Archive for: 2007

Bayer Suspends Sales of Trasylol.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) today announced that, at the agency’s request, Bayer Pharmaceuticals Corp. has agreed to a marketing suspension of Trasylol, a drug used to control bleeding during heart surgery, pending detailed review of preliminary results from a Canadian study that suggested an increased risk for death. This Trasylol recall or marketing suspension follows two scientific studies confirming the serious dangers of the drug. The initial study, which was the largest worldwide Trasylol study ever conducted, was performed by Dr. Dennis Mangano, the same physician who warned the FDA two years ago about the serious side effects of Trasylol.

According to the Wall Street Journal, Bayer said its decision came in the wake of requests or orders from regulators in the U.S., Canada, Germany and other countries. Trasylol, which is supposed to reduce blood loss and allow patients undergoing heart-bypass surgery to avoid transfusions, is the third drug this year whose sale in the U.S. has been halted under scrutiny from the Food and Drug Administration, a signal of how the agency is weighing safety issues heavily in drug decisions.

Still, the history of Trasylol, which was approved in the U.S. in 1993 and has been tied to high-profile safety concerns at least since early 2006, is likely to draw questions from Congress and plaintiff attorneys. It took the FDA eight months to initiate the widespread recall after the physicians’ warnings. These delays in action have been estimated to cause the death of 1,000 patients each month. Bayer has been accused of withholding negative reports about Trasylol from the FDA in order to maintain profits.

TrasylolOn November 5, 2007 the FDA requested Bayer Pharmaceuticals Corp to suspend the further sale or use of the antibleeding drug called Trasylol, amid growing concerns and strong medical evidence that Trasylol may be linked to a higher risk of kidney and renal failures, heart attacks, stroke and death than other antibleeding drugs used during a cardiac bypass, heart catherization or other cardiac surgery or operations.

Trasylol (aprotinin), Bayer’s injectable drug used to prevent excessive blood loss during heart surgery, has produced distrubing results in a recent New England Journal of Medicine study. The New England Journal of Medicine, January 25, 2006, states that patients who were given Trasylol, compared with controls, had nearly double the risk of death, renal failure, or stroke and a more than 50% increased risk of heart attack. Trasylol also increases the risk of kidney damage and kidney failure. If you or a loved one have experienced complications after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) or coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG), or any serious surgery, you should contact your medical providers to determine if Trasylol was used during the procedure.

Speak to a Trasylol Lawyer

If you or a loved one has suffered a heart attack, heart damage, stroke or kidney failure after Trasylol was used during heart surgery, contact our law firm at once. It may be too late to recover from the debilitating effects of Trasylol, but an experienced product liability attorney can assist you in a legal action against the makers of Trasylol. You are not alone. Join other heart attack, heart damage, stroke and kidney failure victims in speaking up and fighting for their legal rights. You may be entitled to file a lawsuit for your pain and suffering, mental anguish, medical bills and other legal remedies and damages. Contact our law firm today.

By Evelyn Pringle – Countercurrents.org

A study of nearly 500,000 women by researchers at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, in the September 18, 2007, Annals of Internal Medicine, found that nearly 50% of women taking a prescription drug that could cause birth defects did not receive warnings to avoid pregnancy. The authors note that the pregnancy risks of a drug should be discussed with women before they begin taking it.

Experts say the seriousness of a life-threatening lung disorder found six times more often in infants born to mothers who take antidepressants during pregnancy is not being adequately conveyed to women while they are considering whether to use the drugs.

The disorder, persistent pulmonary hypertension (PPHN), occurs when a newborn does not adjust to breathing outside the womb. PPHN refers to high pressure in the lungs’ blood vessels which prevents the body’s oxygen-poor blood from entering the lungs to absorb oxygen, and leaves the infant with not enough oxygen into the bloodstream.

On July 19, 2006, the FDA ordered a PPHN warning for the labels of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressants (SSRI’s), based on a February 9, 2006 study in the New England Journal of Medicine, and issued a Public Health Advisory that stated:

“A recently published case-control study has shown that infants born to mothers who took selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI’s) after the 20th week of pregnancy were 6 times more likely to have persistent pulmonary hypertension (PPHN) than infants born to mothers who did not take antidepressants during pregnancy.”

Two week later on August 1, 2006, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologist issued a press release warning that the use of SSRI’s and selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRI’s) during pregnancy should be individualized based on their respective risks and benefits, and specifically warned that Paxil should be avoided due to the potential risk of fetal heart defects, PPHN and other negative effects.

SSRI’s sold in the US include Paxil marketed by GlaxoSmithKline, Prozac by Eli Lilly, Zoloft by Pfizer, and Celexa and Lexapro sold by Forest Laboratories, along with various generic versions of the drugs. The closely-related class of SNRI antidepressants also carry birth defects warnings and include Wyeth’s Effexor and Lilly’s Cymbalta.

In any given year in the US, at least eighty-thousand pregnant women are prescribed SSRI’s, according to a study in the May 2005, Journal of American Medical Association. The CDC recently reported that antidepressants were the most prescribed class of drugs in the country in 2005. The fact that the overall prescribing rate is higher than for any other drugs indicates that a large number of pregnant women may be taking antidepressants without knowledge of the risks to the unborn fetus.

Overall, respiratory failure affects nearly 80,000 newborns per year, and it is responsible for as many as half of all infant deaths. Nearly one-third of all newborns with respiratory failure are born at term or near-term, and are at risk for PPHN, according to the April 2007 article, “Pulmonary Hypertension, Persistent-Newborn,” by Dr Robin Steinhorn, head of the Division of Neonatology at Children’s Memorial Hospital in Chicago and Professor at Northwestern University Medical School, in eMedicine from WebMD.

Dr Steinhorn also notes that an increased incidence of PPHN is reported for mothers who use SSRI’s during the last half of their pregnancies.

As recently as 15 years ago, the reports says, the mortality rate for PPHN infants reached 40%, and the prevalence of major neurologic disability was 15-60%. However, the introduction of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and other new therapies has had a major effect on reducing the mortality rate, yet the prevalence of major neurologic disabilities among surviving newborns remains approximately 15-20%.

Dr Steinhorn reports that Glass and colleagues compared the neurodevelopmental outcome of 103 neonates following ECMO and 37 without ECMO at age 5 and states:

“Major disability, which was defined as mental disability, motor disability, sensorineural impairment, or seizure disorder, was present in 17 of children in whom ECMO had been used. The mean full-scale, verbal, and performance intelligence quotient (IQ) scores of children who received ECMO treatment were within the normal range; however, as a group, the scores were significantly lower than in children who had not had ECMO (96 vs 115).”

According to the report, infants who survive following ECMO have a higher rate of rehospitalization for nonpulmonary and surgical conditions, and the rate of sensorineural disabilities in infants who survive averages 6% and developmental delay occurs in 9%.

Because the prevalence of hearing loss is high, the report recommends that an automated hearing test should be administered before discharging the baby and hearing should be reassessed when he or she is 6-months-old and again, as the results indicate.

Dr Steinhorn also notes that an increased frequency of social problems, academic difficulties at school age and higher rates of attention deficit disorder are reported in children who received ECMO.

Although the actual FDA warning about PPHN was not added to the antidepressant labels until August 2006, the drug makers were well aware of the risk of this birth defect for more than a decade, due to a long and steady line of studies that linked the drugs to serious respiratory problems in newborns dating back to 1996.

A study in the October 3, 1996, New England Journal of Medicine, lead by Dr Christina Chambers of the Department of Pediatrics at the University of California-San Diego, reported that PPHN developed in 2.7% of a group of infants whose mothers took Prozac throughout their pregnancy.

From 1989 through 1995, the California Teratogen Information Service and Clinical Research Program received approximately 1,500 calls requesting information on the potential teratogenic effects of Prozac (fluoxetine), and an estimated one-third of the calls were made by pregnant women who were currently taking Prozac.

For their study, the researchers selected 228 of these women. Because they hypothesized that birth size, gestational age, and neonatal adaptation were influenced by exposure to Prozac late in pregnancy, the women were divided into two groups.

One group was referred to as the exposed-early group because the women discontinued Prozac in the first or second trimester, and another group was referred to as the exposed-late group because the women continued to take Prozac in the third trimester.

A third group of 254 pregnant women who called the same California Information Program between 1989 through 1995, but with questions about other drugs and procedures that were not considered teratogenic, was enrolled as a control group.

The researchers determined that 73 infants in the exposed-late group had higher rates of premature delivery, admissions to special care nurseries, and poor neonatal adaptation, including respiratory difficulty, cyanosis on feeding and jitteriness. Birth weight was also lower and birth length shorter in the exposed-late infants, they found.

The study authors noted their concern over the 15.5% incidence of three or more minor anomalies in some infants exposed to Prozac in early pregnancy. “The combination of any three minor anomalies in a single child is an unusual finding,” they wrote.

The 15.5 percent incidence, they said, indicates that exposure during the first trimester has an effect on embryonic development. “This finding raises the possibility of an associated defect in the development of the central nervous system that may become evident when the infant is older,” the authors wrote.

In January 1998, a study in the international journal of medical science and practice, The Lancet, explained that the lungs act as a reservoir for antidepressants and this study suggests that SSRI’s could play a pivotal role in infant respiratory conditions, such as PPHN. Another study, in the April 2002 Journal of Laboratory and Clinical Medicine, investigated the effects of SSRI’s on pulmonary circulation and found that SSRI’s affect the pulmonary smooth muscle cells and aggravate pulmonary hypertension.

In June 2004, a study in Prescrire International also reported that newborns exposed to SSRI’s toward the end of pregnancy showed signs of altered muscle tone, breathing and suction problems, and agitation, with an estimated 20% to 30% of the infants affected.

The next month, after receiving hundreds of adverse event reports over a decade, in July 2004, the FDA finally revised the labels for all SSRI’s and SNRI’s, warning that some newborns exposed to the drugs had developed problems requiring prolonged hospitalizations, respiratory support and tube feeding.

Less than a year later, a study in the May 2005 Journal of the American Medical Association reported that women who took SSRI’s or SNRI’s late in pregnancy were at a 3 times higher risk of giving birth to infants suffering from serious respiratory problems, jitteriness and irritability. Lead author, Dr Eydie Moses-Kolko, reported that serious respiratory problems developed in about one out of every 100 infants.

According to Dr David Healy, a leading expert on pharmacology and author of “The Antidepressant Era,” the doctors who prescribe SSRI’s are often not able to spend enough time with patients to discuss their emotional issues in depth. “For some doctors,” he notes, “SSRI’s may appear to provide a quick solution for patient problems arising from normal life events such as bereavement, work stress, or marital conflict.”

However, he says, a review of the actual SSRI studies shows that only one patient in 10 responds to these drugs, and he attributes the massive prescribing to successful marketing rather than benefits.

“Through educational and marketing campaigns,” Dr Healy says, “the SSRI makers have produced a situation where people who would never have been given an antidepressant in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, are now given one after cursory questioning by a physician.”

Another leading expert, Dr Peter Breggin, founder of The International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology (ICSPP), a nonprofit research and educational network, and the journal Ethical Human Sciences and Services, also says a thorough review of all the studies submitted to the FDA for the approval of the SSRI’s showed that, when taken as a whole, the drugs do not work.

Dr Breggin also agrees that the high rate of prescribing to women indicates that women who may be experiencing minor symptoms of distress common with daily living are being convinced that they have a mental illness that requires drugs, most frequently an SSRI.

Proponents for the drug makers claim that depression itself poses a greater risk to the fetus than SSRI’s. “The problem with this claim is that there is no consideration for the health of the baby and the immense stress a mother has to endure when her baby is sick,” states Kate Gillespie, a Paxil injury lawyer from the Baum Hedlund law firm.

“Not to mention, the far greater stress that is created by having to constantly deal with life and death health issues, like the respiratory problems of an infant, that are caused by SSRI-induced PPHN,” she adds.

“For these women,” Ms Gillespie says, “it is clear that the risks far outweigh any benefit.”

An August 2006 study in the Archives of General Psychiatry compared babies born to depressed mothers treated with SSRI’s to those born to mothers who were not treated, and found a significantly greater incidence of respiratory distress, 13.9% vs 7.8%, and longer hospital stays for the infants exposed to SSRI’s.

Another study, in the August 2007 American Journal of Psychiatry, examined the effects of depression and antidepressant use on fetal age and the risk of preterm birth with 90 women and found the drugs, rather than depression, to be associated with lower fetal age and an increased risk of preterm birth. The researchers noted that the presence of depression per se during pregnancy did not adversely affect outcomes.

According to Dr Breggin, SSRI’s should never be used during pregnancy. “If pregnant women feel anxious or sad,” he says, “they should seek counseling or family therapy involving the child’s father, along with other sources of emotional support.”

Speak to an SSRI Lawyer about an SSRI Birth Defect Lawsuit

If you took Prozac, fluoxetine, Zoloft, sertraline or any other SSRI antidepressant during pregnancy and your child was born with a birth defect, we encourage you to contact a Prozac litigation attorney at our law firm immediately. It may be too late to recover from the devastating effects of SSRI antidepressants, but an experienced products liability attorney at the Willis Law Firm can assist you in a legal action against the makers of the SSRI prescribed. You are not alone. Join other birth defect victims and their families in speaking up and fighting for your legal rights.

Please fill out our free online legal evaluation form and we will contact you within 24 hours. Please keep in mind that certain states have statutes of limitation that limit the amount of time you have to file a lawsuit or seek legal action. Contact our law firm immediately so that we may explain the rights and options available to you and your family.

6/27/07 - U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT

Pregnant women with depression often find themselves choosing between the lesser of two evils. Should they take antidepressants and risk the slight but real possibility of birth defects? Or should they forgo treatment and chance a relapse?

Two new studies published in this week’s New England Journal of Medicine could help women make a more informed decision.

One study of nearly 10,000 infants born with birth defects and nearly 6,000 healthy infants found that women who took sertraline (Zoloft) in the first few months of pregnancy had twice the risk of having a baby born with a heart defect, while those on paroxetine (Paxil) had more than three times the risk. Paxil also increased the risk of a rare hernia called an omphalocele. But this doesn’t mean antidepressants are unsafe: The heart defects seen in the study normally occur in 5 out of 10,000 babies, so a doubling of the risk means they occur in 10 in 10,000 and a tripling in 15 in 10,000—thus, a baby’s risk is still far less than 1 percent.

“The results are pretty reassuring, though we did find some increased risk relating to specific drugs,” says study leader Carol Louik, an assistant professor of epidemiology at Boston University. The second study from the University of British Columbia also found a tripling of heart defects in babies born to mothers who took Paxil as well as an increased risk of neural tube defects. What’s interesting is that neither study found any significant increase in birth defects from Prozac, Lexapro, and other antidepressants that, like Zoloft and Paxil, fall into the category of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors.

“As the evidence grows, it’s becoming clearer in my mind that the link between SSRIs and birth defects is tenuous at best but probably real,” says Charles Lockwood, chair of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive science at Yale University School of Medicine and spokesperson for the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG already recommends against the use of Paxil in pregnancy because of previous research suggesting it increases heart defects, but Lockwood says he’s not yet convinced that other SSRIs pose smaller risks. He believes that pregnant women taking any SSRI should get regular sonograms to check for fetal heart defects and that bupropion (Wellbutrin), a non-SSRI, should be considered as a first line of therapy; it’s mild and considered to be the safest antidepressant but it also may not work as well for severe depression.

While some women certainly need to stay on their antidepressant throughout pregnancy to avoid a relapse, others may get the same benefits from psychotherapy.

“If someone can do OK without her medication, that’s fine, but she needs to be monitored closely,” says Carolyn Robinowitz, president of the American Psychiatric Association. Untreated depression can cause premature birth and low birthweight and possibly increase the risk of miscarriage. What’s more, depressed mothers may be more likely to have poor eating habits or abuse alcohol or drugs—all potentially harmful to the fetus.

“There’s a careful tightrope that patients and doctors have to walk to minimize exposure to antidepressants but to avoid depression in pregnancy as well,” says Lockwood.

The new findings come on the heels of other research out earlier in the week linking antidepressants to accelerated bone loss in the elderly.

MRI DyeIf you have had a MRI and a contrast agent was used to enhance the image, you need to read the following. There are two very different and distinct kinds of dyes used and several brands of each dye. If you were given an Iodine-based dye then the following does not apply to you. However, if you were given a gadolinium-based contrast dye then you need to be aware of a serious skin disease that you have an increased risk to.

Gadolinium contrast agents have been linked to Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF) and Nephrogenic Fibrosing Dermopathy (NFD). Symptoms of these skin diseases include skin rashes, joint pain, stiffness, kidney failure, and renal failure. Gadolinium contrast agents are marketed under the names: Magnevist (gadopentetate dimeglumine), Ominiscan (gadodiamide), OptiMARK (gadoversetamide), MultiHance (gadobenate dimeglumine) and Prohance (gadoteridol).

Problems with Gadolinium MRI Dye

The potential problem with gadolinium dye result from recent statistical findings discovered in Denmark. On May 29, 2006, the Danish Medicines Agency reported that it had learned of 25 cases where patients who had been administered a gadolinium-containing contrast agent during the previous three months had contracted Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF), a very serious skin disorder. NSF, sometimes called Nephrogenic Fibrosing Dermopathy (NFD), is an incurable skin condition that affects patients suffering from kidney failure.

Types of Gadolinium Dye

Omniscan
(Gadodiamide)
Manufacturer: GE Healthcare

OptiMARK
(Gadoversetamide Injection)
Manufacturer: Mallinckrodt
Manufacturer: Tyco Healthcare

Magnevist
(Gadopentetate Dimeglumine)
Manufacturer: Bayer HealthCare
Manufacturer: Schering AG
Manufacturer: Berlex

ProHance
(Gadoteridol Injection)
Manufacturer: Bracco Diagnostics

MultiHance
(Gadobenate Dimeglumine)
Manufacturer: Bracco Diagnostics

MRI Dye Side Effects

Symptoms associated with gadolinium dye exposure include:

  • Itching or burning skin
  • Reddened or dark patches on the skin
  • Skin rashes, hives or lesions
  • Tightening and swelling of the skin, usually in the extremities
  • Hardening or thickening of the skin
  • Restrictive movement
  • Skin texture changes (leathery, woody, scaly, like an orange peel)
  • Yellow spots on the whites of the eyes
  • Sharp pains in affected areas
  • Joint pain or stiffness
  • Deep bone pain in the hips or ribs
  • Calcification of muscle, skin, or tendons
  • Muscle weakness
  • Muscle contractures

Speak to a Lawyer

If you or a loved one had a MRI or MRA, and a gadolinium-based contrast dye, medium or agent was used to enhance the MRI image, then your health may be at risk. If you developed Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis (NSF), Nephrogenic Fibrosing Dermopathy (NFD), skin problems, skin tightening, severe joint problems, kidney failure, or renal failure, then you may be eligible to collect money damages for your injuries. Please contact our law firm by filling out our legal evaluation form on the far right for a free and confidential case evaluation. Please keep in mind that certain states limit the amount of time you have to file a lawsuit; contact an attorney as soon as possible.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has asked manufacturers to include a new boxed warning on the product labeling of all gadolinium-based contrast agents which are used to enhance the quality of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

The requested warning would state that patients with severe kidney insufficiency who receive gadolinium-based agents are at risk for developing a debilitating, and a potentially fatal disease known as nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF). In addition, it would state that patients just before or just after liver transplantation, or those with chronic liver disease, are also at risk for developing NSF if they are experiencing kidney insufficiency of any severity.

“FDA has been carefully monitoring potential safety signals related to these contrast agents after receiving reports about the risk of this potentially life-threatening disease,” said Steven Galson, M.D., M.P.H., director of FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. “This latest action demonstrates FDA’s continuing vigilance about ensuring the safety of drug products once they enter the marketplace.”

Patients with NSF develop thickening of the skin and connective tissues that inhibits their ability to move and may result in broken bones. Other organs are at risk of thickening as well. The cause of NSF is not known and there is no consistently effective treatment of this condition.

FDA first notified health care professionals and the public about the gadolinium-related risks for NSF in June 2006 . Information on the risks was updated in December.

Gadolinium-based contrast agents are commonly used to improve the visibility of internal structures when patients undergo an MRI. Five gadolinium-based contrast agents have been approved for use in the United States: Magnevist (gadopentetate dimeglumine), Ominiscan (gadodiamide); OptiMARK (gadoversetamide); MultiHance;(gadobenate dimeglumine);and Prohance (gadoteridol).

Reports have identified the development of NSF following single and multiple administrations of the gadolinium-based contrast agents. The reports have not always identified a specific agent. Omniscan was the most commonly reported agent, when a specific agent was identified, followed by Magnevist and OptiMARK.

NSF also has developed after the sequential administration of Omniscan and MultiHance and Omniscan and ProHance. Because reports incompletely describe exposure to gadolinium-based contrast agents, it is not possible to know if the extent of risks for developing NSF is the same for all agents.

Patients should be screened for kidney problems prior to receiving one of these imaging agents. The recommended dose should not be exceeded and enough time should elapse to ensure that a dose has been eliminated from the body before the agent is used again.

There have been no reports of NSF among patients with normal kidney function or those with mild-to-moderate kidney insufficiency.