Doctor says Vioxx didn't kill man
Testifying on behalf of Merck & Co., a cardiologist on Tuesday blamed coronary artery disease - not Vioxx - for a heart attack suffered by a man suing the maker of the now-withdrawn arthritis drug.
Dr. Barry Rayburn, a professor of medicine at the University of Alabama-Birmingham hired by Merck as a $600-an-hour expert witness, said Tuesday his review of John McDarby's medical records and clinical trials of the drug didn't support McDarby's claim that Vioxx caused him to be stricken.
But in a blow to Merck, Rayburn was barred from telling jurors his opinion that McDarby's April 15, 2004, heart attack was brought on by stress related to a hip fracture he suffered the same day.
Before testifying in front of the jury, Rayburn was questioned in court about the scope of his proposed testimony. Afterward, Superior Court Judge Carol Higbee said the doctor could not offer that opinion because he said he couldn't say "with a reasonable degree of medical certainty" that the broken hip triggered the heart attack.
McDarby's lawyers say the heart attack caused McDarby to collapse in the living room of his Park Ridge home and that his body twisted as he fell to the floor, breaking his right hip before he landed.
The trial, now in its fourth week, is the first involving long-term users of the popular arthritis drug, which Merck pulled off the market in September 2004 after a study showed it doubled the risk of heart attacks and strokes after 18 months' use.
McDarby, a 77-year-old diabetic, took Vioxx for four years before he was stricken.
Fellow plaintiff Thomas Cona, 59, whose case was combined with McDarby's for trial purposes, said he took Vioxx for three years - including after his 2003 heart attack - before it was voluntarily pulled from the market by Merck.
Rayburn said there was no evidence to show Vioxx causes heart attacks, downplaying the significance of both the clinical study that prompted the drug's withdrawal and another in which patients taking Vioxx had five times as many heart attacks as those taking naproxen.
Up to 80 percent of diabetics die of cardiovascular disease, said Rayburn, one of Merck's final witnesses in the trial.
In an abbreviated 15-minute cross-examination at the end of the day, Cona's lawyer attacked Rayburn's credibility, noting that he had allowed two of his board certifications to lapse and accusing him of "cherry picking" studies to bolster Merck's case.
Dr. Barry Rayburn, a professor of medicine at the University of Alabama-Birmingham hired by Merck as a $600-an-hour expert witness, said Tuesday his review of John McDarby's medical records and clinical trials of the drug didn't support McDarby's claim that Vioxx caused him to be stricken.
But in a blow to Merck, Rayburn was barred from telling jurors his opinion that McDarby's April 15, 2004, heart attack was brought on by stress related to a hip fracture he suffered the same day.
Before testifying in front of the jury, Rayburn was questioned in court about the scope of his proposed testimony. Afterward, Superior Court Judge Carol Higbee said the doctor could not offer that opinion because he said he couldn't say "with a reasonable degree of medical certainty" that the broken hip triggered the heart attack.
McDarby's lawyers say the heart attack caused McDarby to collapse in the living room of his Park Ridge home and that his body twisted as he fell to the floor, breaking his right hip before he landed.
The trial, now in its fourth week, is the first involving long-term users of the popular arthritis drug, which Merck pulled off the market in September 2004 after a study showed it doubled the risk of heart attacks and strokes after 18 months' use.
McDarby, a 77-year-old diabetic, took Vioxx for four years before he was stricken.
Fellow plaintiff Thomas Cona, 59, whose case was combined with McDarby's for trial purposes, said he took Vioxx for three years - including after his 2003 heart attack - before it was voluntarily pulled from the market by Merck.
Rayburn said there was no evidence to show Vioxx causes heart attacks, downplaying the significance of both the clinical study that prompted the drug's withdrawal and another in which patients taking Vioxx had five times as many heart attacks as those taking naproxen.
Up to 80 percent of diabetics die of cardiovascular disease, said Rayburn, one of Merck's final witnesses in the trial.
In an abbreviated 15-minute cross-examination at the end of the day, Cona's lawyer attacked Rayburn's credibility, noting that he had allowed two of his board certifications to lapse and accusing him of "cherry picking" studies to bolster Merck's case.
posted by Chris Placitella at 6:31 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home