News

By David Litterick in New York

20 August 2005

Merck was yesterday ordered to pay more than $250m to a Texas widow whose husband died after taking the drug maker's Vioxx painkiller.

A jury found the group liable for the death of Robert Ernst, a keen triathlete and marathon runner, who had taken Vioxx for tendonitis over a seven-month period before he died in 2001 from heart arrhythmia.

A 12-member jury yesterday ruled that marketing and design defects in the blockbuster drug were responsible for his death and judged Merck was guilty of negligence and malice.

The drug maker was ordered to pay Mr Ernst's widow $229m in punitive damages and $24m for mental anguish and loss of companionship. Merck said it would appeal, while the amount of punitive damages is expected to be cut in accordance with Texas law.

The jury agreed with Mrs Ernst's lawyers, who argued that Merck had long known that the drug caused heart problems but swept the findings under the carpet.

Merck said it was "disappointed" with the verdict, claiming "the plaintiff did not meet the standard set by Texas law to prove Vioxx caused Mr Ernst's death. There is no reliable scientific evidence that shows Vioxx causes cardiac arrhythmias.

"This case did not call for punitive damages. Merck acted responsibly - from researching Vioxx prior to approval in clinical trials to monitoring the medicine while it was on the market, to voluntarily withdrawing the medicine when it did." It argued that Mr Ernst had died from clogged arteries.

Mark Lanier, lawyer for Mrs Ernst, argued that Merck had known about potential heart problems since at least 1996 but had rushed through its testing programme to ensure Vioxx came to market before rival painkiller Celebrex. It feared losing $800m in sales if Celebrex became available first, Mr Lanier argued.

He added that the company later delayed changing a warning label for seven months because it was afraid of losing more than $200m in sales. "Merck put profits before patients," he said. "There can be no more running."

Merck has maintained there was no scientific evidence of problems with Vioxx until August last year.

Merck shares slumped 8pc after the verdict and the company has lost a third of its market value since the drug was pulled. It was its best selling medicine, accounting for $2.5billion of revenue last year. Analysts put the company's total liability at a range of between $4-$50 billion over the next decade.

The case was just the first wrongful death lawsuit to be brought against Merck, which faces another 4,100 suits involving more than 7,500 plaintiffs. It said yesterday it would "vigorously defend them one by one over the coming years".

The Food and Drug Administration whistleblower who brought the issue to light said it could be "the single greatest drug catastrophe in the history of this country".

About 25m people took the drug and Merck has so far set aside $675m to fight Vioxx-related legal battles. Rival Pfizer is also being sued over its similar Bextra drug.

© Copyright Telegraph Group Limited 2005. All Rights Reserved..