May 15, 2008

Bayer Pulls Trasylol (Aprotinin) Completely From The Market

Bayer finally gave into the overwhelming negative evidence regarding its drug Trasylol and is pulling it off the shelves. Yesterday, a study was released by the New England Journal of Medicine ("NEJM") in which a study Bayer was hoping would save this drug, instead indicated "...the strong and consistent negative mortality trend associated with aprotinin (trasylol) as compared with lysine analogues precludes its use in patients undergoing high-risk surgery." As reported by both Bloomberg and Reuters, as a result of the release of this study, referred to as the BART study, Bayer has decided to remove the remaining supplies of the drug Trasylol from the U.S. market. Moreover, the FDA has indicated that Bayer has confirmed to it that it will be removing the stock of Trasylol from the U.S. market, which is presently being kept in warehouses, hospitals and doctor's offices.

As I have previously discussed
, Trasylol is a drug manufactured by Bayer and has been used in open heart surgery since 1993 to reduce the bleeding that can be caused in this type of surgery. From the day it was approved by the FDA, there have been questions raised about its potential to cause renal/kidney failure. When originally approved by the FDA, it was only approved for high risk open heart surgeries which are typically defined as an individual undergoing a second or more open heart surgery, heart valve surgery, or an individual with a high risk of bleeding. Eventually, the drug was approved for use in ALL open heart surgeries and that's when things started to go wrong. In 2006, a Dr. Mangano published a study in the NEJM which called into question the increased risks of kidney failure and death, among other things, caused by use of this drug. Bayer, as most big pharmaceutical companies will do when one of its drugs gets called into question, went on the attack to discredit not only Mangano's study, but Mangano himself.

It was a two year bitter battle. It included Bayer withholding its own study on the drug during a FDA hearing about the drug, which study only came to light after its author disclosed its existence after the hearing when he couldn't understand why Bayer did not tell the FDA about the study at the hearing itself. At the end of 2007, another FDA hearing was held on the drug which I attended by webinar. Dr. Mangano himself spoke to the FDA panel defending the work he had done. Bayer did all it could do to discredit Mangano's work and hired statisticians to completely confuse the issue. During that hearing, Bayer talked about a study being done in Canada, called the BART study, which was using Trasylol and comparing it to two generic drugs which do the same thing and cost a lot less, in high risk open heart surgeries, the types of surgeries which Trasylol was originally approved for. Bayer indicated to the panel that they hoped this clinical study would provide a lot of answers and show what a great drug Trasylol was.

Within about 2 months of that meeting, the walls caved in. An unexpected announcement came that the BART study was being closed down because too many people were dying that were being given Trasylol. As a result, the FDA and Bayer put a "temporary halt" on use of the drug, except in extreme situations, pending evaluation of the information which could be obtained from this BART study.

Well, now its out in black and white. Essentially, the study found that Trasylol did not do that much better a job than its generic competitors and Trasylol cost $1400 per surgery versus $4 per surgery for the generics. Yes, you read that right $4 (four dollars). More importantly, those patients being given the Trasylol were dying at a higher rate within 30 days of the surgery then those given the generics. Thus, even using the drug for the limited purpose for which it was originally approved i.e. high risk surgeries, more people died who were given the drug within 30 days than who were given the much cheaper alternative which performed comparably. As the editorial in the NEJM said it"...in all likelihood, this is the end of the aprotinin (trasylol) story." It appears today it is and way overdue.

What has always been so insidious about the use of this drug is that patients never know they were given the drug as it is given during the anesthesia process for surgery. Thus, when things later go wrong, whether it be kidney failure or death, the patient and the family would never know it may have been the drug Trasylol which caused the problem. Now at least, the drug will be kept out of the surgery room and away from the unsuspecting patient.

If you feel you or a family member may have been given this drug during open heart surgery and have ended up in kidney failure or died unexpectedly, you are welcome to contact me to discuss whether you may have a potential case regarding Trasylol.

March 24, 2008

FDA Still Sitting on the Trasylol Issue

Yes I know 60 Minutes did a huge story on Trasylol a little over a month ago where, among other things, the leading researcher on this drug, Dr. Mangano, who has been fighting an up hill battle for over 2 years on this drug, indicated that the FDA could have saved 22,000 lives if it would have pulled this drug off the market when Mangano's first study on Trasylol was published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) back in January 2006. Since that report on 60 Minutes, many plaintiff's law firms have been searching far and wide for potential cases regarding this drug. However, like Dr. Mangano, I also have been fighting the good fight on this drug since his study first appeared in the NEJM.in late January 2006.

When I first read the study, I was convinced that this was a drug with significant problems and issues. I immediately addressed the issue with the partners in my old firm and convinced them we needed to help people who had been significantly injured by this drug. One of the biggest injuries caused by Trasylol, as addressed in Mangano's first study, was that the drug, given most often during heart bypass surgery to assist in reducing bleeding, had a significant potential to cause permanent kidney failure. Those patients unfortunate enough to have had this reaction are resigned to a life of 3 days of dialysis every day for the rest of their lives.

755990_pills.jpg

This was personal to me. My own father, after open heart surgery over 8 years ago, ended up in kidney failure and has been tied to a dialysis machine ever since. Here was a man, who worked hard his whole life so that he and my mother could spend their retirement years enjoying the fruits of their labors, but instead they have spent the past 8 years running to doctors, hospitals, and dialysis centers. My dad for the past 3 years has essentially become an invalid and my mother his round the clock caregiver. Thus, when I saw clear, medically and scientifically validated information indicating a drug, which people don't even know they are given and thus have the chance to refuse, can cause a person to spend the rest of their lives tied to a machine just to keep them alive, I knew I had to do something to help.

As a result, I was the first lawyer in the United States to file a case in court claiming that a patient was given this drug and as a result, their kidneys failed, requiring them to have dialysis the rest of their lives. I was interviewed by an independent reporter from Germany who was doing a "60 Minutes" type report on Trasylol which was shown in Germany almost 6 months before the 60 Minutes report appeared. For those who don't know, Trasylol is a drug manufactured by Bayer Corporation which has its international headquarters in Germany.

What has been learned over these past two years of fighting the good fight is more evidence of corporate greed and decisions made by Bayer to expand the use of Trasylol to other surgeries and hide all the bad evidence indicating the drug had a significant potential to cause kidney failure. This included a scandal where Bayer representatives appeared before a FDA committee investigating Trasylol where they steadfastly took the position that there was nothing wrong with the drug, when Bayer knew that it had paid for its own study on Trasylol which confirmed the findings of Dr. Mangano, and hid that information from the FDA. To follow that up, even after Bayer decided to TEMPORARILY stop selling Trasylol in the U.S., it hired doctors to trump up to other doctors, the benefits of Trasylol. There is even indication now that Bayer knew back many many years ago when Trasylol was first put out on the German market that a concern was raised about increased risk of kidney failure from use of Trasylol. It appears that concern was pushed aside, and instead Bayer continued to aggressively pursue the sale and use of Trasylol.

I am continuing the fight I started on this drug over two years ago when I read the first study by Dr. Mangano. If you had open heart surgery and after the surgery ended up on dialysis for the rest of your life, you may have been given Trasylol during your surgery which may have lead to your kidney problems. It is a terrible cost to have to pay. You may want a lawyer to evaluate whether you might have a case against Bayer. My only suggestion in choosing a lawyer to assist you in this process is to make sure you choose one who understands the problems with this drug and can properly evaluate whether Trasylol caused your kidneys to fail. I will continue to provide information about this drug as I learn more because it is important for the public to be aware of what can happen when the drive to make money overrides the concern for patient safety.