MERCK WINS ANOTHER VIOXX CASE

A federal jury in Louisiana has ruled that Merck "properly disclosed data" about its painkiller Vioxx and was not liable for the heart attack a Kentucky man suffered in 2003 after taking the drug for four months, Merck said.

The drugmaker is facing more than 16,000 lawsuits filed by former patients who claim Vioxx (rofecoxib) caused heart attacks and strokes. This is the 10th case that has gone to trial and the fifth that Merck has won.

Merck pulled the drug off the market nearly two years ago. Vioxx had global sales of $2.5 billion in 2003.

After deliberating for three hours, a federal court jury in New Orleans found that Merck "adequately warned" 52-year-old Robert Garry Smith's doctor about the cardiac risks associated with Vioxx, and that Merck did not "conceal information" from Smith's doctor or any other doctors, Merck lawyer Philip Beck of Bartlit, Beck, Herman said during a conference call Sept. 26.

Smith -- who had been shoveling snow at the time of his heart attack -- had high blood pressure, high cholesterol and was considered medically obese at the time, Beck said. "Unfortunately, Mr. Smith would have suffered a heart attack whether he was taking Vioxx or not."

Judge Eldon Fallon of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, who is overseeing all of the federal Vioxx litigation, presided over the case.