Judge Says Bayer’s Claim Against J&J Is Unfounded

In a recent ruling, a federal judge in Manhattan denied Bayer’s attempt to stop Johnson & Johnson from advertising its prostate‑cancer drug, Erleada. The court said Bayer had not shown it was likely to win the case over J&J’s marketing, which claimed Erleada cuts death risk by about half compared to Bayer’s own drug, Nubeqa. Bayer had filed suit on February 23, arguing that J&J’s ads misrepresented clinical data and harmed Nubeqa’s reputation. Bayer contended that the studies J&J used were unreliable because many patients received Nubeqa off‑label, and that the FDA had not approved J&J’s real‑world analysis as a replacement for traditional trials.Judge Dale Ho, in a 41‑page decision, found J&J’s statements reflected its own research findings. He noted that Bayer had not identified any major methodological flaws that would make J&J’s claims materially false. The judge described the study’s methods as “not errant or out‑of‑step within the relevant scientific community. ” Bayer’s spokesperson said the company still believes its evidence supports claims of false advertising and will wait for a full court decision on the merits. J&J, meanwhile, praised the ruling as a win for scientific dialogue and patient care, stressing that real‑world evidence helps doctors choose treatments when direct trial data are lacking. Prostate cancer remains a significant health issue, with over 300, 000 new cases and nearly 36, 000 deaths reported in the U. S. last year. Sales figures show Nubeqa brought in about €2. 39 billion, while Erleada generated $3. 57 billion.