Damning evidence has emerged in a diabetes drug lawsuit involving Takeda Pharmaceuticals who were originally involved in a Type 2 diabetes drug where they allegedly attempted to alter the position of a putative partner involved in the development of the drug.
–> See the Diabetes Miracle Cure review – True or False? – Click Here
It’s been reported by Lawyers and Settlements that evidence from a pharmacologist and toxicologist for the plaintiff, Upjohn Co. allegedly informed Takeda in 1993, during the pre-market development phase of Actos, that it was taking a pass and backing away from the continued development of Actos over concerns Upjohn had with the safety profile of pioglitazone (Actos).
Takeda’s response, according to testimony given by Randall Tackett of the University of Georgia, was to ask Upjohn to claim instead that it had doubts about Actos efficacy, rather than the safety profile.
“What this basically does, in my opinion, is remove the concern for the margin of safety and focuses on the fact that they wanted Upjohn to say that the drug didn’t work as well as they would like. That’s a big difference from saying there was a concern over the margin of safety,”
n previous trials, Takeda has been accused of allowing important documents to be destroyed, and has faced judicial sanctions based on that accusation.
The Actos bladder cancer lawsuit is currently hearing testimony in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas.
The plaintiff Frances Wisniewski, had been prescribed Actos for the management of her Type 2 diabetes and had used Actos for a period of about seven years before her diagnosis of Actos bladder cancer in 2011.
She filed her Actos lawsuit a year later, claiming she was not aware of the Actos bladder cancer risk. The plaintiff also asserts in her lawsuit that Takeda was aware through clinical, premarket studies that tumors had been reported in male rats having been administered pioglitazone.