A Nebraska woman says she suffered from eye injuries after receiving Beovu treatments for macular degeneration, according to a recently filed lawsuit against drugmaker Novartis.

Plaintiff Constance S. says she and other consumers were not warned about the potential side effects of Beovu. As a result, she claims, she unknowingly took a medication that caused serious eye problems.

Beovu (brolucizumab) is a treatment for wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD). It is injected directly into the eye by a doctor, according to Medical News Today.

Wet AMD occurs when irregular blood vessels develop in the macula — the part of the eye responsible for central vision. If left untreated, these blood vessels can leak and cause irreversible vision loss. Beovu treats wet AMD by inhibiting proteins responsible for the irregular growth of blood vessels in the eye.

Beovu may have serious, unexpected side effects.

In her recent lawsuit against Beovu manufacturer Novartis, Constance claims she experienced these complications.

Constance says she was prescribed Beovu in order to treat her wet AMD based on her doctor’s assumption the drug was safe and effective.

As a result of her treatment with Beovu, Constance allegedly suffered from serious eye injuries, including central retinal artery occlusion — a blockage of blood flow to the retina of the eye that can cause sudden loss of vision.

Constance maintains she has experienced pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, mental anguish, and financial injuries in the form of hospitalization and medical treatment expenses.

According to Constance, she and her doctor would not have chosen Beovu as a treatment option if Novartis had sufficiently warned the public about the risk for serious eye complications.

As of June 2020, a new Beovu label had been approved that warns of the risk for adverse eye events, such as retinal vasculitis and retinal vascular occlusion. Although this label now informs doctors and patients of Beovu risks, Constance alleges Novartis knew about the risks earlier and should have warned the public as soon as possible.

“Despite their possession of knowledge regarding these risks and a their duty to adequately warn of severe and dangerous adverse events associated with use of Beovu, Defendants failed to properly warn the medical community and consumers, including Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s healthcare providers, that use of Beovu was associated with an increased risk of serious vision problems,” the Beovu lawsuit contends.

Constance seeks general damages, special damages, punitive damages, exemplary damages, court costs, and attorneys’ fees through her lawsuit.

The Beovu Lawsuit is Case No. 8:21-cv-00032-MDN in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska.