Florida State Court’s ruling finds in favour of GSK and other defendants, excluding plaintiff’s experts’ general and specific causation testimony that ranitidine was a significant risk factor for Wilson’s prostate cancer
Court’s ruling is consistent with scientific consensus that there is no consistent or reliable evidence that ranitidine increases the risk of any cancer
GSK continues to vigorously defend itself, including against all claims in other jurisdictions
GSK plc (LSE/NYSE: GSK) welcomes today’s Daubert ruling by the Florida State Court. In excluding plaintiffs’ expert testimony as unreliable, GSK will now seek dismissal of the upcoming Wilson case in Florida – whereby plaintiffs alleged a causal link between ranitidine and prostate cancer.

Today’s decision echoes the December 2022 ruling by Judge Rosenberg in the federal multidistrict litigation (MDL), which rejected all expert evidence put forward by the plaintiffs and dismissed all MDL cases alleging bladder, esophageal, gastric, liver, or pancreatic cancer. Both the MDL and Florida courts have determined that the methodology used by plaintiffs’ experts is unreliable and fails to meet the Daubert standard for scientific evidence.

Since 2019, following the 16 epidemiological studies looking at human data regarding the use of ranitidine, the scientific consensus is that there is no consistent or reliable evidence that ranitidine increases the risk of any cancer. Today’s ruling reflects the state of that science and ensures that unreliable and litigation-driven science does not enter the courtroom.

GSK continues to defend itself vigorously, including against all remaining claims in other jurisdictions.