PPI Litigation—Why These Lawsuits Are Like No Other
In most mass tort cases there is a distinct injury or injuries established from the onset of litigation; however, this is not the case with the Proton Pump Inhibitor (PPI) lawsuits.
February 14, 2019 at 01:44 PM
6 minute read
In most mass tort cases there is a distinct injury or injuries established from the onset of litigation; however, this is not the case with the Proton Pump Inhibitor (PPI) lawsuits. The multidistrict litigation (MDL) was established on Aug. 2, 2017, and all cases were transferred to the federal district court in New Jersey. Attorneys must be armed with a sufficient organizational system to keep the many injuries, drugs and deadlines clear from the beginning.
This litigation is unique in that it has many moving parts. One client could have used a variation of at least seven different brand names of the PPI drug, prescribed or over-the-counter, with multiple injuries, each case with its own set of circumstances. Another moving part involves knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses in a case, which requires medical research. When filing a PPI case, not only must an attorney determine there was PPI use but he must also be able to determine whether there is evidence of a kidney injury. Therefore, when deciding whether to take a case, attorneys must be well versed with not only the basic requirements of use and injury, but also the research relating to and the science behind each ailment. Organization and medical summary are key for each individual case.
It is important to first note that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved PPIs, for the short-term treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), active duodenal ulcers, severe erosive esophagitis, and pathologic hyperesecretory conditions—producing excess stomach acid. However, PPIs are commonly prescribed to treat acid reflux, and often used long-term. Manufacturers behind pharmaceutical medications such as Prevacid, Nexium, Protonix, Dexilant, Aciphex, Prilosec, PrevPac, Prevacid 24 Hour, Nexium 24 Hour, and Prilosec OTC, have been named in PPI complaints for concealing knowledge that kidney injuries can result after use of these PPIs. PPIs work by irreversibly blocking an enzyme in the body commonly referred to as a gastric proton pump to inhibit gastric acid secretion, see Shin, Jai Moo, “Pharmacology of Proton Pump Inhibitors“ Curr Gastroenterol. Rep. 528-34 (Dec. 2008). After PPIs block acid secretion, the effect can have unforeseen consequences. To have a better understanding, one who works in PPI litigation must keep up with the relevant science and literature as it touches upon gastroenterology and nephrology, just to name a few areas of focus.
|PPI Use and Serious Ailments
The master complaint filed in the MDL alleges PPI use causes kidney-related injuries, such as chronic kidney disease (CKD), acute kidney injury, end stage renal disease (ESRD), and acute interstitial nephritis. There have been numerous case reports and studies published since 1992 documenting the association between PPIs and serious kidney injuries. In 1992, Ruffenach published a case report believed to be the first to find an association between Omeprazole and acute interstitial nephritis, see Ruffenbach, Stephen, “Acute Interstitial Nephritis Due to Omeprazole,” 93 The Am. J. Med. 472-73 (Oct. 1992). In 2006, Geevasinga published an article concluding that PPI-induced acute interstitial nephritis is likely to become more frequent, an there is now evidence to suggest a class effect incriminating PPIs, Geevasinga, Nimeshan, “Proton Pump Inhibitors and Acute Interstitial Nephritis,” Clin. Gastro. And Hepatology 597-604 (2006). Fast forward to 2016 and additional research revealed a connection between an increased risk of chronic kidney disease associated with the use of PPIs, see Lazarus, Benjamin, “Proton Pump Inhibitor Use and Risk of Chronic Kidney Disease,” JAMA Intern. Med. (Feb. 1, 2016); Xie, Yan, “Long-Term Kidney Outcomes Among Users of Proton Pump inhibitors Without Intervening Acute Kidney Injury,“91 Kidney Int'l 1482-94 (June 2017), publ. online Feb. 2017. Patients' lab work will reveal high levels of creatinine and lower levels of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) to indicate whether a patient has developed CKD that may progress to ESRD and the use of dialysis treatment depending on a lowered eGFR. However, these medications have also been associated with a multitude of other serious ailments.
In October 2017, one such study concluded that the long-term use of PPIs was associated with a diagnosis of gastric cancer, see Cheung, Ka Shing, “Long-Term Proton Pump Inhibitors and Risk of Gastric Cancer Development after Treatment for Helicobacter Pylori: A population-Based Study,” Gut 2018; 67: 28-35 (Oct. 31, 2017). There was a 2.4-fold increase in gastric cancer risk in H.pylori-infected subjects who had received eradication therapy, i.e. PPI therapy. The risk of gastric cancer increases with the dose and duration of PPI use.
Gastric cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths in the world; however, the incidence and mortality of gastric cancer has fallen dramatically in the United States and elsewhere over the past several decades. Use of PPIs after H.Pylori eradication for long-term use more than doubles the risk of gastric cancer, while the use of H2 blockers, another class of acid reducers, did not increase this risk.
In February 2018, a study in Sweden found an associated link between long-term use of PPIs and an increased risk of esophageal cancer, see Brusselaers, Nele, “Maintenance Proton Pump Inhibition Therapy and Risk of Oesophageal Cancer,“ 53 Cancer Epidemiology 172-77 (2018). The most common predisposition for esophageal cancer is GERD, and it is the sixth most common form of cancer deaths worldwide. In August 2018, another study found PPIs are associated with an increased risk of hepatocellular carcinoma, the most common form of liver cancer after long-term use of PPIs, Shao, YJ, “Association Between Proton Pump Inhibitors and the Risk of Hepatocellular Carcinoma,” Ailment Pharmacol. Ther. (Aug. 2018). A team from the University of California San Diego School of Medicine found the absence of gastric acid promotes the growth of Enterococcus bacteria in the intestine, which then moves to the liver where they exacerbate inflammation and worsen to chronic liver disease. The study leader noted that gastric acid is used to kill ingested microbes and taking medications to suppress gastric acid secretion can change the composition of the gut microbiome, and in this case, promote the growth of such bacteria that causes liver disease.
The first prescription brand proton pump inhibitor was approved for use in 1989. The first over-the-counter PPI was approved in 2003. PPIs are among the top 10 classes of prescribed medications in the United States with at least $13.5 billion in U.S. sales, see Durand, Cheryl, “Proton Pump Inhibitor Use in Hospitalized Patients: Is Overutlization Becoming a Problem?“ 5 Clin. Med. Insights Gastroenterol. 65-76 (Oct. 15, 2012).
The first bellwether trial is currently set for September 2020.
Caitlin Wilenchik is an associate at Anapol Weiss working with the firm's mass tort team. She is a graduate of George Washington University Law School and is barred to practice in Pennsylvania.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJudge Leaves Statute of Limitations Question in Injury Crash Suit for a Jury
4 minute readSupreme Court's Ruling in 'Students for Fair Admissions' and Its Impact on DEI Initiatives in the Workplace
6 minute readMembership Has Its Privileges: Bankruptcy Court Examines LLC's Authority to File Bankruptcy
8 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Corporate Counsel's 2024 Award Winners Performed Legal Wizardry, Gave a Hand Up to Others
- 2Goodwin, Polsinelli, Fox Rothschild Find New Phila. Offices
- 3Helping Lawyers Move Away from ‘Grinding’ and Toward a ‘Flow’
- 4How GC-of-Year Sam Khichi Has Helped CVS Barrel Through Challenges
- 5A Website is Not a ‘Place.’ What Took So Long To Get This Right?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250