Two pharmaceutical companies have asked a federal judicial panel to consolidate several Eliquis lawsuits into a single multidistrict litigation, or MDL.

Pfizer Inc. and Bristol-Myers Squibb filed their motion in early October 2016 with the federal Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, or JPML – the body that oversees the creation and transfer of MDLs.

The companies’ motion would start the MDL by transferring 34 known Eliquis lawsuits now pending in 13 different district courts to a single federal court in New York.

Both companies have found themselves on the receiving ends of these claims, as defendants.

New cases filed after the MDL is formed would be either transferred to the court hosting the MDL or filed directly with that court.

The two defendant drug companies have asked for consolidation in New York since the defendants’ headquarters, along with much of the relevant witnesses and evidence, are located there.

Eliquis, or apixaban, is the newest of a new generation of oral anticoagulant medications.

The new generation was developed to compete with warfarin, which had been the unopposed go-to anticoagulant of choice since the 1950s.

The new drugs like Eliquis were specifically designed not to require the regular blood testing and dosage adjustments that warfarin requires.

But like all other anticoagulants, Eliquis creates a risk of excessive bleeding.

The drug has been associated with episodes in which patients suffered bleeding injuries like gastrointestinal bleeds or hemorrhage in or near the brain.

The anticoagulant effect of Eliquis reportedly made that bleeding more profuse and difficult, if not impossible, to control – putting patients at risk for serious injury or even death.

Eliquis Lawsuits Focus on Duty to Warn

In the Eliquis lawsuits that may be combined in the MDL, plaintiffs generally claim they were not properly warned about the risk of Eliquis bleeding.

They claim manufacturers Pfizer and Bristol-Myers Squibb knew about these risks but avoided telling the public or the medical community about them, presumably to avoid reducing Eliquis sales.

The plaintiffs challenged the companies’ insistence on administering Eliquis without blood monitoring.

Avoiding blood monitoring was apparently the companies’ goal in developing Eliquis, so that the new drug would have a competitive edge over warfarin.

However, plaintiffs point out evidence from clinical trials that suggests patients would be safer on Eliquis if their blood levels were routinely checked.

Plaintiffs also point out that Eliquis, like the other new anticoagulants, was released to the market before an antidote was available that could counteract its anticoagulant effect.

If the litigation over other new anticoagulants is a reliable indicator, the Eliquis MDL could grow to include thousands of individual Eliquis lawsuits.

Similar litigation over another new anticoagulant culminated in 2012 with a settlement worth $650 million distributed among approximately 4,000 claimants. Another MDL involving a third anticoagulant drug now encompasses over 7,200 claims.

If approved by the JPML as requested, the Eliquis MDL will be In re: Eliquis (Apixaban) Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2745, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.