SCOTUS Wants Government’s View on Fosamax Case

Share

The Supreme Court has invited the Solicitor General to submit a brief outlining the views of the United States on Merck’s request that the high court hear its appeal of a 3rd Circuit court decision involving a state law failure-to-warn claim for the company’s Fosamax (alendronate sodium). In the case decided by the 3rd Circuit, consumers brought separate product liability cases against Merck, claiming it failed to add an adequate warning of risk of atypical femur fractures to the FDA-approved label for the osteoporosis drug. A New Jersey federal judge heard the consolidated suits and entered summary judgment for Merck, which the plaintiffs appealed to the 3rd Circuit.

The appeals court vacated the lower court ruling and remanded the case, saying that the question of whether FDA would have rejected a proposed drug label change is a question of fact for a jury to decide.

Merck’s appeal to the Supreme Court says it is “undisputed” that FDA was aware of the possible link between the drug and the risk at issue and rejected Merck’s comprehensive safety update, saying the “conflicting nature of the literature did not provide a clear path forward” and that it needed more time to consider the issue of a precaution. FDA only became confident that an association potentially existed after it received a report from a task force, Merck says. The appeal frames the question for the Supreme Court as: Is a state law failure to warn claim preempted when FDA rejected the drug manufacturer’s proposal to warn about the risk after being provided with the relevant scientific data, or must such a case go to a jury for conjecture as to why FDA rejected the proposed warning?

Read more