Actos News

Manufacturer of Actos Sees Sharp Drop in Sales of the Drug
Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Japan’s largest pharmaceutical company and manufacturer of the diabetes drug Actos (pioglitazone), is reportedly cutting its global workforce by as much as 9% between now and 2015. According to The Japan Times, the earnings outlook for the next fiscal year is uncertain due to a sharp drop in Actos sales in Japan. 

Takeda is expected to cut around 2,100 jobs mainly in Europe and another 700 in the U.S.

There have been a number of epidemiological studies of Actos and its side effects. Several studies have cited a statistical link between the prolonged use of Actos and an increased risk of bladder cancer.

An Actos study conducted by France's health insurance agency (Caisse National d’Assurance Maladie), made public on June 7, 2011, found that patients taking Actos were more likely to have bladder cancer than those not taking the drug. Additionally, those taking higher dosages of Actos were shown to be at a higher risk for bladder cancer. 

The FDA also announced on their website that the use of Actos for more than one year may be associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer.

If you or a loved one was diagnosed with bladder cancer after taking Actos, it is recommended that you contact an experienced Actos bladder cancer attorney to discuss your legal rights.

Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman’s pharmaceutical drug defect attorneys are investigating Actos bladder cancer cases for diabetes patients throughout the United States. Our firm has successfully represented clients harmed by medications in over 4,000 individual cases, in addition to representing consumers in multiple pharmaceutical class actions. 

The team of lawyers working on the Actos bladder cancer cases have an in depth understanding of biomedical research, clinical trials, statistics, the pharmaceutical industry and marketing, as well as successful and effective discovery procedures and extensive work with experts on complicated scientific issues because of their years of experience related to Baum Hedlund’s past pharmaceutical litigation.