Takeda Pharmaceutical is about to make history that it would prefer not to make. When it produces its quarterly report for the fiscal year that ended March 31, it is expected to post its first net loss since it first listed on the Tokyo Stock Exchange in 1949.
Johnson & Johnson lost another battle in its ongoing vaginal mesh litigation, as a California jury ordered the company to pay $5.6 million in the first trial over one of its mesh devices.
In mid-January, Johnson & Johnson asked the district judge overseeing the federal lawsuit over the transvaginal mesh devices from its Ethicon subsidiary to investigate phone calls urging women with the implant to file suit against the company. But now it's requesting to withdraw that motion.
Medtronic has reached a $22 million settlement with 950 claimants over liability claims related to Infuse Bone Graft. The company denied any wrongdoing and said it will continue to "vigorously defend" the product in remaining cases.
In PatientView's annual survey of patient groups around the world, survey respondents gave a thumbs-up to drugmakers' innovation and quality. They weren't as impressed, however, with pharma marketing.
After investigating Teva Pharmaceutical Industries for potential bribery overseas in 2012, U.S. prosecutors have turned to Teva's marketing, eyeing two branded medications, its top-selling multiple sclerosis drug Copaxone and its Parkinson's disease treatment Azilect.
Johnson & Johnson has been negotiating terms of a multibillion dollar settlement over aggressive marketing of its antipsychotic drug Risperdal with federal authorities for at least two years, and now it is hung on talk over breasts, The Wall Street Journal says.
Federal prosecutors sued the Swiss drugmaker, accusing it of offering "disguised" kickbacks to pharmacies for switching patients to one of its drugs. And switch they did, the prosecutors say.
Maverick states could cost Big Pharma big money. Though many drugmakers have wrapped up marketing settlements with the federal government--and states willing to go along--they're now facing claims from state attorneys general who are bold, stubborn, ambitious, or all of the above.
Will the U.S. Supreme Court buy pharma's argument that cash settlements don't keep generic drugs off the market unduly long? Or will the justices agree with the Federal Trade Commission, which calls such patent settlements anticompetitive?