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

Prevacid Stomach Cancer Lawsuit

For years, millions of Americans reached for Prevacid (lansoprazole) to alleviate chronic heartburn, often taking it every day by prescription or straight off the pharmacy shelf. But now people who used the drug long-term are pursuing lawsuits alleging Prevacid caused them to develop stomach cancer. 

These lawsuits allege that lansoprazole, the active ingredient in Prevacid, can raise the risk of gastric cancer when taken over long periods, and that Takeda never warned patients or their doctors. Attorneys say the science behind the gastric cancer allegations has been building for decades.

If you or someone in your family was diagnosed with stomach cancer following long-term Prevacid use, you may qualify for a lawsuit. Wisner Baum is reviewing and filing these cases across the country. Call (310) 207-3233 or contact us for a free, confidential case evaluation.

What Is Prevacid (Lansoprazole)?

Prevacid is the brand name for lansoprazole, a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) that curbs stomach acid by switching off the tiny “pumps” in the stomach lining that release it. First approved in the United States in 1995, Prevacid spent years as one of the country's top-selling heartburn medications. 

One of the reasons lansoprazole became widely used is its many variations. Along with the standard delayed-release capsule, Takeda sells Prevacid SoluTab, a tablet that dissolves on the tongue for patients who struggle to swallow pills. And since 2009, a lower-dose version has been sold without a prescription as Prevacid 24HR, brought to drugstore shelves under a license from Takeda. Between the prescription and over-the-counter options, it has been easy for people to stay on lansoprazole for months or years at a time.

Studies Link Long-Term Prevacid Use to Stomach Cancer

The Biology: Acid, Gastrin, and the Stomach Lining

Prevacid works by sharply lowering stomach acid. However, the body does not sit still when stomach acid levels drop. To push back, it releases more of a hormone called gastrin, and when a PPI is taken for a long stretch, gastrin can climb and stay high, a state doctors call hypergastrinemia. 

Gastrin tells cells to grow, and researchers have long worried that years of this over-signaling can drive certain acid-regulating cells in the stomach lining (known as ECL cells) to multiply abnormally, a process that, for some, may set the stage for cancer.

There is a second concern as well. Stomach acid is part of the body's defenses, killing bacteria before they take hold. Strip that acid away for years, lawsuits allege, and bacteria can flourish — some of them producing nitrosamines, compounds classified as probable carcinogens. Both pathways point the same way: the longer someone stays on a PPI like Prevacid, attorneys say, the more the risk appears to build.

Two Decades of Research

The connection between long-term PPI use and stomach cancer is not one study — it is an accumulating body of evidence:

  • Back in 2006, researchers reporting in the journal Gut found that people who had used PPIs for more than three years faced roughly three times the gastric cancer risk of people taking older H2-blocker acid reducers (study).
  • A large 2017 study in BMJ Open, tracking PPI users across Sweden's entire population, again landed on about a threefold increase among long-term “maintenance” users (study).
  • The most striking numbers came in 2018, when a study in Gut following patients after H. pylori treatment found that those who kept taking a PPI daily for three or more years had more than eight times the risk of non-users (study).
  • By 2025, a sweeping review in BMJ Open Gastroenterology had pulled the evidence together — 20 of 21 meta-analyses showed elevated risk — leading its authors to call the case for a link “quite convincing” (review).

None of this proves what caused any one person's cancer; that always comes down to the individual's own history and use. But it is the foundation the Prevacid lawsuits are built on.

Not the Same as the Old PPI Kidney Lawsuits

You may have heard about PPI lawsuits before; they were almost certainly about kidney damage, not cancer. Years ago, patients alleged that PPIs caused kidney problems like chronic kidney disease, and those cases were gathered into a single proceeding in New Jersey federal court (MDL No. 2789). Takeda was among the manufacturers that agreed to resolve the kidney damage litigation.

The kidney cases are largely over and will not have any direct impact on the emerging stomach cancer claims. Cancer is a different injury backed by different science. While the earlier kidney settlements say nothing about what a stomach cancer case might be worth, they show that PPI injury claims have previously driven major resolutions. 

Allegations in Prevacid Gastric Cancer Lawsuits

At their core, Prevacid gastric cancer lawsuits are product liability claims. They argue that Prevacid was sold without an honest accounting of its long-term risks. Plaintiffs' attorneys contend that Takeda had the same decades of animal research, case reports, and published studies as everyone else; the company either knew or should have known about the research-backed stomach cancer link but failed to warn people. 

Specifically, Prevacid lawsuits allege that:

  • Neither the prescription Prevacid label nor the over-the-counter Prevacid 24HR box tells patients that taking the drug for years may raise their risk of stomach cancer.
  • The labels also say nothing about “rebound” — the surge of acid that hits when someone stops a PPI, which can push them right back onto the drug and into the kind of long-term use these cases tie to cancer.

From there, the claims follow familiar product-liability theories: failure to warn, defective design, negligence, fraudulent concealment, breach of warranty, and — for families who have lost someone — wrongful death. Many also argue that safer ways to treat acid reflux existed all along.

Think long-term Prevacid use may be behind a stomach cancer diagnosis? A free review with Wisner Baum can tell you where you stand. Call (310) 207-3233 or contact us.

Who Can File a Prevacid Lawsuit?

You may be able to bring a Prevacid stomach cancer claim if the basics below fit your situation — or that of a family member who has passed away:

  • Long-term lansoprazole use — prescription Prevacid, Prevacid SoluTab, over-the-counter Prevacid 24HR, or the generic — typically for a year or more.
  • A diagnosis of stomach or gastric cancer, such as gastric adenocarcinoma.
  • A diagnosis that still falls within your state's filing deadline (its statute of limitations).

Prescription and over-the-counter use both count, and so does generic lansoprazole, since it is the same medicine. If you are not sure your history qualifies, a free review is the fastest way to find out — at no cost and no obligation.

What a Lansoprazole Claim Might Recover

No attorney can promise a result, and every case turns on its own facts. That said, people who succeed in a lansoprazole lawsuit may recover compensation for their cancer treatment and medical bills, the income and earning power lost to the illness, the physical pain and emotional toll of the diagnosis, and, when a family has lost a loved one, wrongful death damages. Where a manufacturer's conduct is shown to be especially reckless, a jury may add punitive damages meant to punish and deter. What any one case is worth depends entirely on the specifics.

Don't Wait Too Long to File

Every state puts a clock on cases like these. It is called the statute of limitations, and it usually gives you only a few years — measured from the cancer diagnosis, or from the point you reasonably could have connected the cancer to the drug. Miss it, and the claim can be gone for good. Because the deadlines differ from state to state and are easy to underestimate, the safest move is to have a lawyer look at your timeline sooner rather than later. Getting started is simple: a free consultation, a review of your pharmacy and medical records to confirm your Prevacid use and diagnosis, and, if it makes sense, a lawsuit filed on your behalf.

Why Families Choose Wisner Baum for Their Prevacid Stomach Cancer Claim

Wisner Baum has spent four decades taking on drug and product manufacturers, winning more than $4 billion in verdicts and settlements for thousands of clients.

Our firm is perhaps best known for its work against Monsanto, where managing partner R. Brent Wisner was co-lead trial counsel in Pilliod v. Monsanto. In that case, a California jury returned a $2.055 billion verdict (later reduced by the court). Wisner, along with attorney and partner Monique Alarcon, filed one of the first PPI stomach cancer cases in the country. Together they bring a proven, trial-ready team to ongoing PPI stomach cancer claims.

There is no financial risk in getting started with a case. Wisner Baum Prevacid lawyers work on contingency, so if we do not win your case, you owe us nothing in attorney's fees.

Talk to a Prevacid Lawyer for Free

A stomach cancer diagnosis after years on Prevacid is worth a conversation — and the conversation costs nothing. The pharmaceutical team at Wisner Baum is reviewing these claims now. Call (310) 207-3233 or contact us to set up a free, confidential case evaluation. You pay no attorneys’ fees unless we win.

Get Started
Call (310) 207-3233 or fill out the form below and request a free consultation.
20,000+ Families Represented

"Wisner Baum gave exceptional attention to all aspects of the case, detailed inquiry, and tenacious overview of all the information submitted. The paralegals are efficient and diligent. I was completely surprised to find an empathic personal message to take care of my own health during the challenging time of being a full-time caretaker.*"

Mary Flores
Reviewed
on Google
Read More Reviews
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.

Prevacid Stomach Cancer Lawsuit FAQ

Takeda, which develops Prevacid and markets its prescription forms, is the primary target of these claims. The over-the-counter Prevacid 24HR was brought to market under a license from Takeda, so depending on the facts, other companies in that chain could be named as well. An attorney can identify the right defendants for your specific case.

Potentially, yes. Prevacid 24HR bought off the shelf and generic lansoprazole from the pharmacy contain the same active ingredient as prescription Prevacid. What matters most is how long you took the drug and your diagnosis — not whether it was branded, generic, prescription, or over the counter.

Possibly. Proof of use helps, but it does not have to be pill bottles. Pharmacy records, prescription histories, insurance claims, and medical records can all show that you took Prevacid, and tracking that documentation down is part of what an attorney does. It is worth a conversation even if your own records are incomplete.

There is no bright-line number, but the research — and these lawsuits — center on long-term use, generally a year or more, with risk appearing to climb the longer and more consistently the drug was taken. That is general research, not medical advice; the only way to know whether your particular history supports a claim is to have it reviewed.

Not yet. As of 2026 these are individual lawsuits — not a class action — and no court has consolidated them into a multidistrict litigation (MDL). They are the kind of claims that usually move forward as a mass tort, where each person keeps their own case and their own potential recovery rather than sharing a single group outcome. If enough cases are filed, an MDL could be formed later.

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 informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Neither accessing this site nor reviewing its contents creates an attorney-client relationship, so please do not send confidential information until such a relationship is established in writing. This site may be considered attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Some matters may be handled with or referred to other firms as co-counsel.
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