news release after the verdict was announced.

Jansen maintained that it did not break the law, pointing out that the package insert included with the medication was approved the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The company can appeal to the Arkansas Supreme Court, though it didn't immediately indicate whether it would do so.

"Janssen firmly believes it did not violate the Arkansas Medicaid Fraud False Claims Act or the Arkansas consumer fraud statute. ... It is our position that an individual state should not penalize a pharmaceutical company for using an FDA-approved package insert or decide for itself whether a company complies with FDA rules," the company said in a statement Tuesday.

In closing arguments, attorney Fletch Trammell, a Houston lawyer hired by McDaniel's office to handle the suit, told jurors that Janssen lied to doctors, saying the drug didn't cause weight gain, diabetes and other adverse health effects.

"The law is broken once they tell a lie," Trammell said.

He explained that the FDA ordered Janssen to issue a letter to doctors correcting an earlier letter saying the drug didn't increase the risk of developing diabetes.

Janssen attorney James Simpson argued that neither McDaniel's office nor the state Medicaid office issued any warning to doctors that Risperdal carried greater risks than believed. He also noted that even after the lawsuit was filed, the state continued to pay for Risperdal prescriptions.

"That doesn't make any sense," Simpson said. "They never restricted a single ... Risperdal prescription."

Simpson also questioned why the state didn't have any testimony from doctors complaining about how the company disclosed the drug's side effects.

Trammell said any action the state did or did not take regarding Risperdal wasn't a concern for the jury. He said it is up to drug companies to notify doctors of any problems with a medication and that companies are obligated to act before the FDA gets involved.

"You have to ring the bell. You have to tell the public," Trammell said.

He cited instances in which patients gained 60 or 100 pounds, leading to diabetes.

Trammell said the rural nature of Arkansas makes it more important for drug companies to keep doctors informed. People outside of cities often rely on primary care doctors rather than specialists, he said, and non-specialists in mental health were prescribing the drug without knowing the full range of side effects.

Other states that have sued over Risperdal include Texas, which reached a $158 million settlement with Janssen in January but did not admit fault. Texas had sought damages of about $1 billion. In December, a South Carolina judge upheld a $327 million civil penalty against Johnson & Johnson.

Jurors in Arkansas had a set of 10 questions to decide – five regarding Janssen and five for its Johnson & Johnson parent company. The jury ruled in favor of the state on all 10 questions. Only nine votes were needed to reach a decision on any question. Several of the decisions were split 11-1 or 10-2.


CORRECTION: A headline elsewhere on the site erroneously stated that a fine had already been levied against the drug company. The attorney general is merely seeking fines of $1.2 billion.
FOLLOW BUSINESS

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. -- A Johnson & Johnson subsidiary downplayed and hid risks associated with the antipsychotic drug Risperdal, a jury determined Tuesday in Arkansas' billion-dollar lawsuit against Jan...
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. -- A Johnson & Johnson subsidiary downplayed and hid risks associated with the antipsychotic drug Risperdal, a jury determined Tuesday in Arkansas' billion-dollar lawsuit against Jan...
Filed by Jillian Berman  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 292
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (10 total)
03:47 PM on 04/13/2012
Here's a good summary of the FDA adverse event data on Risperdal: http://www.adverse-effects.org/drugs/32973-risperdal
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dropthedh
Skeptic
01:59 PM on 04/12/2012
Looks like the traffic on my street will be getting lighter after Janssen shuts its doors.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:45 AM on 04/12/2012
And this is a surprise? Listen, if we all cleaned our colons out we would have much less need for big pharma or drs.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
antipodal2u
Just say NO to hypocrisy
10:39 AM on 04/12/2012
Yet another pharma-poison/corruption example. People wonder why marijuana is illegal?
01:31 PM on 04/12/2012
Yea, go figure...at least with weed you get a natural substance that helps with sleep, mild pain, mood stabilizer, etc.
10:38 AM on 04/12/2012
What's a billion dollar fine to big PHARMA........chicken feed that's what. Until some of them are sent to jail, they'll never stop pushing drugs on trusting people that foolishly fall for the FDA's "approval".
10:16 AM on 04/12/2012
That doesnt surprise me even in the least.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
standup11
Some people just never learn.
09:59 AM on 04/12/2012
Big Pharma no longer does extensive testing on new drugs as they once (claimed) they did. The FDA now approves drugs they probably should not. It's amazing how many new drugs come on to the market and we latter find out about terrible side effects. Don't expect your doctor or pharmacist to inform you about the side effects either. You have to do the research on your own. Too often the side effects far outweigh the benefits. Chemicals in food, water and prescription drugs are slowly killing too many people or making them very sick. I've found a few more natural alternatives to some meds I used to take. I urge others to do the same. The information on prescription drugs and alternatives is out there, it pays to get informed.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sanfran55
11:45 AM on 04/12/2012
Agree - and physicians are not transparent about the financial incentives they are given to prescribe certain expensive drugs.
09:51 AM on 04/12/2012
The only people who don't realize how harmful psychiatric drugs can be are the psychiatrists. They've been prescribing these poisonous antipsychotics to kids for their made-up behavioral problems.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sanfran55
11:47 AM on 04/12/2012
Absolutely, and Risperdal has been prescribed "off label" to young children to counter act the side effects of other drugs taken for ADHD - even though its original approval was for adult schizophrenics. Madness, but it always comes down to money, doesn't it?
08:11 PM on 04/14/2012
You said that right and many other MDs.
crakrman79
Like broken clockwork he's right twice a day!
09:43 AM on 04/12/2012
Each and every substance we put into our bodies has a side effect from food to aspirin. However in the case of medication it is neccesary for the pharm company to explain not only the benefits but the side effects as well to the Drs so that they can make the best possible decisions for each patient. The whole point of clinical trials is to discover these side effects for the Drs.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
onionboy
Blessed are the Cheese Makers
12:37 PM on 04/12/2012
In this case...they didn't. The next big egg to crack is the refusal to publish results. That needs to end.
09:23 AM on 04/12/2012
If the fines levied were equal to the profits illegally made, we might not be reading these stories as often. The game is rigged. The FDA actually relies on drug companies to provide studies for the drugs they're supposed to approve.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Carl Caroli
I just don't understand people
08:43 AM on 04/12/2012
Profits over people, as always. Most prescription drugs have potential side effects that are as dangerous as the problem they are trying to solve. Short of antibiotics and pain killers, you can keep them all as far as I'm concerned.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sanfran55
11:50 AM on 04/12/2012
So many of these studies are directly or indirectly influenced by the drug companies, and in the US, there are billions of dollars to be made. Profits over people is right on target.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:38 AM on 04/12/2012
The problem with fines is that they are just passed on to the consumer as a cost of doing business. Send these jokers to jail.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sanfran55
11:51 AM on 04/12/2012
I put these people in the same category as the banksters and lenders who sold bad loans to vulnerable people - and we need to demand jail time.
08:29 AM on 04/12/2012
And the GOP thinks they need LESS regulation?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aneesia
09:06 AM on 04/12/2012
Excellent point. Less regulation=more disabilities and more death.
08:27 AM on 04/12/2012
This is no surprise. The FDA is a sham organization paid by the entities they are to regulate. They have been allowing us to be poisoned for decades in our food and our drugs. Just look at the rejection of BPA ban. They don't work for us they work for the companies who poison us to make a buck or I should say billions of bucks.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Thinking Conservative
To err is human to forgive is not my policy
08:19 AM on 04/12/2012
We should also have a sanity check of the FDA . . . . . who is flying paper airplanes when they should be doing followups on drug trials?