The lawsuit (case number 6:14-cv-01159) was filed by Blue Cross in the District Court, Western District of Louisiana and seeks damages for injuries caused by the use of Actos in Blue Cross patients.“As a result of the defective nature of ACTOS, persons who were prescribed and ingested ACTOS for more than twelve (12) months, including Plaintiffs’ insured, have suffered and may continue to suffer from bladder cancer,” the court documents state (capitals in original).
The lawsuit alleges that defendants “concealed and continue to conceal their knowledge that ACTOS can cause bladder cancer from Plaintiffs’ insured, other consumers, and the medical community.” Furthermore, the lawsuit alleges that Takeda has still not provided adequate warnings about the risk of using Actos for more than 12 months. This, Blue Cross alleges, has resulted in and will continue to result in its insured patients suffering from various injuries.
The lawsuit notes that a two-year study of Actos on rats showed drug-induced tumors in the male rats. It further alleges that a three-year study in humans, called PROactive (Prospective Pioglitazaone Clinical Trial in Macrovascular Events), showed a higher percentage of bladder cancer in patients who received Actos compared with similar drugs, but that this information was not included in a publicized account of the trial.
READ MORE ACTOS SIDE EFFECTS LEGAL NEWS
Meanwhile, the French Medicines Agency has reportedly suspended use of Actos until a review of the drug is complete.
Blue Cross alleges Takeda knew or should have known about the risk associated with Actos but promoted the drug as safe and effective. The insurer further claims that there are safer products available on the market for patients, but because of Takeda’s alleged actions, patients and doctors could not have known about the risks.
“The information Defendants disseminated to physicians concerning ACTOS drug products was, in fact, inaccurate, misleading, and otherwise inadequate,” the plaintiffs claim.
READER COMMENTS
Alex
on
lina perez calvento
on
In Los Angeles, I was diagnosed with Cardio Vascular disease, I had extremities edema and gained a lot of weight. [The doctor] referred me for eye surgery for macro severe eyes problems.I underwent on both eyes surgery. My blood pressure and blood sugar were very erratic. I could hardly walk, due to edema, on all my extremities. And [the Dr.] diagnosed me with Cardio Vascular disease.I had difficulty breathing I was her patient about two months. and I moved to Sacramento.
In Sacramento, I became the patient of [another doctor], and he changed the Actos pills to Avandia, I was taking this for about 4 to 5 months. I became severely swollen all over the body, difficulty breathing.
I became a Kaiser Permanente member patient In my first visit I was diagnosed with Congested heart failure/ I had fluid in my lungs this was removed about two huge coca-cola bottle of fluid was suctioned out. About two weeks later I fainted and admitted into the Kaiser ICU /
for about 9 days, for CHF/EDEMA. In 2009 I had quadruple open heart surgery. Today I have CHF and #5 Kidney failure. Recently I had bloody smelly discharge my bladder is painful my Kaiser MD's are trying to find out the cause and be able to make a diagnoses. At this point I do not know any diagnosis yet. But I am 80 and in pain and suffering.
My lawyer for the Avandia injury,after effects has settled my claim for $ 28.000/00. Basing this on my taking Avandia pills for less than 6 months.
Disregarded that I had all the diagnosis of the Pre-Existing diseases, eye problem and cardeo-Vascular diseases, Edema of extremities. Which was diagnosed by the Kaiser Clinic on my first visit/
They say they did not claim any Actos injury for I did not have a diagnosis of bladder cancer.
But they forgot I took Actos prescribed for 5 years and 6 months. and had all the diagnosis of Cardeo Vascular Disease, weight gain and edema of all my extremities and macro-severe problems and had surgery on both eyes. Before I took Avandia.
I need an expert legal team to study my pre-existing diagnosed diseases and injuries. Caused by Actos.
[1] latency length of time of after effects to manifest the harm done to the internal organs., of a human being.
[2] By Actos ? pre-existing before prescribed of Avandia ?
[3] And how are this after effects separated ?
[4] The injury was pre-existing caused by Actos.is diagnosed ?
[6] The pre-existing disease , caused by actos and is aggravated by taking Avandia for less than six months?
[7] Is Actos still liable for the pre-existing injuries, after taking prescribed Actos for more than 5 years and 6 months ? with diagnoses relating to injuries after affects of Actos ?
If a team of expert medical scientific studies proof and evidence of documented research and laboratory test findings .
And a team of Legal experts of statue of limitations that can argue on the "Hansen" Claims shall accrue on date of the injury is discovered." in May 1978.113 Wis.2d.550,335,N.W. 2d 578[1983]
And by the none information and or none warnings to ignorant people like me that is covered by the consumer protection laws. For bad drug companies paying for profits in complete disregard pf all the laws for the safety of consumers.
When all these scientific studies and legal documents as proof and evidence are explained step by step. And are.
Put together and properly presented to the Court, can surely defeat any defense argument by any bad drug defendant.
Your opinion and recommendation are greatly appreciated.