No Fees Unless We Win
(310) 207-3233
Menu

Breast Cancer Caused By Antipsychotics Lawsuits

Lawsuits allege that popular antipsychotic medications Risperdal (risperidone), Invega (paliperidone), and Zyprexa (olanzapine) significantly increase breast cancer risk in both women and men. Multiple large-scale studies show these drugs can raise prolactin hormone levels, which can trigger cancer development.

These antipsychotic medications work by blocking dopamine receptors in the brain, which removes the body's natural control over prolactin hormone production. When prolactin levels are elevated, multiple studies have shown this can activate biological pathways that promote breast cancer cell growth.

Wisner Baum was the first law firm to file a breast cancer lawsuit specifically targeting antipsychotic manufacturers, including Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, and Eli Lilly. Our lawsuit alleges the drug makers have known about the breast cancer risk for decades yet failed to adequately warn patients and doctors.

See if you qualify for an antipsychotics lawsuit by filling out our free case evaluation form. To schedule a consultation, call our legal team at (310) 207-3233.

Antipsychotic Breast Cancer Research Overview

For at least the past decade, researchers have been concerned that certain antipsychotics may increase the risk of breast cancer in patients. Certain classes of antipsychotics are known to elevate serum prolactin levels. Elevated prolactin levels have been linked to an increased risk of breast cancer. In fact, multiple studies have reported prolactin receptor expression in the vast majority of breast cancers, with some research identifying expression in more than 95% of breast cancer cases, depending on methodology.

Individuals who are diagnosed with breast cancer after taking an antipsychotic that can increase prolactin levels may be entitled to file a breast cancer drug lawsuit. It is alleged that drug companies knew of the risk of harm associated with the use of the medications and failed to warn patients and practitioners. Patients taking antipsychotics are encouraged to undergo routine screenings and inform their healthcare providers of any new or worsening symptoms.

The Science Linking Elevated Prolactin Levels and Breast Cancer Risk

Observational studies have evaluated whether antipsychotic use is associated with breast cancer risk, with some reporting an increased risk, particularly for prolactin-elevating medications. Other reviews have found mixed or non-significant results depending on study design and population. Separately, it is well established that some antipsychotics can elevate prolactin by affecting dopamine signaling.

The link between prolactin and breast cancer is an active area of research. Scientific literature has discussed prolactin’s possible role in breast cancer since at least the 1970s. One reason elevated levels of the hormone may increase a person’s risk is its correlation with mammographic density, a known risk factor of breast cancer. Some research also suggests prolactin levels may be associated with breast cancer risk in certain contexts.

Researchers at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis found that antipsychotics may increase levels of the hormone prolactin. Prolactin is involved in puberty, pregnancy, and lactation, but may also cause serious side effects when overexpressed, such as abnormal breast tissue growth. Patients taking antipsychotics are encouraged to have healthcare providers monitor prolactin levels. Individuals diagnosed with breast cancer after taking an antipsychotic, shown to elevate prolactin levels, may be eligible to file a lawsuit for breast cancer.

Current Status of the Antipsychotics Breast Cancer Litigation

  • These are new and developing lawsuits. The attorneys at Wisner Baum filed the first breast cancer-specific antipsychotic lawsuit in April of 2025.
  • Previous Risperdal litigation focused on gynecomastia (male breast tissue growth) and resulted in $800 million in settlements. Current lawsuits specifically target breast cancer, representing a new wave of litigation.

What are Antipsychotic Medications?

Antipsychotic medications are prescription drugs that are prescribed to help treat certain mental health conditions. An antipsychotic may be prescribed to treat psychosis-related conditions such as schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, or borderline personality disorder.

Antipsychotics alter neurotransmitters or brain signals. The mechanism of action is slightly different depending on the type or generation of the antipsychotic. The first generation of antipsychotics worked by blocking the way the brain used certain neurotransmitters, primarily dopamine. Second-generation antipsychotics block certain dopamine and serotonin receptors while activating others. Next-generation antipsychotics do not affect dopamine but rather deal with acetylcholine receptors instead.

What Do Antipsychotics Do?

In short, antipsychotics treat the symptoms of psychosis or psychosis-related conditions, although they may be prescribed for conditions that are not related to psychosis. Antipsychotic medications alter the activity of certain brain signals known as neurotransmitters. When someone experiences psychosis or a psychosis-related condition, it is often due to a chemical imbalance in the brain. By blocking or activating certain receptors, the medication may help to reset the chemical imbalance and improve some of the symptoms caused by the underlying condition.

How Do Antipsychotics Work?

The way that antipsychotics work depends on the type or generation of the medication. First-generation antipsychotic medications work by blocking the way the brain uses certain neurotransmitters, primarily dopamine. Too much or too little dopamine can cause serious symptoms, including hallucinations and delusions. By blocking the way the brain uses dopamine, some symptoms related to schizophrenia and other mental health disorders may be mitigated.

Second-generation antipsychotics work by blocking some receptors but activating others. It is believed that blocking certain receptors, such as dopamine receptors, prevents the body from controlling the production of certain hormones, such as prolactin. According to some studies, an increase in prolactin levels may cause harm, including cancer, although research is ongoing.

Who Qualifies for an Antipsychotic Breast Cancer Lawsuit?

You may qualify for a legal claim if:

  • You took Risperdal, Invega, or Zyprexa.
  • You were diagnosed with breast cancer after using these medications for a certain length of time.
  • You are male or female (both genders affected).
  • The statute of limitations on your claim has not expired.

The fastest way to find out whether you qualify for a case is to complete our contact form or give us a call at (310) 207-3233.

Why are Antipsychotics Linked to Breast Cancer?

Antipsychotics have been linked to breast cancer in the available epidemiological literature.   One potential mechanism is due to certain antipsychotics increasing prolactin levels in the body, according to some studies. Higher prolactin levels have been associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. Prolactin may activate pathways that promote the development of cancerous cells in the breast. Litigation against the manufacturers of certain antipsychotics continues. It is alleged that the manufacturers knew or should have known of the potential risk of harm associated with the use of their drugs and failed to warn consumers.

Potential Compensation in Antipsychotic Lawsuits

The following damages may be available by pursuing a lawsuit:

Economic Damages

These cover provable financial losses caused by your diagnosis:

  • Medical Expenses
    • Hospital stays, surgeries, chemotherapy, or radiation
    • Medications (e.g., hormone therapy, pain management)
    • Future treatments (reconstructive surgery, physical therapy)
  • Lost Income
    • Wages lost during treatment/recovery
    • Reduced earning capacity if you can’t return to your job
    • Future lost income for long-term disabilities
  • Additional Costs
    • Transportation to medical appointments
    • Home nursing care or caregiver wages

Non-Economic Damages

Compensation for intangible harms, including:

  • Pain and suffering
  • Emotional distress
  • Loss of enjoyment of life

Lawsuits may also result in punitive damages, which are monetary penalties awarded to the plaintiffs in addition to compensatory damages. Punitive damages are designed to punish defendants who recklessly disregard human safety and deter similar harmful conduct from happening again.

What Happens After Filing an Antipsychotic Claim?

The legal process in an antipsychotic lawsuit is extensive and should be handled by an experienced attorney. After filing a claim, an attorney may continue to investigate the allegations, request evidence or substantiating documents, confirm legal deadlines, and prepare for pre-trial motions or requests. As the litigation advances, the case will enter into the Discovery Phase, where both parties may request and review evidence. During this time, each side may also take depositions and prepare the case for trial. Prior to trial, attorneys representing each side may enter into negotiations to try and find a reasonable settlement. If a settlement cannot be negotiated, the case may go to trial in front of a judge or judge and jury.

Timeline of Antipsychotic Litigation

Due to the complexity of antipsychotic litigation, it can take months to years to resolve a claim. It is important to work with an experienced breast cancer side effects lawsuit lawyer to determine an accurate timeline based on the individual circumstances of the case.

Timeline considerations in antipsychotic litigation:

  • Initial Consultation: Prior to filing a claim, individuals diagnosed with breast cancer after taking a qualifying antipsychotic medication are encouraged to contact an attorney. A breast cancer side effects lawsuit attorney can help determine eligibility for taking legal action, including whether to join existing litigation. This process can take several weeks to retain an attorney and establish eligibility.
  • Pre-filing Investigation: A breast cancer drug lawsuit requires evidence to help substantiate the claim. During a pre-filing investigation, an attorney may request records and other evidence to strengthen the case. It can take multiple weeks to gather the evidence necessary to file the claim.
  • Discovery Phase: After the case is filed, it enters the discovery phase. The discovery phase allows both parties to review information and go through pre-trial motions. The discovery phase can take several months to complete.
  • Settlement Negotiations: Prior to trial, both parties may engage in settlement negotiations. It may take several months before a settlement is reached. If a settlement cannot be reached, the case may proceed to trial.
  • Trial (If Necessary): In some cases, it may be necessary to go to trial. A trial may last for a week or more, depending on the complexity of the claim.

What is a Statute of Limitations?

A statute of limitations is a legal deadline for filing a lawsuit. If you miss this deadline, you may lose the right to seek compensation, no matter how strong your case may be. It is in your best interest to consult with a lawyer as soon as possible.

How to Find the Best Lawyer for Your Antipsychotic Lawsuit

A breast cancer diagnosis creates profound physical, emotional, and financial consequences. Patients who took an antipsychotic and later developed breast cancer should not face these burdens alone—especially when pharmaceutical companies allegedly failed to warn about known cancer risks.

Our lawsuits allege the drug maker defendants in this litigation knew about breast cancer risks as early as the 1990s but failed to warn patients and doctors. According to legal filings, clinical trials conducted as part of the approval process showed antipsychotics can substantially contribute to breast cancer development, yet manufacturers concealed this evidence while aggressively marketing these drugs to vulnerable populations.

You need a law firm with a proven track record of success in similar cases on your side. At Wisner Baum, our attorneys have won some of the most highly publicized prescription drug cases. Our settlements in litigation against Big Pharma include:

  • $105 Million Pharmaceutical Settlement
  • $63 Million Pharmaceutical Class Action Settlement
  • $40 Million Pharmaceutical Class Action Settlement
  • $28 Million Pharmaceutical Class Action Settlement
  • $10 Million Pharmaceutical Class Action Settlement

Put our experience and resources to work for you. Let us fight for full and fair compensation so you can focus on what matters most: your health and well-being.

To learn more about your legal rights, fill out our contact form or call our legal team anytime at (310) 207-3233.

What To Do If You Believe You Qualify?

  • Consult a Law Firm: Wisner Baum offers free consultations and works on a contingency fee basis, meaning you pay nothing unless we win your case.
  • Don’t Delay: We strongly encourage potential claimants to begin the legal process immediately to avoid missing critical deadlines that could affect your potential claim.
  • Talk to Your Doctor: For current antipsychotic users concerned about the risk of breast cancer, consider talking to your doctor about regular breast cancer screening appropriate for your age and risk factors, monitoring of prolactin levels if you’ve been on these medications long-term, and potential alternative medications that don’t significantly elevate prolactin levels. This information is for educational purposes only and should not replace professional medical advice.

 

Case Results
We Demand Accountability.
More Successful Results
$2.0 Billion Verdict
Personal Injury
In May of 2019, the jury in the case of Pilliod et al. v, Monsanto Company ordered the agrochemical giant to pay $2.055 billion in damages to the plaintiffs, Alva and Alberta Pilliod, a Bay Area couple in their 70s. R. Brent Wisner served as co-lead trial attorney for the Pilliods, delivering the opening and closing statements and cross-examining several of Monsanto’s experts. Wisner Baum managing shareholder, Michael Baum and attorney Pedram Esfandiary also served on the trial team in the Pilliod case. The judge later reduced their award to $87M. Monsanto appealed the Pilliod’s verdict which the California Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District denied on August 9, 2021. Monsanto then requested the California Supreme Court review the appeal’s court decision, which the court denied on Nov. 17, 2021. Monsanto (Bayer) then submitted a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court which SCOTUS denied on June 27, 2022, allowing the final judgment of $87M to remain intact.
In May of 2019, the jury in the case of Pilliod et al. v, Monsanto Company ordered the agrochemical giant to pay $2.055 billion in damages to the plaintiffs, Alva and Alberta Pilliod, a Bay Area couple in their 70s. R. Brent Wisner served as co-lead trial attorney for the Pilliods, delivering the opening and closing statements and cross-examining several of Monsanto’s experts. Wisner Baum managing shareholder, Michael Baum and attorney Pedram Esfandiary also served on the trial team in the Pilliod case. The judge later reduced their award to $87M. Monsanto appealed the Pilliod’s verdict which the California Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District denied on August 9, 2021. Monsanto then requested the California Supreme Court review the appeal’s court decision, which the court denied on Nov. 17, 2021. Monsanto (Bayer) then submitted a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court which SCOTUS denied on June 27, 2022, allowing the final judgment of $87M to remain intact.
Continue Reading
$2.0 Billion Verdict
Personal Injury

In May of 2019, the jury in the case of Pilliod et al. v, Monsanto Company ordered the agrochemical giant to pay $2.055 billion in damages to the plaintiffs, Alva and Alberta Pilliod, a Bay Area couple in their 70s. R. Brent Wisner served as co-lead trial attorney for the Pilliods, delivering the opening and closing statements and cross-examining several of Monsanto’s experts. Wisner Baum managing shareholder, Michael Baum and attorney Pedram Esfandiary also served on the trial team in the Pilliod case.

The judge later reduced their award to $87M. Monsanto appealed the Pilliod’s verdict which the California Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District denied on August 9, 2021. Monsanto then requested the California Supreme Court review the appeal’s court decision, which the court denied on Nov. 17, 2021. Monsanto (Bayer) then submitted a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court which SCOTUS denied on June 27, 2022, allowing the final judgment of $87M to remain intact.

$289.2 Million Verdict
Personal Injury
$289.2 million jury verdict in Monsanto Roundup trial Wisner Baum co-represented Dewayne “Lee” Johnson in the first Roundup cancer lawsuit to proceed to trial. On Aug. 10, 2018, a San Francisco jury ordered Monsanto to pay $39.25 million in compensatory damages and $250 million in punitive damages to Mr. Johnson, a former groundskeeper who alleged exposure to Monsanto’s herbicides caused him to develop terminal non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Months after the jury verdict, the judge overseeing the trial reduced the punitive damages to $39.25 million. Mr. Johnson decided to accept the remittitur, bringing the adjusted amount awarded to Mr. Johnson $78.5 million. Monsanto (Bayer) appealed the verdict and Johnson cross appealed. On July 20, 2020, the First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the verdict against Monsanto but reduced Mr. Johnson’s award to $20.5 million. The company chose not to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, ending the litigation.
$289.2 million jury verdict in Monsanto Roundup trial Wisner Baum co-represented Dewayne “Lee” Johnson in the first Roundup cancer lawsuit to proceed to trial. On Aug. 10, 2018, a San Francisco jury ordered Monsanto to pay $39.25 million in compensatory damages and $250 million in punitive damages to Mr. Johnson, a former groundskeeper who alleged exposure to Monsanto’s herbicides caused him to develop terminal non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Months after the jury verdict, the judge overseeing the trial reduced the punitive damages to $39.25 million. Mr. Johnson decided to accept the remittitur, bringing the adjusted amount awarded to Mr. Johnson $78.5 million. Monsanto (Bayer) appealed the verdict and Johnson cross appealed. On July 20, 2020, the First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the verdict against Monsanto but reduced Mr. Johnson’s award to $20.5 million. The company chose not to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, ending the litigation.
Continue Reading
$289.2 Million Verdict
Personal Injury

$289.2 million jury verdict in Monsanto Roundup trial

Wisner Baum co-represented Dewayne “Lee” Johnson in the first Roundup cancer lawsuit to proceed to trial. On Aug. 10, 2018, a San Francisco jury ordered Monsanto to pay $39.25 million in compensatory damages and $250 million in punitive damages to Mr. Johnson, a former groundskeeper who alleged exposure to Monsanto’s herbicides caused him to develop terminal non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Months after the jury verdict, the judge overseeing the trial reduced the punitive damages to $39.25 million. Mr. Johnson decided to accept the remittitur, bringing the adjusted amount awarded to Mr. Johnson $78.5 million.

Monsanto (Bayer) appealed the verdict and Johnson cross appealed. On July 20, 2020, the First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the verdict against Monsanto but reduced Mr. Johnson’s award to $20.5 million. The company chose not to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, ending the litigation.

$265 Million Settlement
Fatal Train Crash
In 2016, Wisner Baum attorney Timothy A. Loranger and six other attorneys in the Plaintiffs’ Management Committee were able to secure a $265 million settlement for victims of the 2015 Amtrak 188 derailment in Philadelphia, one of the largest in the U.S. for 2016.
In 2016, Wisner Baum attorney Timothy A. Loranger and six other attorneys in the Plaintiffs’ Management Committee were able to secure a $265 million settlement for victims of the 2015 Amtrak 188 derailment in Philadelphia, one of the largest in the U.S. for 2016.
Continue Reading
$265 Million Settlement
Fatal Train Crash

In 2016, Wisner Baum attorney Timothy A. Loranger and six other attorneys in the Plaintiffs’ Management Committee were able to secure a $265 million settlement for victims of the 2015 Amtrak 188 derailment in Philadelphia, one of the largest in the U.S. for 2016.

Frequently Asked Questions About the Antipsychotics Litigation

The deadline to file your case is dictated by the specific statute of limitations. Because these deadlines can permanently bar your claim, contact an antipsychotics attorney immediately to determine your specific deadline.

Nothing out of pocket. Our attorneys work on a contingency fee basis, meaning you pay no upfront costs or attorney fees unless we win your case. We offer free consultations to evaluate your potential claim.

Individuals are filing lawsuits against the manufacturers of antipsychotic medications including Invega, Risperdal, and Zyprexa. Allegations include that the manufacturers knew or should have known that these drugs cause elevated levels of prolactin that may increase a person’s risk for developing breast cancer. Both males and females may be at risk for this serious side effect and are encouraged to seek legal counsel after a diagnosis.

Several studies show that some antipsychotics, including Invega, Risperdal, and Zyprexa, may elevate a person’s prolactin levels. Elevated prolactin levels have been associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. Patients taking these antipsychotic drugs should consult with their healthcare provider about the potential risk of harm.

While it is not legally required to retain an attorney to file an antipsychotic lawsuit, it is strongly recommended. Individuals with attorneys are more likely to secure a favorable outcome in their cases. Attorneys, well-versed in pharmaceutical litigation, can help to determine the best course of legal action and will fight to ensure justice is served.

No. Litigation against Johnson & Johnson related to antipsychotics and an increased risk of developing breast cancer is in the early stages Attorneys believe this litigation will take years to resolve.

In 2021, Johnson & Johnson agreed to an $800 million settlement that resolved claims related to Risperdal and an increased risk of developing gynecomastia (an abnormal breast tissue growth in males). The gynecomastia claims are not related to the ongoing breast cancer lawsuits.

Individuals who were diagnosed with breast cancer after taking Invega, Zyprexa, or Risperdal may be eligible to file a lawsuit against the manufacturers of these drugs. The best way to determine eligibility is by speaking with an attorney as early in the process as possible.

The first step in filing an antipsychotic lawsuit is consulting with an experienced attorney. An attorney can help determine eligibility for pursuing compensation and will provide compensation throughout the litigation.

Currently, males or females diagnosed with breast cancer after taking certain antipsychotics, such as Invega, Zyprexa, or Risperdal, may qualify for compensation in an antipsychotic lawsuit.

Compensation in an antipsychotic lawsuit may include economic and non-economic damages. Individual payouts are expected to vary significantly and may encompass losses related to medical expenses, lost wages, loss of future earning capacity, pain and suffering, and more.

When companies choose profit over people, we fight. Wisner Baum exposes injustice, demands accountability, and delivers real results for real people. Your Path to Justice Starts Here.
Los Angeles
11111 Santa Monica
Blvd Suite 1750
Los Angeles, CA 90025
Get Directions
Bay Area
100 Drakes Landing Road
Suite 160
Greenbrae, CA 94904
Get Directions
Washington, D.C.
2101 L St NW 

Suite 800
Washington, DC 20037
Get Directions
The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute a client relationship.
Send Us Your Case Details
We’ll respond and let you know the best way to proceed with your case.
crossarrow-up
linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram