• Home
  • Lesley University
  • Professionalism, Leadership And Ethics EDEC 3332
  • Endo International and Allergan Settlement

Endo International and Allergan Settlement

Assignment - Endo Endo International and Allergan develop, manufacture, and market pharmaceuticals. In 2006. the FDA approved Endo International's pain drug Opana ER. Pharmaceutical companies use a variety of abbreviations as to how soon or long a medication works. The "ER" after Opana's name indicate that it is an extended release medication. Opana ER is a pain medication used for the management of moderate-to-severe pain for individuals that need continuous pain relief. The medication works in a slower manner. In general, and when used as prescribed, extended- release opioids are considered safer. They use lower doses and offer much more consistent results. Some users of Opana ER began abusing the drug by crushing then snorting the drug and injecting the drug to get an immediate high. In 2019, Endo International and Allergan agreed to pay a $15,000,000 settlement to two Ohio counties ahead of trial brought to court to hold drug manufactures responsible for the increasing drug epidemic. Endo's portion of the settlement was $10,000,000 and Allergan's portion of the settlement was $5,000,000. There are numerous similar pending suits throughout the country against drug manufactures. In July of this year, Massachusetts reached a settlement with 14 other states against drug manufacture Purdue Pharma. Lawsuits are costly to plaintiffs and defendants alike and can take years in court. Even when the court case results in an award plaintiffs may not see the fruits of awards for many years as many judgments are appealed. Sometimes accepting a fair settlement might be in the best interest of all parties involved. Settlements are faster, cost less and can be less stressful than a trial. If several parties have a similar suit against the same company getting the company to agree to a settlement sooner ensures that that company has the funds to pay the settlement prior to other upcoming suits. The longer it takes to bring the case through the courts, the plaintiff risks the defendant filing bankruptcy, decreasing in value, or ceasing to exist. Settlements also lesson the exposure to damaging information on both parties' sides revealed during trial. It's very likely that Endo sought to settle this case as, well as others, to help protect their reputation, limit negative exposure and also limit potential exponential damages. Due to the history of abuse of this medication since its release, in 2011 Endo Pharmaceuticals reformulated the drug to make it more resistant to abuse. The reformulation was intended to make the drug more resistant to physical and chemical manipulation for abuse by snorting or injecting. Endo then wanted to market the drug touting this reformulation as safer, but the FDA did not agree and would not approve the relabeling. The FDA found that the reformulated Opana ER could still be crushed and injected. Marketing data actually showed a significant shift in the route of abuse of Opana ER, from snorting nasally to injection, following the product's reformulation. In June 2017, the FDA requested that Endo International remove the drug completely from the market as