A Xarelto stroke lawsuit claims the blood thinner caused a patient injury. 

Plaintiff John S. claims that his late wife, Shirley S., took Xarelto in 2014 to treat or prevent deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. He claims that on July 25, 2014, she suffered a cardiovascular event, and was hospitalized until July 31, 2014.

Shirley was then ordered to stop taking Xarelto, John claims, because her injury was caused by the drug. John claims that Shirley suffered ongoing, lasting injury from her use of the drug.

The Xarelto stroke lawsuit claims that Xarelto was not safe or fit for human use as was advertised by the drug’s makers. Allegedly, Bayer and Johnson & Johnson (as well as their affiliate companies) knew or should have known that the drug was dangerous, but marketed it to patients and medical professionals nonetheless.

The Xarelto stroke lawsuit states that Xarelto was approved in July 2011 for the prevention of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism in patients undergoing hip or knee replacement surgeries. The drug was then approved for use to reduce the risk of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation on Nov. 4, 2011.

The drug was approved for use to reduce the recurrence of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism on Nov. 2, 2012.

John states that Xarelto was marketed as a desirable alternative to other blood thinners because it was more convenient for patients. Allegedly, the drug was marketed as only needing to be taken once a day, where others needed to be taken twice daily. Additionally, the drug was marketed as being more convenient for patients because it required less monitoring by physicians, and did not require patients to change their diets, as was the case when using other blood thinners.

However, John claims that these features were under-researched and that though the drug seemed more convenient for patients, the once-daily dosing and lack of physician monitoring made the drug more dangerous to patients.

Allegedly, the drug was approved for various uses even though it was shown to have increased patients’ likelihood of suffering a bleeding event. Allegedly, it was more likely to cause bleeding than its predecessor, warfarin. Additionally, John claims this bleeding was more dangerous than bleeding caused by warfarin, because it was harder to stop.

John says researchers reported the once-daily dosing caused a patient to experience spikes and dips in how much of the drug was in their body, causing more severe bleeds. Allegedly, in the case of warfarin, which is given in a twice daily dose, the amount of the drug that is in a patient’s system is more stable, so a patient did not bleed as severely.

The Xarelto blood thinner lawsuit states that the approval of the drugs for these purposes was based on information from studies that were unreliable. John’s Xarelto stroke lawsuit claimed that the drug’s manufactures manipulated data to make the drug seem safer and more effective than data suggested it was.

The Xarelto Stroke Lawsuit is Case No. 2:18-cv-06347-EEF-MBN, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.