Sunday, September 29, 2013

Diabetes Thyroid Cancer Risk: Some Diabetes Drugs Have Been Shown To Cause An Increased Risk of Thyroid Cancer by Diabetes Thyroid Cancer Lawyer

Diabetes Thyroid Cancer Risk: Some Diabetes Drugs Have Been Shown To Cause An Increased Risk of Thyroid Cancer by Diabetes Thyroid Cancer Lawyer

Recent scientific studies have shown that some diabetes drugs cause an increased risk of cancer including thyroid cancer and pancreatic cancer.  Persons taking diabetes drugs should be aware of these cancer risks and discuss the potential health risk with their medical provider to determine their best treatment as well as how to detect early signs of cancer.

Persons that have been taking diabetes drugs and have been diagnosed with cancer as well as families that have lost a loved one to cancer and that loved one was on a diabetes drug should make sure that the adverse reaction of the diabetes drug is reported to the health provider that prescribed the diabetes drug and the FDA.  Further, several diabetes drug lawyers are currently reviewing diabetes drug lawsuits.  For more information on these lawsuits please go to the following web pages: Diabetes Drug Thyroid Cancer Lawsuit Information and Diabetes Drug Pancreatic Cancer Lawsuit Information.

Early Detection of Cancer is Essential for Survival: Symptoms of Thyroid Cancer and Pancreatic Cancer

Early warning of cancer is essential for survival and can often prevent the spread of cancer in an individual.  Below are symptoms of both Thyroid Cancer and Pancreatic Cancer.  Persons on diabetes drugs should be aware of the risk of cancer that the diabetes drug may cause and discuss the risk as well as early detection protocols with their health care provider.  

Thyroid cancer is usually highly treatable when found early and is usually painless and without symptoms in its early stages. Unless there is an obvious neck mass that can be seen, most nodules are detected by chance during a routine physical examination or during a doctor visit for an unrelated purpose.

Some symptoms that may appear include:
  •     Hoarseness that has no known cause and does not go away
  •     Difficulty breathing or shortness of breath
  •     Difficulty swallowing or an unusual sensation (a “lump”) when swallowing
  •     Nodule (lump) or growth in the neck
  •     An abnormally large lymph node (a “swollen gland”) that fails to spontaneously shrink over a few months' time

Pancreatic cancer can be one of the most deadly types of cancer and early detection of pancreatic cancer is essential for survival.  Symptoms of pancreatic cancer can include:
  • dark urine and clay-colored stools,
  • fatigue and weakness, 
  • jaundice (a yellow color in the skin, mucus membranes, or eyes), 
  • loss of appetite and weight loss, 
  • nausea and vomiting, 
  • pain or discomfort in the upper part of the belly or abdomen, 
  • back pain, 
  • blood clots, 
  • diarrhea, and 
  • indigestion.
Pancreatic cancer is often not detected early on and is often advanced when it is first found.  As such, ninety-five percent of the people diagnosed with this cancer will not be alive 5 years later.  Some patients have pancreatic cancer that can be surgically removed are cured. However, in more than 80% of patients the tumor has already spread and cannot be completely removed at the time of diagnosis. 

Monday, September 23, 2013

Byetta Cancer Lawyer: Recent Studies Have Shown That Byetta May Cause An Increased Risk of Both Thyroid Cancer and Pancreatic Cancer by Byetta Cancer Lawyer

Byetta Cancer Lawyer: Recent Studies Have Shown That Byetta May Cause An Increased Risk of Both Thyroid Cancer and Pancreatic Cancer by Byetta Cancer Lawyer Jason S. Coomer

Persons taking the injectable diabetes drug, Byetta (Exenatide), should be aware that this diabetes drug may cause an increased health risk of both thyroid cancer as well as pancreatic cancer.  It is important for any person taking Byetta to communicate with their physician to determine the best course of treatment for their diabetes and to make sure that they are aware of any potential cancer symptoms if they continue to take the drug.
If you are taking Byetta and have been diagnosed with thyroid cancer or pancreatic cancer, please feel free to contact Byetta Thyroid Cancer Lawyer and Byetta Pancreatic Cancer Lawyer, Jason S. Coomer about a potential lawsuit. 

Byetta Pancreatic Cancer Lawsuits and Byetta Thyroid Cancer Lawsuits

Byetta Pancreatic Cancer Lawsuits and Byetta Thyroid Cancer Lawsuits are in the process of being reviewed and filed as recent scientific evidence indicates that the injectable diabetes drug, Byetta (Exenatide), may cause an increased risk of thyroid cancer and pancreatic cancer.  Pancreatic Cancer is an extremely deadly form of cancer.  Most people diagnosed with Pancreatic Cancer or Cancer of the Pancreas do not survive beyond the five years and many are given much less time as Pancreatic Cancer is hard to detect.  Early detection for both pancreatic cancer and thyroid cancer is a key to surviving cancer and preventing it from spreading.

Prior 2009, the FDA received more than 30 adverse reports from Byetta users. Base on this information, the FDA directed Amylin to conduct six post-marketing studies regarding potential health risks associated with the use of Byetta including the risk of thyroid cancer and pancreatic cancer. Additionally, the FDA has expressed concern that all extended-release diabetes drugs belonging to Byetta's family of GLP-1 receptor agonists may be linked to thyroid tumors based on tests conducted on rats and monkeys.

For the over 1 million users of Byetta, it is important to be aware of these cancer health risks and contact your doctor if you are experiencing any potential cancer symptoms.

Wednesday, May 29, 2013

Fatal Medical Mistakes: Fatal Medical Mistakes and Deadly Hospital Errors Are A Leading Cause of Death and Becoming More Common by Fatal Medical Mistake Lawyer Jason S. Coomer

Fatal Medical Mistakes: Fatal Medical Mistakes and Deadly Hospital Errors Are A Leading Cause of Death and Becoming More Common by Fatal Medical Mistake Lawyer Jason S. Coomer 

Fatal medical mistakes and hospital errors are a leading cause of death and becoming more common.  Families that have lost a loved one from a fatal medical mistake or deadly hospital error should obtain their loved one's medical records and make sure a proper investigation is made of the mistake.  A proper investigation or a fatal medical malpractice lawsuit can often ensure that a hospital corrects policies to avoid future similar fatal medical mistakes. 

For more information on fatal medical mistakes and hospital errors, please feel free to contact Fatal Mistake Medical Malpractice Lawyer, Jason S. Coomer.


Decreased Budget and Lack of Communication Can Cause Fatal Medical Mistakes

Unfortunately, medical mistakes happen when doctors and nurses get too busy, are understaffed, under the influence of drugs, or are just not paying attention.  As medical budgets go down and healing people becomes more of a "for profit" business, cost cutting measures are causing more medical mistakes.  Overworked doctors, residents, and nurses are much more likely to make mistakes than well rested health care professionals.

Medical mistakes also happen more often when no one is watching.  It is extremely important when you are in the hospital to have someone that is with you and watching out for your well being.  This is especially true if you have an allergy to certain types of medicines.  Communication with your health care professionals is also important and can greatly limit medical mistakes.

Preventing Fatal Medical Errors: It's Going to Be a Long, Hard Slog - CBS News

"Hospitals are dangerous places for patients, thanks to the generally underappreciated risks of infection and medical errors, which may claim almost 100,000 lives a year in the U.S. That's true even though the Institute of Medicine sounded the alarm more than a decade ago."



Medical radiation treatments fraught with technician error and fatal mishap, oversight questionable


"Medical radiation accidents are more common than you may think. Whether it's a software glitch or technician error, there are plenty of opportunities for a scan or treatment to go horribly wrong. And technologists are poorly regulated in a number of states, increasing the chances of a serious and potentially life-threatening mistake."

FIVE MYTHS ABOUT MEDICAL MALPRACTICE - five_myths_about_medical_negligence.pdf 

Myth #1: There are Too Many “Frivolous” Malpractice Lawsuits

Myth #2: Malpractice Claims Drive Up Health Care Costs

Myth #3: Doctors are Fleeing

Myth #4: Malpractice Claims Drive Up Doctors’ Premiums

Myth #5: Tort Reform will Lower Insurance Rates 
 

Severe brain damage and death can be caused by a lack of oxygen getting to the brain, a hemorrhage inside the brain, or damage to the skull.  When an improper combination of drugs is prescribed it can cause a patient to go into respiratory failure, this combined with improper monitoring of the patient can cause prolonged lack of oxygen to the brain resulting in permanent brain damage and even death.
These serious brain injuries can occur because of medical negligence when careless health care providers do not provide proper monitoring of patients, prescribe incorrect drug combinations, do not recognize fetal distress, or fail to recognize a patient has stopped breathing.  For this reason, it is important to have a person with HIPPA Authority, Medical Power of Attorney, and Limited Power of Attorney looking out for you or a loved one while they are in the hospital.


Tuesday, May 28, 2013

Diabetics and Pancreatic Cancer Risk: Diabetics Should Be Aware That Some Diabetic Drugs May Cause An Increased Risk of Pancreatic Cancer by Diabetic Cancer Lawyer Jason S. Coomer

Diabetics and Pancreatic Cancer Risk: Diabetics, Physicians Treating Diabetics, and Loved Ones of Diabetic Should Be Aware That Some Diabetic Drugs May Cause An Increased Risk of Pancreatic Cancer by Diabetic Cancer Lawyer Jason S. Coomer
 
Recent scientific studies have shown that some diabetes drugs may cause an increased health risk of pancreatic cancer and other forms of cancer.  These incretin diabetes drugs include exenatide (Byetta, Bydureon), liraglutide (Victoza), sitagliptin (Januvia, Janumet, Janumet XR, Juvisync), saxagliptin (Onglyza, Kombiglyze XR), alogliptin (Nesina, Kazano, Oseni), and linagliptin (Tradjenta, Jentadueto). If you have been taking a diabetes drug and have been diagnosed with pancreatic cancer or you have lost a loved one who was taking a diabetes drug and was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, please report the adverse action to the prescribing medical doctor and FDA as soon as possible.   For more information on diabetes drug pancreatic cancer lawsuits, please feel free to send an e-mail message to Pancreatic Cancer Lawyer Jason Coomer or go to the following pages: Januvia, Janument, Victoza, Byetta, Onglyza, Bydureon, and diabetes drugs.  
 
 Diabetics Should Be Aware of Incretin Drug Pancreatic Cancer Health Risk
 
Incretin class diabetic drugs work by mimicking the incretin hormones that the body usually produces naturally to stimulate the release of insulin in response to a meal. They are used along with diet and exercise to lower blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes.  Many of these incretin diabetes drugs already include a black box warning regarding thyroid cancer risk, but evidence is growing that these drugs may also create an increased risk of pancreatic cancer.  

Diabetics who are taking incretin diabetes drugs including: Januvia, Janument, Victoza, Byetta, Onglyza, Tradjenta,  Oseni, and other diabetes drugs should be aware of the cancer health risks and discuss these potential health risks with their physicians.

Thursday, May 2, 2013

St. Judes EON Back Stimulator Adverse Events Include Burning, Pain, Disability and Required Intervention By Texas St. Judes Eon Back Stimulator Lawyer Jason S. Coomer

St. Judes EON Back Stimulator Adverse Events Include Burning, Pain, Disability and Required Intervention By Texas St. Judes Eon Back Stimulator Lawyer Jason S. Coomer

Defective St. Judes EON stimulators can cause catastrophic injuries, impairment, and the need for revision surgery.  Patients considering a spinal implant should review the FDA's adverse event reports and discuss potential problems with their health care provide prior to having surgery or implants.

When investigating defective St. Judes Eon Back Stimulator lawsuits, it is important to know what implant had been used as well as to obtain medical records of the surgery.  For more information on Defective St. Judes EON lawsuits, please feel free to send an e-mail message to defective St. Judes EON lawyer Jason Coomer.

St. Judes EON Back Stimulator FDA Adverse Event Reports

Several different adverse events have been reported to the FDA regarding St. Judes EON Back Stimulators including a few of them which are listed below.  For patients that have had bad experiences with St. Judes EON Back Stimulators, it is import to make sure that these adverse events are reported to your health care provide and the FDA.  

Model Number 3851ANS
Event Date 07/15/2012
Event Type  Injury   Patient Outcome  Disability,Required Intervention
Event Description

An eon ipg spinal cord stimulator generator implant was inserted on (b)(6) 2012. On (b)(6) 2012, upon recharging the unit, client experienced pain and a burning sensation at the implant site. The client immediately stopped the recharging process at that time. On (b)(6) 2012, the client tried to recharge the unit once again and she immediately felt a burning discomfort at the implant site. She stopped the charge and reported to the surgeon's office. A company representative from st. Judes got in contact with the pt and provided her with a new charging unit on (b)(6) 2012. The pt proceeded to recharge on this date, however, this time the pt experienced severe pain with charging. Pt is scheduled to have the generator removed on (b)(6) 2012. Diagnosis or reason for use: rsd - used for pain relief.

Model Number 3851
Event Date 05/21/2012
Event Type  Injury   Patient Outcome  Disability
Event Description

The stimulator does not work as intended. Intermittent, and gets heated when charging. The stimulator shuts off periodically, when turned on, it beeps 2x then shuts off. The device has to be turned on and started over. The device has to be turned up 1 bar at a time for strength. After 4 bars, the unit shuts down. Doctors stated that it needed to scar in, st judes reps and stated it will work. Now almost a year out, this device still does not work, has had a revision of the scs, and moved a level down. It still stimulates the abdomen and causing severe stomach pain. The ipg has been reprogrammed by st judes reps many times and still does not work as expected. On (b)(6) 2011, stimulator implanted. On (b)(6) 2011, stimulator turned on and activated. Every 2 weeks after that i was up at the doctors office having it readjusted, still doesn't work. Around (b)(6) 2012 had revision done. Still didn't work. Worked intermittently and shut off. Stimulating abdomen more than any other part of back causing severe stomach pains. (b)(6), i had 14 screws and 5 rods removed from back as st judes reps and doctor thought that it might have been interfering with the pulse signals. Still to this day, (b)(6) 2013. The device still does not work correctly. Dates of use: (b)(6) 2011 - (b)(6) 2013.

Model Number 3788
Event Date 01/04/2013
Event Type  Malfunction 
Event Description

Per the surgeon - failed occipital nerve stimulator; possible defective generator and/or lead. The surgeon removed and replaced the occipital nerve stimulator and lead. ======================manufacturer response for spinal cord stimulator, spinal cord stimulator generator (per site reporter). ======================rep took the device for evaluation.

Model Number 3788
Event Date 09/02/2010
Event Type  Malfunction   Patient Outcome  Other
Manufacturer Narrative

Eval method: the device history and sterilization records were also reviewed. Results: the device history and sterilization records were reviewed and were found to meet specs and no anomalies were found. Conclusion: the cause of the reported complaint could not be determined from the review of the dhr and sterilization records. Ans has limited info related to the pt's medical history and is unable to form an opinion as to the relevancy of the pt's history to the event reported. Ans defers to the pt's physician regarding medical history.

Event Description

On (b)(6) 2010, the pt was implanted with an scs system. The pt states that her system will turn off randomly. This has happened many times over the last several months. While it is off, she is not able to communicate with her ipg via the programmer. Her system will then turn back on by itself. When it turns back on, it comes on with a strong surge and then reduces to the normal stimulation level. After it turns back on, she is able to communicate with the ipg via the programmer again. The pt has not tried to communicate using the charger during a time when the stimulation was off. This problem does not appear to be position related or happen at any specific time of day. Diagnostic impedances all came back normal. The pt was reprogrammed over 6 times and all programs had the same results. The clinical specialist was never preset during a period when the stimulation was off. The doctor has decided to replace the ipg. 

Model Number 3788
Event Date 02/04/2010
Event Type  Injury   Patient Outcome  Other
Manufacturer Narrative

Method: device history and sterilization records were reviewed. Results: the device history and sterilization records reviewed were found to meet specs and no anomalies were found. Conclusion: the cause of the reported complaint could not be determined from the review of the dhr and sterilization records. Ans has limited info related to the pt's medical history and is unable to form an opinion as to the relevancy of the pt's history to the event reported. Ans defers to the pt's physician regarding medical history.

Event Description

On (b) (6) 2008, a pt with rsd of the right foot was implanted with dual percutaneous leads. It was reported that the pt complained of over stimulation. On (b) (6) 2010, the dr replaced the percutaneous leads with a surgical lead. The percutaneous leads did not have any irregularities and were functioning fine. The leads had migrated into the gutter and the pt was receiving over-stimulation. On the evening of (b) (6) 2010, it was reported that the pt was at home and felt severe over stimulation/shocking. The pt fell out of their chair and to the floor. The pt reported the symptoms were similar to a "seizure. " it took about 5 minutes before the pt was able to call 911. The emt was able to turn off stimulation with the magnet. Emt stated pt was drenched from sweat from his neck down and his hands were curling in, as if having a seizure. On (b) (6) 2010, the clinical specialist (cs) met with the pt at the hospital. Diagnostic impedance showed contact 8 was high. X-ray verified the connections were intact and that the lead may have moved left. Programs 1-6 for the previous percutaneous lead were removed so the pt could not inadvertently use the old programs.

Patients with Serious Back Injuries Including Severed Spinal Cords, Crushed Discs, Bulged Discs, and Herniated Discs when Seeking Pain Relief can sometimes Fall Victim to Defective Products, Negligent Health Care, and "For Profit" Medical Professionals Seeking to Increase Profits: Be Careful When Deciding to Have Back Surgery

The human spinal cord is basically a bundle of nerves which is surrounded by 33 bones or vertebrae.  Located between each vertebrae is a spinal disc which is a liquid filled disc shaped pouch.  These discs are stacked on top of one another and act as shock absorbers allowing the spine to flex, bend, and twist.  When functioning properly, the vertebrae and discs protect the spinal cord allow nerve impulses to travel from and to the brain to other parts of the body.  This allows us to experience sensations, move our bodies, and control many bodily functions.

Problems arise when the vertebrae, discs, or spinal cord are injured.  Broken vertebrae can damage and impinge on discs or the spinal cord causing extreme pain, numbness, and loss of control of bodily functions.  Back injuries can occur through traumatic events that result in paralysis.  Depending where and how severe the injury is will determine what type and how severe the paralysis is.   

The human body has remarkable healing potential.  Combining determination, proper medical attention, knowledge about an injury, and focus on the healing process can greatly help most injuries.  Hiring a lawyer to battle the insurance companies and responsible parties can allow the injured person to focus on the healing process.     

If you or a loved one have suffered a traumatic spinal cord injury or other serious back injury including a severed spinal cord, broken vertebrae, crushed discs, herniated discs, or a bulged discs; the most important thing you can do is to find a good medical doctor to assess the injury so you know what you are dealing with and how to best treat the injury.  From physical therapy and steroid injections to back surgeries (lumbar diskectomy, cervical fusion, and other lumbar or cervical procedures), there are many different ways to treat a back injury and it is important to know what will work best for you.  

Unfortunately, there are also medical clinics, medical implant sales people, and doctors that are more interested in profit and their bottom line than what is best for a patient.  Some of these medical professionals carelessly cause painful and difficult conditions to become much worse by paralyzing patients that are seeking relief from pain.   

As the economic pressures of the medical system keep pushing medical providers to become "for profit" and prioritize making money over the health of individual patients; unnecessary procedures, overworked staff, using defective products, and making mistakes will become more common and hurt people.  It is extremely important to thoroughly investigate any clinic, hospital, surgeon or other health care provider prior to having spinal surgery, or any other complicated procedure.  Please feel free to go to the following web pages for more information on Failed Back Surgery and Defective Implantable Neurostimulation System Lawsuits, Texas Medical Malpractice Lawsuits, and Federal Medical Malpractice Lawsuits.

Monday, March 18, 2013

Spine Stimulator Lawyer: St. Jude Stimulators, Medtronic Stimulators, and Boston Scientific Stimulators May Malfunction Causing Pain and Requiring Removal by Spinal Stimulator Lawyer Jason S. Coomer

Spine Stimulator Lawyer: Implantable Neurostimulation Systems Including St. Jude Stimulators, Medtronic Stimulators, and Boston Scientific Stimulators May Malfunction Causing Pain and Requiring Removal by Spine Stimulator Lawyer Jason S. Coomer

Several Implanted Spine Stimulators have malfunctioned including locking on and failing to work causing significant pain and many situations additional surgeries to repair or remove the implanted stimulators. Persons with or thinking about receiving an implanted spine stimulator, should speak with their health care provider about the potential health risks of having a spine stimulator implanted in them as well as make sure that the device is being used for an FDA approved indication.

Persons that have experienced severe shocks, malfunctioning batteries, and other problems with an implanted spinal stimulator, should consult their health care provider and make sure that any adverse health events are reported to the FDA. For more information on spine stimulator lawsuits, please go to the following web page: Defective Spine Stimulator Lawsuit Information or please feel free to send an e-mail to Spine Stimulator Lawyer Jason Coomer.


Implantable Spinal-Devices Are a Multi-billion Dollar Industry and the Leaders In the Industry Are Medtronic, St. Jude Medical, and Boston Scientific

Implantable Neurostimulation Systems and other spinal-devices are a huge business for the medical implant device industry.  The global market for spinal-devices is currently over $ 3 billion per year and is expected to increase to over $5 billion per year by 2018.  Currently, the major manufacturers in the neurostimulator market are Medtronic, St. Jude Medical, and Boston Scientific.
Neurostimulators have been used for a variety of types of chronic back pain situations including heriniated disks, postlaminectomy paid, Complex Reginal Pay Syndrome, unsuccessful disk surgery, Degenerative Disk Disease, and Failed Back Syndrome. The Medtronic implantable neurostimulation system is indicated for spinal cord stimulation (SCS) as an aid in the management of chronic, intractable pain of the trunk and/or limbs—including unilateral or bilateral pain associated with several different conditions.   Unfortunately, because of the profits to be made from implanting a spinal stimulator, many people have received spinal stimulators for off-label or non-approved indications.  

Medical professionals that are aware of significant off-label use of spinal stimulators are encouraged to properly report any Medicare fraud or Medicaid fraud that may be occurring.  Please feel free to go to the following web page for information on Qui Tam Whistleblower Reward Lawsuits and Reporting Medicare Fraud
FDA Action on Spine Stimulators

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) issues warning letters when it finds certain problems that it wants a company to fix.  In a letter dated July 17, 2012, the FDA issued a warning letter related to Medtronic’s process for handling complaints and stated that regulatory action might ensue should the manufacturer fail to address the agency’s request to take action. The FDA also issued a warning letter to St. Jude Medical, resulting in the company’s announcement that there were weld failures present within the internal batteries of their units. Physicians and Patients who may have been implanted with defective stimulators are being notified individually by St. Jude Medical. Since the problem surfaced in 2011, over 300 heat-related complaints have been filed on behalf of carriers of defective units and several lawsuits have been filed. The failure of a stimulator to operate correctly has had many effects on our clients. At a minimum, defective devices expose clients to the very pain the devices are supposed to relieve. In addition to increased pain, other symptoms our clients have reported experiencing include:
  • Severe irritation and  burning at the battery site
  • An inability to control the stimulator (resulting in unwelcome jolts, pain, or temporary paralysis)
  • Severe burns while recharging the battery
  • Premature battery depletion
  • Bladder problems
  • Increased numbness
  • Lead migration and broken anchors
  • Partial paralysis
In most cases, when a stimulator is found to be defective it must be removed. This surgery can be both costly and cause its own complications. Not only is there always a risk of infection with every surgery, but because the removal of a stimulator requires navigating delicate nerves in the spine, it is possible that nerves can be nicked or otherwise damages during the procedure leading to symptoms such as weakness, pain, or numbness in the body. In some cases, removal of the simulator can result in a leakage of spinal fluid from the epidural space, leading to severe and long-lasting headaches or feelings of fatigue which may heal on its own or may require its own surgery to repair.

Spinal Stimulator Lawsuit Information

In reviewing potential failed back surgery implant lawsuits, it is important to obtain copies of your medical records and to determine if the implantable neurostimulation system was properly implanted by the spinal surgeon or if the spinal stimulator was defective.  If the spinal stimulator was defective and has/had to be removed, it is important that the defective device is kept as potential evidence.  For more information on this topic, please feel free to go to the following web page, Failed Back Surgery and Defective Implantable Neurostimulation System Lawsuits  or please feel free to send an e-mail to Defective Spinal Stimulator Lawyer Jason Coomer.

Thursday, March 14, 2013

Incretin Drug Cancer Risk: Diabetes Drugs in the Incretin Mimetic Class May Cause an Increased Risk of Pancreatic Cancer and Pancreatitis By Incretin Drug Pancreatic Cancer Lawyer Jason S. Coomer

Incretin Drug Cancer Risk: Diabetes Drugs in the Incretin Mimetic Class May Cause an Increased Risk of Pancreatic Cancer and Pancreatitis By Incretin Pancreatic Cancer Lawyer and Diabetes Incretin Drug Cancer Lawyer Jason S. Coomer

Diabetes drugs in the incretin mimetic class may cause an increased health risk of pancreatic cancer and pancreatitis.  These incretin diabetes drug include  exenatide (Byetta, Bydureon), liraglutide (Victoza), sitagliptin (Januvia, Janumet, Janumet XR, Juvisync), saxagliptin (Onglyza, Kombiglyze XR), alogliptin (Nesina, Kazano, Oseni), and linagliptin (Tradjenta, Jentadueto). These drugs work by mimicking the incretin hormones that the body usually produces naturally to stimulate the release of insulin in response to a meal. They are used along with diet and exercise to lower blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes.

Many of these incretin diabetes drugs already include a black box warning regarding thyroid cancer risk, but evidence is growing that these drugs may also create an increased risk of pancreatic cancer. People that are taking incretin diabetes drugs including: Januvia, Janument, Victoza, Byetta, Onglyza, Tradjenta, Bydureon, Oseni, and other diabetes drugs should be aware of the cancer health risks. If you have been taking a diabetes drug and have been diagnosed with Pancreatic Cancer or you have lost a loved one that was taking a diabetes drug and the loved one was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, please report the adverse action to the prescribing medical doctor and FDA as soon as possible.
 

FDA Drug Safety Communication: FDA investigating reports of possible increased risk of pancreatitis and pre-cancerous findings of the pancreas from incretin mimetic drugs for type 2 diabetes

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is evaluating unpublished new findings by a group of academic researchers that suggest an increased risk of pancreatitis, or inflammation of the pancreas, and pre-cancerous cellular changes called pancreatic duct metaplasia in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with a class of drugs called incretin mimetics. These findings were based on examination of a small number of pancreatic tissue specimens taken from patients after they died from unspecified causes. FDA has asked the researchers to provide the methodology used to collect and study these specimens and to provide the tissue samples so the Agency can further investigate potential pancreatic toxicity associated with the incretin mimetics.

Thursday, February 28, 2013

Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits: Two Juries Awarded Large Verdicts For Vaginal Mesh That Contracted and Eroded Causing Health Problems by Texas Vaginal Mesh Lawyer Jason S. Coomer

Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits: Two Juries Have Awarded Large Verdicts To Women That Had Vaginal Mesh Implanted In Them Contract and Erode Causing Serious Health Problems by Texas Vaginal Mesh Lawyer Jason S. Coomer

Thousands of women, who have had vaginal mesh implanted in them during surgery, are at an increased risk of suffering significant health problems from recalled vaginal mesh.  These health problems can be caused by mesh erosion, mesh deterioration, and mesh contraction and can include recurrence of prolapse and/or incontinence; bowel perforation; bladder perforation; blood vessel perforation; neurological problems; erosion of the mesh through vagina infection; urinary problems; and vaginal epithelium.  These health issues can often require multiple surgeries to repair or cause permanent health problems. 

If you or a loved one has suffered significant health problems from a failed vaginal mesh, it is important to seek immediate medical attention.  For more information on contracted vaginal mesh lawsuits or eroded vaginal mesh lawsuits, please feel free to contact Texas Failed Vaginal Mesh Surgery Lawyer, Jason Coomer, via e-mail message or go to the following webpage: Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit Information.

N.J. jury awards woman $7.76 mln punitive damages for vaginal mesh | Reuters

"A New Jersey jury on Thursday ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay $7.76 million in punitive damages to a South Dakota nurse who claimed harm from the company's now-recalled Prolift vaginal mesh."

Johnson & Johnson Told to Pay $3.35 Million in Vaginal Mesh Case - NYTimes.com

On February 25, 2013, a jury awarded $3.35 million to a woman who suffered a failed vaginal mesh surgery.  The failed vaginal mesh implant caused the woman to suffer erosion, scar tissue, inflammation and neurologic compromise.  The woman had to seek significant medical treatment including having to endure 18 operations to repair the damage caused by the failed vaginal mesh.  

These cases are some the first vaginal mesh lawsuits to reach a jury and many more failed vaginal mesh lawsuits are currently pending.

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Transvaginal Mesh Surgery Lawsuits: Jury Awards $3.35 Million in Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuit by Transvaginal Mesh Lawyer Jason S. Coomer

Transvaginal Mesh Surgery Lawsuits: A Jury Awarded $3.35 Million to a Woman Who Suffered Transvaginal Mesh Failure and Had to Have 18 Operations to Repair the Damages She Suffered from the Transvaginal Mesh Failure by Transvaginal Mesh Lawyer Jason S. Coomer

On February 25, 2013, a jury awarded $3.35 million to a woman who suffered a failed transvaginal mesh surgery.  The failed transvaginal mesh surgery caused the woman to suffer erosion, scar tissue, inflammation and neurologic compromise.  The woman had to seek significant medical treatment including having to endure 18 operations to repair the damage caused by the failed transvaginal mesh.  This case in one of the first transvaginal mesh lawsuits to reach a jury and many more failed transvaginal mesh lawsuits are currently pending.

If you or a loved one has suffered from a failed transvaginal mesh surgery, it is important to seek immediate medical attention.  For more information on failed tranvaginal mesh surgery lawsuits, failed pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery lawsuits, or failed stress urinary incontinence (SUI) surgery lawsuits, please feel free to contact Failed Transvaginal Mesh Surgery Lawyer, Jason Coomer, via e-mail message or go to the following webpage: Transvaginal Mesh Surgery Lawsuit Information

 Transvaginal Mesh FDA Safety Communications and Actions

On July 13, 2011, the United States Food and Drug Administration released the below FDA Safety Communication update regarding Serious Complications Associated with Transvaginal Placement of Surgical Mesh for Pelvic Organ Prolapse.  This FDA Safety Communication and other FDA Actions were intended to provide adequate safety warnings to women and their health care providers regarding the potential health risk of transvaginal mesh.  Women considering transvaginal mesh surgery and their health care providers should be aware of these potential health risks.

Audience:

Health care providers who implant surgical mesh to repair pelvic organ prolapse and/or stress urinary incontinence.

Health care providers involved in the care of patients with surgical mesh implanted to repair pelvic organ prolapse and/or stress urinary incontinence.

Patients who are considering or have received a surgical mesh implant to repair pelvic organ prolapse and/or stress urinary incontinence

Medical Specialties: gynecology, urogynecology, urology, general surgery, internal medicine, family practice, emergency medicine

Device:

Surgical mesh is a medical device that is generally used to repair weakened or damaged tissue. It is made from porous absorbable or non-absorbable synthetic material or absorbable biologic material. In urogynecologic procedures, surgical mesh is permanently implanted to reinforce the weakened vaginal wall to repair pelvic organ prolapse or to support the urethra to treat urinary incontinence.

Background:

Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) occurs when the tissues that hold the pelvic organs in place become weak or stretched. Thirty to fifty percent of women may experience POP in their lifetime with 2 percent developing symptoms. When POP happens, the organs bulge (prolapse) into the vagina and sometimes prolapse past the vaginal opening. More than one pelvic organ can prolapse at the same time. Organs that can be involved in POP include the bladder, the uterus, the rectum, the top of the vagina (vaginal apex) after a hysterectomy, and the bowel.

Stress Urinary Incontinence:

Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is a leakage of urine during moments of physical activity, such as coughing, sneezing, laughing, or exercise.

Failed Transvaginal Mesh Surgery and Failed Transvaginal Mesh Surgery Lawsuits


There are still many women who have failed transvaginal mesh surgery and have suffered significant health problems from the failed surgery including recurrence of prolapse and/or incontinence, erosion of the mesh through the vagina infection, pain, urinary problems, vaginal epithelium, bowel perforation, bladder perforation, and blood vessel perforation.  If you or a loved one has suffered from a failed transvaginal mesh surgery, it is important to seek immediate medical attention.  For information on a failed transvaginal mesh surgery lawsuits, please feel free to contact Failed Transvaginal Surgery Lawyer, Jason Coomer, via e-mail message or go to the following web page on Failed Transvaginal Surgery Lawsuit Information

Sunday, February 17, 2013

Pancreatic Cancer Causes: Several Diabetic Drugs Have Been Shown to Cause An Increased Risk of Pancreatic Cancer by Pancreatic Cancer Lawyer Jason S. Coomer

 Pancreatic Cancer Causes: Several Different Types of Diabetes Drugs Have Been Shown To Cause An Increased Risk of Pancreatic Cancer by Pancreatic Cancer Lawyer Jason S. Coomer

Recent scientific studies have shown that several diabetes drugs may cause an increased risk of pancreatic cancer.  People that are taking Onglyza, Tradjenta, Bydureon, Oseni, Byetta, Victoza, Januvia, or Janumet should be aware of the potential dangers of these drugs and should discuss the potential dangers of these drugs with their physician.  

If you have lost a loved one from Pancreatic Cancer who was taking a diabetes drug or you have been taking a diabetes drug and have been diagnosed with Pancreatic Cancer, please report the adverse action to the prescribing medical doctor and FDA as soon as possible.  Attorneys are in the process of filing and reviewing lawsuits where a person has developed pancreatic cancer after taking Onglyza, Tradjenta, Bydureon, Oseni, Byetta, Victoza, Januvia, and/or Janumet. For more information on this topic, please feel free to contact Pancreatic Cancer Lawyer, Jason S. Coomer or go to the following webpage: Pancreatic Cancer Lawsuit Information.

Pancreatic Cancer Detection: Understanding and Identifying Symptoms of Pancreatic Cancer Can Be Important In Early Detection and Treatment of Pancreatic Cancer Resulting in Higher Pancreatic Cancer Survival Rates

Symptoms of pancreatic cancer can include: dark urine and clay-colored stools, fatigue and weakness, jaundice (a yellow color in the skin, mucus membranes, or eyes), loss of appetite and weight loss, nausea and vomiting, pain or discomfort in the upper part of the belly or abdomen, back pain, blood clots, diarrhea, and indigestion.

Pancreatic cancer is often not detected early on and is often advanced when it is first found.  As such, ninety-five percent of the people diagnosed with this cancer will not be alive 5 years later.  Some patients have pancreatic cancer that can be surgically removed are cured. However, in more than 80% of patients the tumor has already spread and cannot be completely removed at the time of diagnosis.  In the few cases where pancreatic tumors can be removed by surgery. The standard surgical procedure to remove pancreatic tumors is called a Whipple procedure (pancreatoduodenectomy or pancreaticoduodenectomy). This surgery should be done by an experienced surgeon and at a medical center that performs the procedure often. Some studies suggest that the Whipple procedure is best performed at hospitals that do more than five of these surgeries per year.

When the tumor has not spread out of the pancreas, but cannot be removed, radiation therapy and chemotherapy together may be recommended. When the tumor has spread (metastasized) to other organs such as the liver, chemotherapy alone is usually used. The standard chemotherapy drug is gemcitabine, but other drugs may be used. Gemcitabine can help about 25% of patients.

Patients whose tumor cannot be totally removed, but who have a blockage of the tubes that transport bile (biliary obstruction) must have that blockage relieved. There are two approaches including surgery and placement of a tiny metal tube (biliary stent) during ERCP.

Managing pain and other symptoms is an important part of treating advanced pancreatic cancer. Palliative care tams and hospice can help with pain and symptom management, and provide psychological support for patients and their families during the illness.

The Diabetes Drug Market is Over $40 Billion Each Year and Growing Rapidly Encouraging Drug Companies To Push Dangerous Diabetes Drugs For Profits

More than 300 million people worldwide suffer from diabetes, including about 30 million Americans.  In 2010, the global prevalence of diabetes was estimated to have reached 285 million and predicted to reach 438 million by 2030. The corresponding figures for North America were 37.4 million in 2010 and 53.2 million by 2030 and in Europe 55.2 million in 2010 and 66.2 million in 2030.  The global market for products in the management of diabetes currently stands at $41 billion and is on pace to grow to over $114 billion by 2018.

Monday, January 28, 2013

Blood Thinner Death and Injuries: The Blood Thinner, Pradaxa, Has Been Linked to Numerous Blood Loss Deaths by Blood Thinner Death Lawyer Jason S. Coomer

Blood Thinner Death and Injuries: The Blood Thinner, Pradaxa, Has No Known Antidote or Reversal Agent and Has Caused Numerous Blood Thinner Excessive Bleeding Deaths and Injuries by Blood Thinner Death Lawyer Jason S. Coomer 

The blood thinner, Pradaxa, has been marketed as a new and improved blood thinner.  However, what has not been commonly known is that the blood thinner has no known antidote or reversal agent.  As such, the blood thinner's known risk of causing excessive bleeding combined with the lack of an antidote or reversal agent can result in death and serious injuries.  Persons using Pradaxa should communicate with their physician and health care providers about the risks of Pradaxa.

For more information on this topic, please feel free to go to the following web page: Pradaxa Blood Thinner Death Lawyer and please feel free to read the below information for the FDA. 

FDA Pradaxa and Blood Thinner Safety Warnings and Information 12-19-2012

[12-19-2012] The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is informing health care professionals and the public that the blood thinner (anticoagulant) Pradaxa (dabigatran etexilate mesylate) should not be used to prevent stroke or blood clots (major thromboembolic events) in patients with mechanical heart valves, also known as mechanical prosthetic heart valves. A clinical trial in Europe (the RE-ALIGN trial)1 was recently stopped because Pradaxa users were more likely to experience strokes, heart attacks, and blood clots forming on the mechanical heart valves than were users of the anticoagulant warfarin. There was also more bleeding after valve surgery in the Pradaxa users than in the warfarin users.

Pradaxa is not approved for patients with atrial fibrillation caused by heart valve problems.  FDA is requiring a contraindication (a warning against use) of Pradaxa in patients with mechanical heart valves. Health care professionals should promptly transition any patient with a mechanical heart valve who is taking Pradaxa to another medication.  The use of Pradaxa in patients with another type of valve replacement made of natural biological tissue, known as a bioprosthetic valves, has not been evaluated and cannot be recommended. Patients with all types of prosthetic heart valve replacements taking Pradaxa should talk to their health care professional as soon as possible to determine the most appropriate anticoagulation treatment.  Patients should not stop taking anticoagulant medications without guidance from their health care professional; stopping Pradaxa or other anticoagulants suddenly can increase the risk of blood clots and stroke.

FDA Pradaxa and Blood Thinner Safety Warnings and Information 11-02-2012 

[11-02-2012] The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has evaluated new information about the risk of serious bleeding associated with use of the anticoagulants (blood thinners) dabigatran (Pradaxa) and warfarin (Coumadin, Jantoven, and generics). Following the approval of Pradaxa, FDA received a large number of post-marketing reports of bleeding among Pradaxa users.  As a result, FDA investigated the actual rates of gastrointestinal bleeding (occurring in the stomach and intestines) and intracranial hemorrhage (a type of bleeding in the brain) for new users of Pradaxa compared to new users of warfarin.  This assessment was done using insurance claims and administrative data from FDA’s Mini-Sentinel pilot of the Sentinel Initiative. The results of this Mini-Sentinel assessment indicate that bleeding rates associated with new use of Pradaxa do not appear to be higher than bleeding rates associated with new use of warfarin, which is consistent with observations from the large clinical trial used to approve Pradaxa (the RE-LY trial).1 (see Data Summary). FDA is continuing to evaluate multiple sources of data in the ongoing safety review of this issue.

Pradaxa and warfarin are important medications used to reduce the risk of stroke and blood clots in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common heart rhythm abnormality, which causes the heart (upper chambers or atria) to beat rapidly and irregularly.  Although these drugs reduce the number of strokes in patients with non-valvular AF, they can cause bleeding, potentially leading to serious or even fatal outcomes.  The risk of bleeding is a well-recognized risk of anticoagulant drugs.
FDA has not changed its recommendations regarding Pradaxa.  Pradaxa provides an important health benefit when used as directed.  Healthcare professionals who prescribe Pradaxa should carefully follow the dosing recommendations in the drug label, especially for patients with renal impairment (when kidneys don’t function normally) to reduce the risk of bleeding. Patients with atrial fibrillation should not stop taking Pradaxa without first talking to their healthcare professional. Stopping use of anticoagulant medications such as Pradaxa can increase the risk of stroke.  Strokes can lead to permanent disability and death.
 


Monday, January 21, 2013

Pharmacy Whistleblower Recoveries: State and Federal Medicaid Fraud Laws Offer Large Rewards To Pharmacy Whistleblowers by Pharmacy Whistleblower Lawyer

Pharmacy Whistleblower Recoveries: State and Federal Medicaid Fraud Laws Are Offering Large Financial Rewards To Pharmacy Whistleblowers That Expose Drug Company Marketing Fraud by Pharmacy Whistleblower Lawyer Jason S. Coomer

State Attorney General Offices are targeting drug companies and retail pharmacy chains that seek to manipulate drug prices to their advantage.  These drug price Medicaid fraud whistleblower lawsuits include pharmacy chains that fail to perform a required drug utilization review and attempt to defraud government health care programs.  Many of these State Attorney General Offices are working with drug price fraud whistleblower Ven-A-Care.  This pharmacy drug price fraud whistleblower has been working on drug fraud cases since 1994 and has help state and federal governments recover more than $2 billion and has won roughly $380 million for itself in the process. 

On February 1, 2011, a Travis County, Texas jury found that a global pharmaceutical manufacturer had misrepresented drug prices to the state's Medicaid program and said the drug company should pay the state and federal government $170.3 million.  These Drug Price Medicaid Fraud Lawsuits are becoming more common as evidence is coming to light that the $700 Billion a year drug industry includes some large drug companies that are defrauding Medicaid, Medicare, the VA, Tricare, and other governmental benefit programs out of vasts amounts of money.

Several governmental officials have made it clear that those who defraud the Medicaid program, Medicare, the VA, Tricare, CHIP and other government benefit programs will be held accountable for their actions.  Recent changes in the False Claims Act and other Qui Tam laws have created stronger protections and economic incentives for whistleblowers with knowledge of drug price fraud and other forms of Medicare Fraud and Medicaid Fraud.  As such, it is important for drug price fraud whistleblowers, pharmaceutical representative whistleblowers, medical device sales representative whistleblowers, drug marketing representative whistleblowers, and other drug executive whistleblowers to blow the whistle on drug fraud pricing schemes.

Medicaid Drug Marketing Fraud Whistleblower Lawyers, Medicaid Drug Formulary Fraud Whistleblower Lawyers, Targeted Medicaid Off Label Marketing Fraud Whistleblower Lawyers, Medicaid Formulary Drug Fraud Whistleblower Lawyers, & Medicaid Drug Illegal Kickback Marketing Fraud Whistleblower Lawyers

For more on this topic, please go to the following webpages: Pharmacy Drug Price Fraud Whistleblower Lawsuit Information and Medicaid Drug Marketing Fraud Whistleblower Lawsuit Information.
 
Texas Getting $36 Million in Medicaid Fraud Settlement | The Texas Tribune

"Under the settlement agreements, Texas will receive $18.17 million from Endo Pharmaceuticals and Pfizer Inc. each and additional compensation to cover the state's legal costs. The federal government, which jointly funds Medicaid with the state, will receive some of the money."

"Ven-A-Care, the Florida-based pharmacy that reported the companies to the state, will also receive a portion of the settlement for helping recover the funds. Since 2000, the pharmacy has earned millions by participating in more than 20 Medicaid and Medicare fraud cases in various states, including Texas. According to a Los Angeles Times article from 2011, the company and its lawyers had earned more than $380 million by participating in fraud cases at that time."

"“Both in recoveries for themselves and for taxpayers, Ven-A-Care’s partners are apparently the most successful whistle-blowers in U.S. history,” the newspaper reported."

"In 2011, Texas won a $170 million court case against Actavis, an Iceland-based pharmaceutical company, with the help of Ven-A-Care, which had reported the company to the state for inflating drug prices."

"Under Texas law, whistleblowers can receive 15 percent to 25 percent of the financial penalties of a Medicaid fraud settlement for bringing the case forward. Texas has recovered at least $354 million in Medicaid fraud settlements from pharmaceutical companies — more than any other state — since 1991 with the help of private whistleblowers, according to a report released in September by Public Citizen, a nonpartisan consumer advocacy organization."

The Federal Government and Several States Including Texas Are Making Large Recoveries Through Medicaid Drug Marketing Fraud Whistleblower Lawsuits and Medicaid Drug Price Fraud Whistleblower Lawsuits


In January 2012, the State of Texas and a Medicaid drug marketing fraud  whistleblower squared off against Johnson and Johnson, Inc. and several related companies in Travis County District Court.  In the case, the State of Texas alleged that the large drug company systematically targeted the Texas Medicaid System and fraudulently misrepresented their drug, Risperdal, with false and misleading marketing information.  Further, that the defendants intentionally targeted opinion leaders in the medical community with financial incentives and misleading information in an effort to have the drug placed into treatment guidelines, model state treatment programs, formularies, Texas Vendor Drug Programs, and the Texas Medicaid preferred drug lists.

Attorneys for the State of Texas and Medicaid Marketing Fraud Whistleblower argued that they had reviewed millions of documents and could prove that the large drug company intentionally pushed Risperdal as a safer alternative to the typical medications despite rulings from the Food and Drug Administration that these assertions were not supported by scientific research.  Further, that the defendants orchestrated a fraudulent marketing scheme to seed medical literature with misleading information and influence key medical decision makers to increase Risperdal in the Texas Medicaid Program as well as used this information to push their drug as the established treatment in state Medicaid programs throughout the United States as well as in the Federal Medicare program.

As a result of this Texas lawsuit, the drug maker, Johnson and Johnson, Inc., agreed to settle the Texas Medicaid fraud case for $158 million.  Johnson and Johnson, Inc. has also agreed to a settlement where the drug company will will pay more than $1 billion in civil and criminal penalties to the federal government and individual states to settle an investigation into the marketing practices of its anti-psychotic drug Risperdal.  Johnson and Johnson, Inc. has also been hit in Medicaid fraud cases in South Carolina and Louisiana and was ordered to pay more than $250 million each.

State and Federal Medicaid Fraud Whistleblower Reward Laws Are Expanding

Medicaid is a federal/state cost-sharing program that provides health care to people who are unable to pay for such care.  The Medicaid Program is jointly funded by state and federal governments, but is managed by the states.  Medicaid is the largest source of funding for medical and health-related services for people with limited income in the United States and the Medicaid program has been increasing.  The fastest growing aspect of Medicaid is nursing home coverage and this is expected to continue as the Baby Boomer generation begins to reach nursing home age. 

Unlike Medicare, which is solely a federal program, Medicaid is a joint federal-state program. Each state operates its own Medicaid system.  Each state's Medicaid Program must conform to federal guidelines in order for the state to receive matching funds and grants.  For many states Medicaid has become a major budget issue as on average the state's matching costs of the Medicaid program is about 16.8% of state general funds. According to CMS, the Medicaid program provided health care services to more than 46.0 million people in 2001. In 2008, Medicaid provided health coverage and services to approximately 49 million low-income children, pregnant women, elderly persons, and disabled individuals. Federal Medicaid outlays were estimated to be $204 billion in 2008.  Medicaid payments currently assist nearly 60 percent of all nursing home residents and about 37 percent of all childbirths in the United States. The Federal Government pays on average 57 percent of Medicaid expenses.

Medicaid fraud is a violation of federal law and several new state Medicaid fraud laws.  Health care providers that are convicted of Medicaid fraud can be fined, incarcerated, and lose their status as Medicaid providers.  To prevent Medicaid fraud, several states including Texas, California, Florida, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Nevada, Tennessee, Wisconsin, New Jersey, Georgia, Michigan, Illinois, Louisiana, Delaware, Indiana, Minnesota, Montana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, North Carolina, and Virginia have enacted state Medicaid fraud whistleblower recovery laws.  These Medicaid fraud whistleblower laws are based on the Federal False Claims Act and many acts of large scale systematic Medicaid fraud will entail aspects of several different laws.    

There are many types of Medicaid fraud that may be the basis for Medicaid fraud whistleblower recovery lawsuits and other qui tam claims including:
  • billing Medicaid for X-rays, blood tests and other procedures that were never performed
  • falsifying a patient’s diagnosis to justify unnecessary tests;
  • giving a patient a generic drug and billing for the name-brand version of the medication;
  • giving a recipient a motorized scooter and billing for an electric wheelchair, which can cost three times more;
  • billing Medicaid for care not given;
  • billing Medicaid for patients who have died or who are no longer eligible for Medicaid;
  • billing Medicaid for care given to patients who have transferred to another facility;
  • transporting Medicaid patients by ambulance when it is not medically necessary;
  • requiring vendors to “kick back” part of the money they receive for rendering services to Medicaid patients (kickbacks may also include vacations, merchandise, etc.);
  • billing patients for services already paid for by Medicaid;
  • billing Medicaid for phantom patients;
  • double billing Medicaid for services;
  • upcoding services for increased Medicaid payments.
Upcoding occurs when a medical service provider intentionally and fraudulently upcodes services to obtain a higher reimbursement than one that is entitled to for the service that was actually provided.  In both the Medicare and Medicaid systems a set of billing codes is used by healthcare providers to bill for services. These codes are known as the Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS). A service provider that intentionally uses a higher paying code to fraudulently reflect that a more expensive procedure or device was involved in the patient’s treatment than actually was used or was necessary.  A pattern of intentional upcoding treatment can result in large profits for the healthcare provider, but also cost taxpayers millions of dollars.

Upcoding fraud is typically hard to catch without the help of persons with inside information because that Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes are billed electronically and can easily slip through the system.  Therefore unless the upcoding is caught through a random audit (approximately 2% of the claims per year are audited), it is up to insiders, informants, heroes, and health care professionals to catch fraudulent upcoding.

Another type of coding fraud is “unbundling”, where bundled related procedures or composite lab tests are run together, but billed separately by the lab or healthcare provider to obtain more compensation.  These types of billing fraud also allow healthcare providers and labs to make higher profits by bilking Medicare, Medicaid, and taxpayers out of millions of dollars.  These unbundling fraud schemes are also hard to detect without someone that is familiar with the codes and billing.

Sunday, January 20, 2013

Average Wholesale Price Fraud Lawyer and Pharmacy Whistleblower Reward Lawyer: Drug Companies that Fraudulently Inflate AWP to Increase Market Share Are The Target of Medicaid Reward Lawsuits by Average Wholesale Price Fraud Lawyer and Pharmacy Whistleblower Lawyer Jason S. Coomer

Average Wholesale Price Fraud Lawyer and Pharmacy Whistleblower Lawyer: Drug Companies that Fraudulently Inflate Average Wholesale Price to Medicaid Are The Target of Whistleblower Reward Lawsuits by Average Wholesale Price Fraud Lawyer and Pharmacy Whistleblower Lawyer Jason S. Coomer

The United States Department of Justices and many states are offering large rewards to pharmacies, drug intermediaries, and other pharmaceutical professionals that are the first to expose drug companies that are fraudulently inflating Average Wholesale Price to Medicaid in order to increase market share and profits.  Pharmacy whistle-blowers and other drug company whistle-blowers have already helped the Federal government and several state governments obtain over $30 Billion dollars in recoveries from large drug companies that have violated the law and committed fraud.

For a confidential review of a potential average wholesale price fraud lawsuit or other drug company fraud whistle-blower lawsuit, please feel free to contact to contact Average Wholesale Price Drug Price Fraud Whistle-blower Lawyer Jason Coomer via e-mail message.


Price Fraud Whistle-blower Lawsuits  Information, Drug Company False Drug Pricing Whistleblower Lawsuit Information, Pharmaceutical Executive Whistleblower Lawsuit Information, Medicaid False Drug Price Lawsuit Information, and Medicare False Drug Pricing Lawsuit Information

Drug companies that engage in schemes to report false and inflated prices for pharmaceutical products are committing drug price fraud and can be held liable for these illegal actions.  The difference between the resulting inflated government payments and the actual price paid by healthcare providers for a drug is referred to as the “spread.” The larger the spread on a drug, the larger the profit for the health care provider or pharmacist who is reimbursed by the government.

The drug companies that commit this fraud know that federal healthcare programs rely on the reported prices to set payment rates and that by increasing the spread they entice pharmacies and other drug intermediaries to use their drug, thus increasing market share.  The problem with this scam is that public health programs such as Medicaid and Medicare end up paying substantially inflated prices for drugs. 

 Pharmaceutical Executives and Pharmacies That Are The First To Properly Expose The Drug Pricing Fraud Can Receive Large Financial Recoveries and Avoid Potential Criminal Liability

Pharmaceutical Executives and pharmacies that commit drug pricing fraud, cooperate with drug price fraud, or fail to report fraudulent drug price schemes can be held liable for criminal and civil prosecution.  In fact, the government is cracking done on drug price fraud schemes and is actively encouraging drug price fraud whistle-blowers to step forward to report fraudulent drug pricing schemes that are costing government health care programs like Medicaid, Medicare, Tricare, and the Veteran's Administration millions of dollars.  Pharmaceutical Sales Executives, Pharmacists, Drug Representatives, and other health care professionals that properly blow the whistle on fraudulent drug pricing schemes can receive a significant recovery on money recovered by being the first to file on Drug Price Medicare fraud, Drug Price Medicaid fraud, Drug Price Tricare fraud, and/or Drug Price VA.

Pharmaceutical executives and representatives who are the original source of specialized knowledge of drug pricing fraud can recover large economic rewards for properly reporting fraudulent drug pricing schemes.  A successful false claims act qui tam claim can not only result in a significant recovery for the drug representative whistleblower, pharmaceutical executive whistleblower, or pharmaceutical accounting whistleblower, but can result in uncovering Medicare price fraud, Medicaid price fraud, Tricare price fraud, and/or VA price fraud that could result in millions or billions of dollars being recovered or saved by taxpayers.

There are several keys to a successful Drug Price Fraud False Claims Act Qui Tam Whistleblower Lawsuit including 1) obtaining original and specialized information of the fraud, 2) being the first to file regarding the specific fraud, and 3) protecting the whistleblower for retaliation.  

For more information on this topic, please feel free to go to the following web page: Drug Price Fraud Whistleblower Lawyer and Inflated Average Wholesale Price Lawyer