Dupixent MDL hearing opens as Sanofi faces CTCL warning allegations
- First hearing held in Dupixent MDL alleging drug causes cutaneous T-cell lymphoma
- FDA flagged CTCL as potential serious risk signal in March 2025
- 2024 study found higher odds of CTCL in Dupixent-treated eczema patients
- Plaintiffs argue Sanofi's internal materials acknowledged risk but label lacks warning

*this image is generated using AI for illustrative purposes only.
The first case management conference for the federal multidistrict litigation against Sanofi and Regeneron opened this past Friday. The proceedings address allegations that the drug Dupixent (dupilumab) can cause, accelerate, or unmask cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL). Weitz & Luxenberg, representing the largest group of plaintiffs, appeared at the hearing led by Judge Zahid N. Quraishi of the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.
The litigation centers on claims that patients and physicians were not adequately warned about the risk of CTCL development or progression while using Dupixent. Laura Baughman, a partner at Weitz & Luxenberg leading the firm’s Dupixent litigation, stated that Sanofi’s own educational materials for doctors describe how this cancer can be mistaken for eczema and unmasked by the drug. She emphasized that if the company understood this risk, clear warnings were warranted, noting that the U.S. label still does not include a lymphoma warning.
Regulatory and scientific context
CTCL is a rare cancer of the immune system that initially appears on the skin. In its early stages, it can look almost identical to eczema, the primary condition Dupixent is prescribed to treat. The lawsuits allege that Sanofi and Regeneron failed to disclose the potential link between Dupixent use and CTCL.
In March 2025, the FDA identified CTCL as a potential signal of serious risk associated with Dupixent based on its adverse event reporting system. Additionally, a 2024 study published in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology found significantly higher odds of CTCL among eczema patients treated with Dupixent compared to those not treated. Sanofi has maintained that the scientific literature does not support a causal association.
Litigation timeline and claims
The initial case management conference took place one year to the day after Weitz & Luxenberg and co-counsel filed the first Dupixent lawsuit. Ellen Relkin, chair of Weitz & Luxenberg’s Drug and Medical Device Litigation practice group, stated that people were told their rash was eczema while a cancer progressed. She noted that the litigation focuses on what the companies knew, when they knew it, and why patients never heard about the risks.
Patients are advised not to stop taking any prescribed medication without consulting their doctor. Individuals diagnosed with CTCL, mycosis fungoides, or Sézary syndrome after using Dupixent are encouraged to seek further information through legal channels.
What the numbers show
The divergence between regulatory signals and labeling actions is a key point of contention. While the FDA flagged CTCL as a potential signal of serious risk in March 2025 and peer-reviewed studies reported higher odds of CTCL in treated patients, the drug’s U.S. label remains unchanged regarding lymphoma warnings. This gap between identified risk signals and consumer-facing disclosures forms the core of the plaintiffs' argument regarding negligence and failure to warn.
Historical Stock Returns for Sanofi
| 1 Day | 5 Days | 1 Month | 6 Months | 1 Year | 5 Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -0.43% | -3.44% | -5.52% | -15.32% | -37.78% | 0.0% |
Will the FDA mandate a label change for Dupixent to include a CTCL warning before the litigation concludes?
How might the discovery process regarding Sanofi's internal safety data impact the timeline and potential settlement value of the MDL?
What are the potential financial implications for Sanofi and Regeneron if plaintiffs successfully prove negligence in failure-to-warn claims?


































