We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.
  • SKIP TO CONTENT
  • SKIP NAVIGATION
  • Drug Products
    • Books
    • FDAnews Books Library
    • Events
    • Form 483s Database
    • Subscription Newsletters
    • Free Newsletters
    • Webinar Training Pass
    • eCFR and Guidances
  • Device Products
    • Books
    • FDAnews Books Library
    • Events
    • Form 483s Database
    • Subscription Newsletters
    • Free Newsletters
    • Webinar Training Pass
    • eCFR and Guidances
  • Clinical Products
  • Advertising
  • White Papers
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • COVID-19
  • Sign In
  • Create Account
  • Sign Out
  • My Account
Home » Court Sides With Merck in Second Case Over Fosamax

Court Sides With Merck in Second Case Over Fosamax

November 24, 2009

A federal court has dismissed allegations that Merck’s osteoporosis drug Fosamax causes jaw bone destruction, two months after declaring a mistrial in a similar suit involving Fosamax liability.

In granting summary judgment, Judge John Keenan of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York said an expert witness for plaintiff Bessie Flemings was unqualified and that Flemings failed to otherwise prove her case, according to the opinion. He called the lawsuit “the second of three bellwether trials in a multi-district products liability litigation concerning the osteoporosis drug Fosamax.”

Flemings was seeking damages for alleged jaw and dental problems she experienced after taking Fosamax (alendronate sodium). The drug’s labeling notes that osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ), typically associated with tooth extraction or local infection, has been reported in patients taking bisphosphonates such as Fosamax.

Flemings and her family physician, Walter Rose, claimed she developed ONJ in 2006 after taking the product for severe osteoporosis, according to the District Court opinion. But the judge says that Rose’s opinion is derived from a “subjective belief” rather than from scientific knowledge and that he is not qualified as an expert under Rule 702 and his opinion is inadmissible.

Specifically, the judge said Rose did not explain whether his theory that Flemings’ ONJ would heal when she stopped taking Fosamax had been tested, peer reviewed and published, and whether it was generally accepted in the scientific community.

Flemings also offered no evidence to support her claim, Paul Strain, outside counsel for Merck, says in a statement. “Unfortunately, Ms. Flemings had medical problems that cause people to develop jaw problems regardless of whether they were taking Fosamax,” he adds.

The first bellwether lawsuit to go to trial ended in to a mistrial in September after the jury failed to reach a verdict. That case, Boles v. Merck, also alleged that Fosamax caused deterioration of the plaintiff’s jaw (DID, Sept. 14). The second case was Flemings v. Merck & Co., Inc., for which the In re: Fosamax Products Liability Litigation opinion was filed Nov. 23.

The third bellwether case, Maley v. Merck, is set to go to trial April 12, 2010, according to a recent statement by Merck. As of Sept. 30, about 953 Fosamax liability cases had been filed by an estimated 1,334 plaintiff groups in state or federal courts, according to the statement. — Meg Bryant

Upcoming Events

  • 10Mar

    FDA Drug GMP Facility Inspections During the Pandemic

  • 16Mar

    Pharmaceutical Naming Regulation: Understanding the Latest Developments

  • 18Mar

    Pharmaceutical Postmarket Surveillance: Latest Developments in the Era of COVID-19

  • 23Mar

    Data Integrity for GCP Professionals: Core Requirements, Expectations and Challenges

  • 30Mar

    Data Integrity for GMP/Postmarket Professionals: Core Requirements, Expectations and Challenges

  • 06Apr

    Medical Device Cybersecurity: Understand the Latest Developments

Featured Products

  • Biological Risk Evaluation and Management for Medical Devices

  • GMP Inspection Preparation Checklist: A Tool for Internal Auditing

Featured Stories

  • FDA clears text

    Vetex Medical’s Thrombectomy Catheter Cleared by FDA

  • 100Bills_flatmoney.gif

    Merck Purchases Rights to Debiopharm’s Xevinapant for More Than $1 Billion

  • abbott-logo.gif

    Abbott Gets FDA EUA for COVID-19 IgG Antibody Test

  • 100Bills_flatmoney.gif

    In $1.55 Billion Deal, Perrigo Sells Off Generic Drug Business

The Revised ICH E8: A Guide to New Clinical Trial Requirements

Learn More
  • Drug Products
    • Quality
    • Regulatory Affairs
    • GMPs
    • Inspections and Audits
    • Postmarket Safety
    • Submissions and Approvals
    • Research and Development
    • Commercial Operations
  • Device Products
    • Quality
    • Regulatory Affairs
    • QSR
    • Inspections and Audits
    • Postmarket Safety
    • Submissions and Approvals
    • Research and Development
    • Commercial Operations
  • Clinical Products
    • Trial Design
    • Data Integrity
    • GCP
    • Inspections and Audits
    • Transparency
  • Privacy Policy
  • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Footer Logo

300 N. Washington St., Suite 200, Falls Church, VA 22046, USA

Phone 703.538.7600 – Fax 703.538.7676 – Toll free 888.838.5578

Copyright © 2021. All Rights Reserved. Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing