Tepezza, an FDA-approved treatment for Thyroid Eye Disease (TED), has come under scrutiny as individuals claim the drug led to permanent hearing loss.
If you or a loved one experienced such adverse effects, you may be eligible to file a Tepezza hearing loss lawsuit. Understanding the criteria for eligibility is crucial before pursuing legal action.
In this article, we will discuss key criteria for eligibility in Tepezza hearing loss lawsuits, covering diagnosis, treatment details, awareness, and legal consultation.
Diagnosis and Tepezza Usage
To establish eligibility for a Tepezza lawsuit, it’s crucial to have a documented diagnosis of TED and a history of Tepezza usage. Lawyers will inquire about when you initiated Tepezza treatment, the frequency of sessions, and the medical professional who diagnosed your thyroid condition.
A clear timeline linking your TED diagnosis to the Tepezza administration is crucial for building a solid case. Ensuring comprehensive medical records are available can strengthen your claim.
Do you know: Which Are The Best hearing Aids Machines in India?
Number of Infusions or Treatments
The quantity of Tepezza infusions or treatments plays a pivotal role in evaluating eligibility. Endocrine Society notes that typically, the complete treatment duration is once every three weeks for a total of eight infusions.
Attorneys will dive into the specifics of your treatment plan, seeking information on how often you underwent Tepezza sessions and the overall treatment duration.
This assessment helps determine if there’s a correlation between the extent of Tepezza exposure and the onset of hearing-related issues. Providing a detailed treatment history will aid in a more thorough evaluation.
Nature of Hearing Problems
Detailing the nature and severity of your hearing problems is essential for eligibility assessment. Whether you experienced complete hearing loss or persistent issues like tinnitus, providing a comprehensive account of your symptoms can help.
It aids in gauging the impact on your daily life and strengthens the connection between Tepezza usage and adverse auditory effects. Make sure to include specifics about how these hearing problems have affected your quality of life.
Medical Treatment for Tepezza-Related Injuries
If you have previously sought medical intervention for hearing problems associated with Tepezza, it significantly increases your eligibility. Lawyers will inquire about the specific treatments you underwent, medications prescribed, and any lasting effects on your overall health.
Medical records documenting Tepezza-induced hearing injuries strengthen your case. Be sure to provide details on ongoing medical care or rehabilitation efforts.
Awareness of Tepezza-Related Risks
Your awareness, or lack thereof, regarding the potential risks linked to Tepezza is a crucial aspect of eligibility. If you and your healthcare provider were unaware of the risks associated with Tepezza, it underscores the manufacturer’s responsibility to provide adequate warnings.
Lack of informed consent can contribute to the validity of your claim. Emphasize any discussions with your healthcare provider about potential side effects.
Consultation with a Tepezza Attorney
According to TorHoerman Law, engaging with a Tepezza attorney is an essential step in evaluating eligibility. These legal professionals specialize in pharmaceutical litigation and can provide tailored advice based on your circumstances.
An initial consultation allows you to discuss the specifics of your case, understand the legal process, and understand the potential strength of your claim. Taking notes and bringing relevant documents to the consultation will ensure a more productive discussion.
Current Status of the Tepezza Litigation
As per the October 2023 update, the Tepezza litigation is still in its early stages, with no jury verdicts or settlements reached. Numerous affected individuals have come forward to file a Tepezza lawsuit. The multidistrict litigation (MDL) process, initiated in June 2023 in the Northern District of Illinois, is centralizing these lawsuits from across the country.
The plaintiffs’ lawyers have initiated an early discovery battle within the Tepezza hearing loss MDL. They have cited concerns about Horizon and its defense team’s compliance with initial discovery requests. Horizon Therapeutics is accused of failing to alert patients about the danger of hearing impairment connected with Tepezza.
A Florida woman joined the Tepezza hearing loss class action, alleging permanent hearing loss and tinnitus after Tepezza infusions. According to LezDo TechMed, there has been a slow but steady growth, with 59 pending cases and five new cases in the last month.
Timeliness and Statute of Limitations
Time sensitivity is paramount in Tepezza lawsuits. Each state has a statute of limitations dictating the timeframe within which legal action must be initiated.
For example, Forbes notes that the statute of limitations for personal injury lawsuits is two years in several jurisdictions, such as California and Arizona. This implies you have two years to file a lawsuit. You can no longer claim for medical misconduct if you wait even one day over the two-year threshold.
Consulting with an attorney promptly ensures compliance with these deadlines, preserving your right to file a lawsuit. Delays could jeopardize your eligibility, making it crucial to act swiftly to protect your legal rights and seek compensation for Tepezza-induced hearing issues. Keeping a record of all communication and events related to your case will aid in meeting these time constraints.
Learn: What to Know About a County Court Judgement?
In summary, eligibility for a Tepezza hearing loss lawsuit depends on a documented TED diagnosis, treatment history, and the nature of hearing issues. The evolving Tepezza litigation emphasizes the need for timely legal consultation, awareness of risks, and thorough documentation.
Swift action is crucial due to statute limitations, and collaboration with specialized attorneys can strengthen potential claims. Those affected must act promptly to seek accountability for alleged hearing injuries associated with Tepezza.
Leave a comment