GSK Wins Again as Florida Court Dismisses Zantac-Cancer Testimony

GSK has secured another legal victory in its ongoing Zantac litigation. Late Thursday, the company announced a favorable decision in a Florida State Court Daubert ruling. The court dismissed expert testimonies that attempted to link ranitidine, the primary ingredient in Zantac, to a plaintiff's prostate cancer. This led GSK to seek the dismissal of the Wilson case in Florida, where plaintiffs alleged a causal connection between ranitidine and prostate cancer.

GSK compared this recent triumph to an earlier success in 2019. At that time, the judge overseeing the company's federal multidistrict litigation dismissed all expert evidence provided by plaintiffs and all multidistrict litigation cases claiming Zantac caused various cancers, including bladder, esophageal, gastric, liver, and pancreatic cancers. GSK has consistently argued that the scientific evidence connecting Zantac to cancer risks is flawed.

In its latest announcement, the company highlighted that 16 epidemiological studies conducted since 2019 found no consistent or reliable evidence that ranitidine increases cancer risk. The Daubert standard, established by the Supreme Court in 1993, sets criteria for determining the admissibility of expert testimony under federal evidence rules. GSK explained that the Daubert standard requires courts to act as gatekeepers, ensuring that expert opinions meet reliability standards and that speculative or unreliable opinions are not presented to the jury.

This positive Daubert decision is the latest in a series of favorable developments for GSK in the Zantac litigation. Earlier this month, a jury in Illinois state court found that GSK was not liable for a plaintiff's colorectal cancer. This verdict followed closely on the heels of a settlement in a different Zantac prostate cancer lawsuit in Illinois. Additionally, in the first Zantac personal injury case to go to trial, a jury in Chicago absolved GSK and Boehringer Ingelheim of fault in claims that Zantac had caused a plaintiff's colon cancer.

The potential link between Zantac and the carcinogen N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) first emerged in 2019. Subsequently, the FDA called for the removal of all versions of Zantac's original formulation from the U.S. market in April 2020. Zantac initially received approval in 1983 under GSK's ownership. After losing its patent exclusivity in 1997, companies including Pfizer, Sanofi, and Boehringer Ingelheim began selling generic versions of Zantac.

GSK's string of legal victories provides a significant reprieve amid widespread concerns over Zantac's safety profile. The company has remained steadfast in its defense, arguing that the evidence does not support claims linking the drug to cancer. These recent court decisions bolster GSK's position and could potentially influence future litigation outcomes.

The Daubert ruling in Florida State Court represents a pivotal moment in GSK's defense strategy. By disqualifying expert testimonies that purported a link between ranitidine and prostate cancer, the ruling underscores the importance of reliable scientific evidence in legal proceedings. GSK's continued success in these cases may deter further claims and reinforce the company's stance on the safety of its former blockbuster drug.

As the legal battles surrounding Zantac continue, GSK's recent victories are likely to play a crucial role in shaping the future landscape of pharmaceutical litigation. The company's commitment to challenging the scientific basis of the claims against Zantac reflects its broader strategy to protect its interests and uphold the integrity of its products.