Propecia, the commercial name for finasteride, is
a low-dosage medication prescribed to treat male pattern baldness. The drug has
several sexual side effects, including male breast cancer, decreased semen
production, erectile dysfunction, testicular pain, and high-grade prostate
cancer. When Propecia first hit the market in 1997, Merck, the drug's
manufacturer, warned of the risks and alleged that Propecia's sexual side
effects would persist until patients stopped treatment. However, studies
revealed that side effects could be persistent, long-term and even permanent.
In June 2011, the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) issued a safety alert warning that 5-ARI drugs could cause an increased
risk of high-grade prostate cancer. The organization also required
pharmaceutical companies to update their product warning labels accordingly. This
action, coupled with anecdotal evidence and study results, helped mobilize many
affected patients, who filed lawsuits against Merck.
Plaintiffs in Propecia lawsuits cite the physical
and emotional pain they suffered after taking the hair-loss remedy. What they
believed to be temporary side effects soon were revealed to be long-term and/or
permanent – and with devastating results. Lives changed, and some plaintiffs explain
that Propecia's side effects were severe enough to end their marriages.
Propecia Misinformation and Potential Lawsuits
Dr. Valerie Ulene, a board-certified specialist in
preventative medicine, explains that the root issue in these types of cases is
risk assessment: if patients are not adequately warned of a drug's side
effects, then it is impossible for them to weigh a medication's risks versus
rewards. In this case, Merck did not inform the public that Propecia's sexual
side effects could last a lifetime.
Although Propecia lawsuits have not yet been consolidated
into a mass tort lawsuit or multi-district litigation (MDL), plaintiff numbers
are growing. Several regional class action suits already exist in the United
States and Canada, and Propecia lawyers expect that future out-of-court
settlements could be substantial.
