The plaintiffs—companies assigned the right to recover payments made for Actos prescriptions—claim that Takeda marketed the drug as a superior therapy for diabetes without disclosing that it increases the risk of bladder cancer, and that their assignors—Medicare administrators—wouldn’t have put the drug on their formularies but for Takeda’s misrepresentations about its risks and benefits.
But their theory is ...
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.