The current Zofran lawsuit alleges that GlaxoSmithKline actively marketed the drug off-label as a safe and effective treatment for a common side effect of normal pregnancy (pregnancy-related nausea and vomiting, or morning sickness).
The Zofran lawsuit makes allegations that the company engaged in unethical practices by promoting Zofran to pregnant mothers while failing to undertake a single study on the effects of Zofran on pregnant mothers or their unborn children.
In this sense, pregnant mothers and their unborn children were arguably the test subjects for the drug.
Plaintiffs also allege that GlaxoSmithKline was actually aware that Zofran was unsafe for ingestion by pregnant women based on animal studies done in the 1980s, which revealed evidence of toxicity, intrauterine deaths, and malformations in offspring.
Plaintiffs also assert that this evidence was supported by reports of birth defects submitted to GlaxoSmithKline in the 1990s and 2000s.
In February 2015, two zofran lawsuits were filed in federal courts alleging that the use of Zofran during pregnancy increases the risk of birth defects.
These lawsuits are aimed at GlaxoSmithKline LLC, the maker of Zofran, and seek compensatory and punitive damages, equitable relief, and other relief deemed just and proper arising from the injuries as a result of prenatal exposure to Zofran.
In 2012, GlaxoSmithKline pled guilty to criminal charges lodged by the United States Department of Justice for its off-label promotion of Zofran for uses never approved by the FDA.
GlaxoSmithKline also entered civil settlements and had to pay a $3 billion settlement for the company’s unlawful promotion of several prescription drugs, including Zofran, as well as paying doctors to prescribe the drug.
The settlement will compensate plaintiffs who allege that they were encouraged to use these drugs, but it does not compensate them for alleged injuries resulting.