Shareholder class-action lawsuits against life sciences companies were on the rise last year, continuing a decade-long trend.

But not all life-sciences companies were treated equally in 2017, according to a new report by Cornerstone Research. While investor cases against pharmaceutical companies increased 30 percent, from 23 filings to 30, suits against biotechnology and health care companies declined in a near-offsetting amount, the report states.

And there's a new player in town. California-based Glancy Prongay & Murray has joined New York-based law firms Pomerantz & Co. and The Rosen Law Firm as one of the biggest players in the shareholder lawsuit game against a range of industries, including life sciences.

According to the report, for the past four years, these three firms have been responsible for more than 50 percent of complaints overall. In 2016, Pomerantz and The Rosen Law Firm filed more than half of the 67 cases against life sciences firms, and Glancy likewise has become particularly active in this space, said Kevin LaCroix, an attorney and executive vice president of RT ProExec, an insurance intermediary focused exclusively on management liability issues. LaCroix authors a blog called The D&O Diary, which features news and developments related to directors and officers liability.

“These are the three firms that are filing the smaller lawsuits,” LaCroix said in an interview. “They're filing a lot of the lawsuits, but in general they particularly like to target life sciences.”

Among the favorite health sciences targets are companies that do not have products in commercial development but rather are involved in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval process, LaCroix said.

“As a drug or device progresses [from one approval step to another], the consequence of any setback magnifies,” he said. “If a company hits a setback, share prices will plunge and that will draw a lawsuit. In many cases, the likelihood of a lawsuit depends on where the product is in its life cycle.”

Other trends in investor suits against life sciences companies, LaCroix said, are frequent complaints involving regulatory hurdles and clinical trial issues as opposed to claims involving financial matters. In addition, more claims are filed against life sciences companies with smaller market caps, he said.

The upside, though, LaCroix added, is that while the health sciences industry tends to attract more cases, those companies' dismissal rate tends to be higher.

Given the continued uptick in health sector securities class actions, LaCroix offered several tips to the companies' general counsel:

1. Ensure that trading does not take place at sensitive times, such as just prior to the end of a trial or when the company is in a delicate regulatory phase.
2. Have an insider trading plan that individuals can adopt to rebut allegations of insider trading.
3. Always use caution in your disclosures and when communicating about your product.

“Any biotech company [in-house lawyer] knows that, but there's a cheerleading mentality that sets in when the drug moves toward that commercial date,” La Croix said. “But it's really crucial to manage those communications.”