The federal court overseeing thousands of lawsuits alleging Nexium and other proton pump inhibitors caused serious kidney complications has set a date for the litigation’s first bellwether trial.
According to a Case Management Order issued in the U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey, earlier this month, the litigation will convene six bellwether trials, with the first scheduled for November 15, 2021.
“For the first 6 bellwether cases, there shall be a generic discovery deadline of September 15, 2020,” the Order states. “There will be soft caps of four depositions per side for bellwether discovery. The parties shall meet and confer on a pre-trial schedule incorporating these provisions and report back to the Court by January 10, 2020.”
More than 13,400 proton pump inhibitor lawsuits are currently undergoing coordinated pretrial proceedings in the District of New Jersey. All of the pending cases were filed on behalf of individuals who allegedly suffered kidney failure and other renal complications due to the long-term use of Nexium Prilosec, PrevAcid, Protonix, and Dexilant.
These heart burn medications are among the most popular drugs in the world. But while they are only indicated for short-term use, research suggests that many people take proton pump inhibitors for inappropriate indications and for far longer than current guidelines recommend.
While they’re generally believed to be safe, mounting studies indicate that proton pump inhibitors may be associated with a range of serious side effects, especially if taken for an extended period of time, including:
Other adverse events possibly linked to long-term use include kidney failure, chronic kidney disease, acute kidney disease, and acute interstitial nephritis.
Plaintiffs pursuing proton pump inhibitor lawsuits in the District of New Jersey claim that the manufacturers of Nexium and other drugs in this class had long known of the potential for kidney complications, but purposely concealed this information and failed to provide adequate warnings to the public. Plaintiffs further assert that they could have avoided their injuries had such warnings been made available.