Xarelto has only been on the market for a few years, but there are already hundreds of complaints that the blood thinner causes excessive bleeding that can’t be reversed. These reports of injuries have led to dozens of Xarelto lawsuits accusing the drug’s manufacturer of failing to adequately disclose the risks of uncontrollable bleeding.

A product of Janssen (subsidiary to Johnson & Johnson), Xarelto was marketed as a better and safer alternative to Coumadin/warfarin, which had been the only blood thinner available in the US for several decades. However, Xarelto bleeding incidences have occurred in hundreds of patients, sometimes with fatal results. There’s also no antidote to Xarelto bleeding like there is with Coumadin. Combining the lack of an antidote with no medical monitoring and no warning of excessive bleeding has become a dangerous cocktail. It’s why Illinois plaintiff William H. has become the latest alleged victim of Xarelto bleeding to file a lawsuit on September 10, 2014.

Coumadin doesn’t come without side effects, although they’re clearly stated. Excessive bleeding can occur, which is why patients on Coumadin are required to be under medical monitoring while taking the drug. Janssen marketed Xarelto as not having that bleeding risk and attracted patients and physicians alike with promises of no need for medical monitoring.

William found this to be the contrary. His Xarelto lawsuit claims:

“Defendants concealed their knowledge of Xarelto’s defects from Plaintiff, the Food and Drug Administration (FD), the public in general, and/or the medical community specifically. These representations were made by Defendants with the intent of defrauding and deceiving Plaintiff, the public in general, and the medical and healthcare community in particular, and were made with the intent of inducing the public in general, and the medical community in particular, to recommend, dispense and/or purchase Xarelto for use to reduce the risk of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, to treat DVT and PE, to reduce the risk of recurrence of DVT and/or PE, and for prophylaxis of DVT for patients undergoing hip and knee replacement surgery, all of which evinced a callous, reckless, willful, depraved indifference to health, safety and welfare.”

Even though William survived, it was not without consequences.

“As a result of the foregoing acts and omissions, the Plaintiff was and still is caused to suffer serious and dangerous side effects including inter alia bleeding, as well as other severe and personal injuries which are permanent and lasting in nature, physical pain and mental anguish, diminished enjoyment of life, expenses for hospitalization and medical treatment, and loss of earnings,” his Xarelto lawsuit says.

William first started taking Xarelto in Illinois on June 4, 2013. Just a few days later, he “experienced hemoptysis on or about June 11, 2013 and was caused to suffer a bleed that required hospitalization from the use of Xarelto. As a direct and proximate result of the use of Defendants’ Xarelto, the Plaintiff suffered serious and dangerous side effects including, bleeding, as well as other severe and personal injuries which are permanent and lasting in nature, physical pain and mental anguish, including, diminished enjoyment of life, expenses for hospitalization and medical treatment, and loss of earnings.”

A Close Call

It’s claimed by all Xarelto lawsuit Plaintiffs that the drug makers intentionally under-warned of the risks and should have (or did) know about the full Xarelto side effects before going to market.

“Defendants spent significant money in promoting Xarelto, which included at least $11,000,000.00 spent during 2013 alone on advertising in journals targeted at prescribers and consumers in the U.S. In the third quarter of the 2013 fiscal year, Xarelto was the number one pharmaceutical product advertised in professional health journals based on pages and dollars spent,” William claims in his Xarelto bleeding lawsuit.

William is suing for negligence, breach of warranties, fraudulent misrepresentation, fraudulent concealment, negligent misrepresentation, fraud and deceit, and violation of Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Practices Act.

The lawsuit is William H. v. Janssen Research & Development et al., Case No.: 14-988-NJR-PMF in the United States District Court Southern District of Illinois, Benton Division.