Clogged Logic: Johnson&Johnson Admits in Court Stents are Unsafe

Greenwood, DEA well-known medical products manufacturer has told a federal judge in Delaware that its Cypher stent can cause blood clots. This admission under oath flies in the face of the company's continued public stance that the Cypher stent, which is coated with a drug, is safe.

According to a story appearing today in the New York Times, the unusual and outrageous admission was used as a legal manoeuvre in defence against a claim by Boston Scientific that Johnson&Johnson was guilty of patent infringement.

At stake are billions of dollars worth of profit in a huge medical products sector.

While Johnson&Johnson has been in the stent business since 1988 after licensing and marketing a bare-metal mesh stent, Boston Scientific introduced its Taxus line of drug-coated stents in April of 2004, and sales took off. Easily eclipsing Cypher on the way up the profit ladder, Taxus achieved $2 billion dollars in sales in its first year alone in the United States. That holds the record for the biggest debut for a health-care product.

A stent is a small device designed to keep arteries open and free flowing after blockages have been removed. The stakes are high. Since they went on the market in the United States, stent sales totalled $24 billion dollars, and have grown to a $6.5 billion dollar business worldwide. Profit margins can be as high as 80 percent.

Little wonder that the major players are in court, slugging it out over patents and issues surrounding jurisdiction.

It is in the courtroom that the revelation of safety came out.

Boston Scientific is claiming that Johnson&Johnson infringed on their patent with J & J's Cypher drug-coated stent. The fortified stent is all the rage, with stents coated with anti-inflammatory compounds and other drugs thought to enhance performance and safety.

However, in court, Johnson&Johnson claimed that recent medical studies linked the company's Cypher drug-coated stent to blood clots. Their claim, therefore, is paraphrased this way: 'as the Johnson&Johnson Cypher stent isn't safe, and the Boston Scientific Taxus stent IS safe, then there cannot be a patent infringement, as one product is safe and the other poses a risk.'

Curious. In making this legal claim in an effort to win its case, Johnson&Johnson appears to have shot itself in the foot when it comes to any public posturing over the inherent safety of its Cypher stent.

One has to wonder what patients who have had Cypher stents implanted, think of this? And the potential for litigation against Johnson&Johnson, regardless of the outcome of this case, in the wake of the company's admission.

Our product has been linked to blood clots.

In their own words, too.