Updated June 2026active

Depo-Provera Brain Tumor Lawsuits Lawsuit

Researched By
People's Justice Research Team

Verified against court records, regulatory records, and peer-reviewed research.

Last reviewed: June 11, 2026How we research

People's Justice is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice.

Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

2 Cited SourcesFact-Checked15 min read

Last reviewed against primary sources: June 11, 2026

15,000+ Attorneys
$15B+ Recovered
No Upfront Fees
Free Case Review

Start Your Free Review

Answer 2-3 quick questions to review your potential case.

Depo-Provera (medroxyprogesterone acetate / MPA) is a contraceptive injection administered every three months. Over 2,000 lawsuits consolidated in MDL 3140 in the Northern District of Florida allege that Pfizer failed to warn about a significantly elevated risk of meningioma — a tumor in the tissue surrounding the brain and spinal cord. Women who received the shot for more than one year face up to a 5.6-fold increased risk, and the risk escalates with duration of use.

Injured? Get a free Depo-Provera Brain Tumor Lawsuits case review.

Get Your Free Case Review

The Progesterone Receptor Mechanism

Meningiomas express progesterone receptors (PR) at rates of 60–80%, making them highly sensitive to progestational hormones. Medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) — the active ingredient in Depo-Provera — is a potent synthetic progestin that binds to these receptors with high affinity. When MPA binds to progesterone receptors on meningioma cells, it can stimulate proliferation and tumor growth. This mechanism has been documented since at least 1983, when early studies first identified the progesterone-meningioma connection.

The dose-response relationship is critical to the litigation. Depo-Provera delivers 150mg of MPA per injection — a supraphysiological dose that maintains serum MPA levels far above natural progesterone levels for months. With quarterly injections over years, cumulative progestin exposure becomes enormous. The French study (Roland et al., BMJ 2024) found a 5.6x risk increase for long-term users, while the U.S. study found a dose-dependent relationship: 23% increased odds for ≤1 year use, rising to 250% increased odds for >3 years of use.

Upjohn's Troubled FDA History (1967–1992)

The regulatory history of Depo-Provera is central to the litigation. Upjohn Company first sought FDA approval in 1967, but the agency identified cancer concerns — beagle dogs receiving MPA developed breast tumors. The FDA rejected the application. Upjohn reapplied in 1978, and the FDA again rejected it after a seven-year beagle study showed two animals with malignant breast tumors out of 36 tested. A rare FDA Public Board of Inquiry in 1983 also resulted in rejection.

Despite three FDA rejections over 25 years, Depo-Provera was widely used internationally — the WHO included it in its essential medicines list. The FDA finally approved Depo-Provera in October 1992, after Upjohn submitted additional studies. Pfizer acquired Pharmacia & Upjohn in 2002, inheriting both the drug and its regulatory history.

International Regulatory Actions

The international regulatory timeline strengthens the failure-to-warn case. Canada added meningioma to the Depo-Provera label as an adverse reaction in 2015. New Zealand's Medsafe issued an alert in 2024. The European Medicines Agency's Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee (PRAC) reviewed the evidence in 2024 and recommended meningioma warnings for all injectable MPA products and oral formulations containing 100mg+ of MPA. The EMA specifically recommended that MPA be contraindicated in patients with existing meningiomas.

The U.S. FDA did not act until December 2025 — and only after rejecting Pfizer's first label supplement attempt in 2024. Plaintiffs argue that Pfizer was aware of the international warnings and could have voluntarily updated the U.S. label at any time through the Changes Being Effected (CBE) regulatory pathway, which allows manufacturers to add safety information without prior FDA approval.

Bone Density Loss and the Black Box Warning

Meningioma is not the only serious Depo-Provera risk. In 2004, the FDA added a black box warning — its most serious safety communication — regarding bone mineral density loss. Long-term Depo-Provera use causes significant calcium loss from bones, increasing fracture risk. The FDA limited recommended use to 2 years unless no alternative contraceptive is adequate. Despite this warning, many women continued receiving injections beyond the 2-year recommendation.

The bone density warning is relevant to the meningioma litigation because it demonstrates a pattern: risks associated with long-term use that Pfizer and the FDA were slow to address. The intersection of bone loss and meningioma risk creates a particularly compelling narrative for women who used Depo-Provera for extended periods.

Clinical Presentation and Diagnosis

Meningiomas grow slowly and symptoms develop gradually, often over years. Common symptoms include persistent headaches that worsen over time, visual changes (blurred vision, double vision, visual field loss), seizures (occurring in over one-third of meningioma patients), hearing loss or tinnitus, weakness or numbness in extremities, cognitive changes and memory problems, and personality or behavioral changes.

Diagnosis requires neuroimaging — typically a contrast-enhanced MRI of the brain. Current clinical guidelines do NOT recommend routine MRI screening for asymptomatic Depo-Provera users. However, the updated FDA label (December 2025) instructs providers to "monitor patients on Depo-Provera CI for signs and symptoms of meningioma" and to "discontinue Depo-Provera CI if a meningioma is diagnosed." Women experiencing new or worsening headaches, visual changes, or seizures after Depo-Provera use should request brain imaging.

Internal Documents

Internal Documents & Evidence

2024-03-01Source: Roland N, Froelich S, Weill A. The BMJ, March 2024

French National Study — 5.6x Meningioma Risk (Roland et al., BMJ 2024)

Impact:

2024-10-01Source: Cancers 2024; Frontiers in Global Womens Health 2025

U.S. Medicaid Study — Dose-Dependent Risk (Griffin et al., 2024)

Impact:

2025-12-17Source: FDA supplemental NDA approval, December 17, 2025

FDA Label Supplement Approval — Meningioma Warning (December 2025)

Impact:

2025-01-01Source: Roland N, Froelich S, Weill A. Frontiers in Global Womens Health, 2025

Frontiers Global Review — Worldwide Public Health Necessity (Roland et al., 2025)

Impact:

Injured? Get a free Depo-Provera Brain Tumor Lawsuits case review.

Get Your Free Case Review
Case Results

Notable Verdicts & Settlements

Verdict

MDL 3140 Bellwether Trial (Pending)

Rule 702 hearings on general causation are scheduled for late May 2026. Bellwether trial selection and scheduling will follow. No verdict has been reached yet.

Verdict

Comparable: Mirena IUD Pseudotumor Cerebri Litigation

$12.2 million individual verdict in Mirena IUD litigation involving pseudotumor cerebri (elevated intracranial pressure). Bayer faced failure-to-warn claims similar to the Depo-Provera meningioma theory. The neurological injury parallel makes this a key benchmark.

Verdict

Comparable: Depakote Birth Defect — $15M Verdict

$15 million verdict against Abbott Laboratories for failure to warn about Depakote birth defect risks. The pharmaceutical failure-to-warn theory and pregnancy/reproductive health context parallel the Depo-Provera litigation.

Verdict

Comparable: Actos Bladder Cancer — $9B Verdict (Later Reduced)

$9 billion verdict (later reduced to $36.8 million) against Takeda Pharmaceuticals for hiding bladder cancer risks of the diabetes drug Actos. Demonstrates potential for massive jury awards when pharmaceutical companies are found to have concealed known cancer risks.

Verdict

Comparable: NuvaRing Contraceptive Settlement — $100M Total

$100 million global settlement by Merck resolving approximately 3,800 NuvaRing hormonal contraceptive injury claims. As a hormonal birth control failure-to-warn case with a similar plaintiff profile, NuvaRing provides a baseline comparator for per-plaintiff values in the Depo-Provera litigation.

Research & Evidence

Scientific Evidence

Medroxyprogesterone Acetate and Meningioma: A Global Issue

Roland N, Froelich S, Weill A (2025). Frontiers in Global Womens Health

View on PubMed

Use of High-Dose Medroxyprogesterone Acetate and Risk of Intracranial Meningioma

Roland N, Neumann A, Hoisnard L, Gagne JJ, Froelich S, Weill A (2024). The BMJ

View on PubMed

The Association between Medroxyprogesterone Acetate Exposure and Meningioma

Griffin BR et al. (2024). Cancers

View on PubMed

Injured? Get a free Depo-Provera Brain Tumor Lawsuits case review.

Get Your Free Case Review
FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Depo-Provera litigation about?

Lawsuits allege that the injectable contraceptive Depo-Provera (medroxyprogesterone acetate) can increase the risk of developing an intracranial meningioma, a type of brain tumor, and that users were not adequately warned. These claims drew wider attention after a 2024 study published in the medical journal The BMJ reported an association between long-term use of the drug and meningioma risk. The litigation is in its early stages.

Do I qualify for a Depo-Provera lawsuit?

Whether someone may qualify for a Depo-Provera claim generally depends on factors such as the diagnosis or injury, the history of using or being exposed to the product, and when the condition was diagnosed. The clearest way to find out is a confidential case review. People's Justice is not a law firm; we connect people with attorneys who can evaluate their individual situation.

Is there a deadline to file a Depo-Provera claim?

Yes. Each state sets a statute of limitations — a legal deadline for filing — and the time limit varies by state and can depend on when you discovered your injury. Because these deadlines can be strict and missing one may permanently bar a claim, it is important to speak with an attorney as soon as possible.

How much does it cost to pursue a Depo-Provera claim?

Many attorneys who handle Depo-Provera claims work on a contingency-fee basis, meaning their fee is typically a percentage of any recovery rather than an upfront payment; the specific terms are set in the agreement between the client and the attorney. A confidential case review can explain how this would work for an individual situation. People's Justice is not a law firm.

What kinds of compensation can a Depo-Provera claim seek?

Compensation in injury and product-liability claims can include categories such as medical expenses, lost income, and pain and suffering. Whether any compensation is available, and how much, depends entirely on the specific facts of each case, and no outcome can be promised. An attorney can explain what may apply to your situation during a free review.
Dive Deeper

In-Depth Guides

Depo-Provera Meningioma Brain Tumor

Meningioma — a tumor in the tissue surrounding the brain — is the primary injury in Depo-Provera lawsuits. Studies show long-term users face up to a 5.6x increased risk. The tumor can cause seizures, vision loss, and require major brain surgery.

Read guide

Depo-Provera Brain Tumor Symptoms

Meningioma symptoms develop gradually and include persistent headaches, vision changes, seizures, and cognitive decline. If you used Depo-Provera and experience these symptoms, request brain imaging from your doctor.

Read guide

Depo-Provera Long-Term Use Risks

Long-term Depo-Provera use carries multiple serious risks: meningioma brain tumors (up to 5.6x risk), significant bone density loss (black box warning), weight gain, depression, and delayed return to fertility. The FDA recommends limiting use to 2 years.

Read guide

Depo-Provera Settlement Amounts

No Depo-Provera meningioma cases have settled or gone to trial yet. Projected settlements based on comparable pharmaceutical brain injury litigation suggest $75,000 to $1.5 million+ depending on injury severity.

Read guide

Pfizer Depo-Provera Lawsuit

Pfizer inherited Depo-Provera when it acquired Pharmacia & Upjohn in 2002. Despite international warnings dating to 2015, Pfizer did not add a U.S. meningioma warning until December 2025. Plaintiffs allege a pattern of delayed safety action prioritizing revenue over patient safety.

Read guide

Depo-Provera Alternatives After Diagnosis

If you are diagnosed with a meningioma, the FDA recommends discontinuing Depo-Provera immediately. Safer contraceptive alternatives exist that do not carry meningioma risk, including copper IUDs, barrier methods, and non-progestin options.

Read guide

Depo-Provera Military Veterans

Military women were disproportionately prescribed Depo-Provera due to its convenience for deployment. If you received Depo-Provera during military service and were later diagnosed with a meningioma, you may be eligible for both civil lawsuit compensation and VA benefits.

Read guide

Depo-Provera MRI Screening

Current guidelines do not recommend routine MRI screening for asymptomatic Depo-Provera users. However, the updated FDA label instructs providers to monitor for meningioma symptoms. If you have symptoms, request brain imaging immediately.

Read guide
Keep Reading

Explore This Litigation

Stay informed

Get free updates on the Depo-Provera Brain Tumor Lawsuits as it develops

No phone call required. We will email you when there is meaningful news — new filings, settlements, or important deadlines.

By submitting, you agree to receive email updates about this case. You can unsubscribe anytime. This is not legal advice, and we are not a law firm.

Sources & References

  1. A 2024 national case-control study published in The BMJ reported that prolonged use of the injectable progestogen medroxyprogesterone acetate (the active ingredient in Depo-Provera) was associated with an increased risk of developing an intracranial meningioma.The BMJ, 2024
  2. Depo-Provera (medroxyprogesterone acetate) has been an FDA-approved injectable contraceptive in the United States since 1992; lawsuits allege that users were not adequately warned about the reported meningioma risk.U.S. Food and Drug Administration; federal court filings