Texas Woman Says Avandia Killed Her Husband

GlaxoSmithKline is accused of fraud and negligence in a federal wrongful-death suit filed by a Texas woman who says the diabetes drug Avandia caused her husband's fatal heart attack.

The action is the first reported federal lawsuit alleging that Avandia caused the death of a patient. A shareholder suit, a class action and a personal-injury suit have been filed in other federal courts.

In a complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Peggie Stanford says her husband, Larry, had been using Avandamet, an Avandia variant, for just over two years when he died May 21.

The 60-year-old Dallas-area resident died the same day the New England Journal of Medicine published the results of a study questioning whether Avandia exposes users to an undue risk of heart attack.

Peggie Stanford says GlaxoSmithKline tallied $2.2 billion in Avandia sales for 2006 by hiding from the public, and the medical community, data it had since at least September 2005 showing problems with the drug's "safety profile."

According to the suit, GSK unjustly enriched itself by deceiving Larry Stanford, his family and the public by not disclosing its knowledge of the "various studies" allegedly showing an increased heart attack risk with Avandia.

Larry Stanford used Avandamet, Avandia combined with another diabetes drug, metformin, under the care of his endocrinologist since February 2005, according to the suit.

Citing theories of recovery including strict product liability for the "defective" design and marketing of the drug, his widow requests at least $75,000 in compensatory, punitive and exemplary damages.

Her other liability theories include fraud, negligence, negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, breach of an expressed warranty for goods, and breach of the warranties of merchantability and fitness.

The suit says GSK sold Avandia in a "defective" and "unmerchantable" condition because it was unfit for its ordinary intended purpose of safely and effectively treating diabetes.

Peggie Stanford requests a punitive damages award, saying the drug maker's "deceptive conduct exhibits such an entire want of care as to establish that its actions were a result of fraud, ill will, malice, recklessness, and/or willful and intentional disregard for the safety and rights of plaintiffs, as well as the general public."

To comment, ask questions or contribute articles, contact West.Andrews.Editor@Thomson.com.