As reported earlier, the first federal Vioxx trial ended in a mistrial in Houston, Texas. Judge Eldon Fallon has now announced that the retrial will commence February 6 next year.

Since the jury went into deliberations in the Houston trial, damaging information about Merck's deception has been disclosed by the New England Journal of Medicine. According to the Journal, Merck scientists tried to mislead the scientific community by hiding the number of deaths from the drug.

Another favorable development for Evelyn Irvin Plunkett, the plaintiff in this case, is that the trial is being moved back to New Orleans, where it was originally meant to be tried but had to be moved due to Hurricane Katrina. The jurors in Houston are tend to be highly conservative and typically tend to favor businesses rather than American people. The jury in New Orleans is expected to be more favorable to victims.

Related article: Dates also set for New Jersey trials

After the first federal Vioxx trial in Houston ended in a mistrial, the news only keeps getting bad for Merck. According to a statement released by the company, the number of Vioxx related lawsuits has jumped to 9,200 as of November 30 this year. The company has already cut thousands of jobs and closed plants and it is likely that it will continue to do so as it gets ready to pay billions of dollars in Vioxx liabilities that are estimated to be over $50 billions.

The number of lawsuits against Merck was 6,400 at the end of September. In other words, the victims are suing the company at the rate of 1,500 a month. Another report indicates that a law firm in Australia has sued the company on behalf of 400 Australian victims and thousands of more lawsuits are expected to be filed there.

The first federal Vioxx trial in Houston has ended in a mistrial, according to Reuters, after the jurors could not reach a unanimous verdict in the case - an outcome that was expected. This is, of course, great news for tens of thousands of Vioxx victims who now have a stronger chance of presenting their case. The New England Journal of Medicine has revealed that Merck misrepresented the risk of Vioxx by not reporting the number of deaths from the VIGOR trial.

The lawsuit was filed by Evelyn Irvin Plunkett in the death of her husband Richard "Dicky" Irvin. In this particular case, a major point of debate was if Vioxx could cause a fatal heart attack if taken for less than 18 months, as Merck contends. Doctors had argued that the drug could cause a heart attack even if taken only occasionally and as soon as the drug was taken. A decision in Merck's favor in this case, while it would have been appealed due to new information now available (but not available to the jurors in this case), would have been a setback to those victims who claim that they had cardiovascular problems as soon as they took the drug.

As Merck faces new credibility issues, the company is hitting back. "If a retrial is scheduled we will be right back with the same facts," says Kenneth Frazier, senior vice president and general counsel of Merck, in a written statement. "The VIOXX litigation will go on for years. We have the resources and the resolve to address these cases, one by one, in a reasonable and responsible manner," he added, repeating the line that the company has been using since the day the drug was recalled last year.

The next Vioxx trial will begin early next year.

Recommended article: Renowned cardiologist Eric Topol criticizes Merck

As jurors deliberate in Houston in the lawsuit filed in the death of Richard "Dicky" Irvin, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that the plaintiff's attorney has already filed for a mistrial. Chris Seeger, the attorney for Frederick "Mike" Humeston, who lost his case, is quoted by CNN as saying that he too will file for a retrial.

These new developments are a result of an editorial published by the New England Journal of Medicine that Merck did not include all the data related to death from Vioxx in the VIGOR trial. In a very harsh criticism of the company, the editors say that were those deaths included, Vioxx would emerge out to be even deadlier than it is currently believed.

As expected, Merck is defending its actions though the stock market was clearly not pleased with the news. Merck stock continues to sink. Alise Reicin, who has been a vocal defendant of the drug and has testified in all the trials so far, is one of the co-authors of the paper published in the Journal. The scientific community uses the term "scientific misconduct" to describe such behavior.

In an article in Forbes, Garret FitzGerald, an expert at the University of Pennsylvania, calls Merck's actions "extraordinarily stupid."

While many of Merck's actions in hiding the risks of Vioxx may not have been illegal, but the fact that it did all it could cover up the risks definitely helps the case of Vioxx victims who have been saying that Merck knew the dangers of the painkiller and it deliberately kept them in the dark. It is highly likely that Vioxx litigation will get even more complicated due to this development making it difficult for the company to defend itself in the rapidly growing number of lawsuits.

Beijing Youth Daily is reporting that victims of Vioxx in China are grouping together to file a class action lawsuit against Merck. Victims from many other countries, including Britain, Israel, The Netherlands, Germany, South Africa, New Zealand, France, and Australia.

According to the report, a law firm in Beijing is seeking Chinese victims to come forward. The FDA estimates that as many as 60,000 Americans died after taking Vioxx though Merck refuses to accept responsibility for any of the deaths.

Related article: Update on federal trial in Houston

Dr. David Silver is a rheumatologist based in Los Angeles and has received research grants from Merck in the past. In addition to that he is a paid speaker for the company. So anything that he says should be believed with a lot of caution.

In fact there was no surprises in his testimony today. He basically regurgitated everything that Merck has been saying for years - that Vioxx was safe, that it did not kill anyone, and that everyone else who believes otherwise is an idiot.

And of course Dr. Silver relied only one FDA memo to make his point. Now it is no secret that the US FDA has been hijacked by the pharmaceutical industry and the Agency iself regurgitates what the drugmakers tell it to say. The panel that FDA constituted to evaluate the Cox-2 drugs actually was full of doctors who had serious conflicts of interest (many of them were paid by Merck and Pfizer).

He had also probably not read the latest study published in the British Medical Journal that all Cox-2 drugs including Vioxx were no better than the painkillers that you can buy for pennies in the supermarket.
Dr. Silver was testifying after the plaintiff's attorneys rested their case and Evelyn Irvin Plunkett, the wife of the deceased Richard "Dicky" Irvin, testified that he was a healthy man and had a job that required him to do a lot of physical work. They can only attribute his death to Vioxx.

Related article: World famous cardiologist blasts Merck

It was definitely not a great weekend for Merck's attorneys after a tough week. The company's worst nightmare hit them on Saturday when one of the top cardiologists in the world blasted every single argument that the company has been using in its defense.

Dr. Eric Topol of the Cleveland Clinic called Merck's behavior "repulsive" and "appalling" in his video testimony shown to the jury in the ongoing trial in the death of Richard "Dicky" Irvin. Dr. Topol was an early critic of Vioxx and was seriously upset that Merck was misleading the whole world about its risks and benefits.

Another important point made during the testimony will also help the plaintiff in this case and in thousands of other cases. Contrary to what the company has been saying, Dr. Topol says that Vioxx can have deadly side effects even if taken for a very short period of time and the heart attack might come immediately after the drug is taken.

He also cricized Merck's argument that the company knew about the dangers of the drug only in September 2004 when it recalled Vioxx. Dr. Topol thinks that the risks were known as early as 1999.

Related article: Merck put pfofits ahead of patient safety

Bad week for Merck in the federal Vioxx trial

This wasn't exactly a great week for Merck. Apart from announcing layoffs and plant closures, Superior Court Judge Carol Higbee chose two very difficult cases for Merck to win (the trial begins in February next year). To make matters worse for the company, a newly published study in the British Medical Journal says that everything that Merck and Pfizer have said about the benefits of Vioxx, Celebrex, and Bextra have no basis in science. The study finds no evidence to back up claims that the new generation of anti-inflammatory drugs (COX-2 inhibitors) are less harmful to the stomach lining than many traditional anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Vioxx, Celebrex, and Bextra all belong to the Cox-2 family of drugs and both Merck and Pfizer not only charged a much higher price for these drugs but also made tall claims about these features in their advertisements.

Merck finds itself under attack from medical experts

Dr. Colin Bloor, a pathology expert, told the jury that Vioxx contributed to the death of Richard "Dicky" Irvin, as claimed by his wife Evelyn Irvin Plunkett. He was a healthy man at the time he started taking the painkiller with a prescription written by a family members.

Cardiac expert Dr. Benedict Lucchesi, who has testified at other two previous trials, told the jury how Vioxx blocks production of a chemcial prostacyclin that prevents the blood from clotting. Another cardiologist Dr. Thomas Baldwin agreed with Dr. Lucchesi and testified that only Vioxx could be held responsible for Mr. Irvin's death.

Dr. Wayne Ray, who heads the Pharmaco-Epidemiology department at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, told jurors that Vioxx was a dangerous drug and caused heart attacks. He held the drug responsible for Irvin's sudden death.

Really bad news for Merck

Dr. Eric Topol who is considered to be an authority on cardiovascular diseases and has been an early critic of Cox-2 drugs will also testify by videotape in this trial. While Merck tried to discredit him in the past and he did not testify at the other two trials, Federal Judge Eldon Fallon wants the jury to hear his expert opinion on the dangers of Vioxx.

Related article: Merck buried under Vioxx recall litigation