Johnson & Johnson’s Erleada Concerns –  Health Giant Allegedly Falsely Advertised the Risks of the Prostate Drug

Johnson & Johnson is being investigated after it was reported that J&J falsely advertised the comparative risks of its prostate treatment drug, Erleada. If you or someone you know has or is currently taking Erleada and were not made aware of the risks (or were made to believe that any potential risk was not concerning) fill out the form below to join the investigation.

What Is Erleada?

Prostate cancer is a pervasive form of cancer—around 333,000 men in the United States are diagnosed with it each year, and approximately 35,000 of those cases are fatal. Those diagnosed with prostate cancer may undergo a treatment method that combines testosterone reduction therapy with a drug that inhibits a patient’s testosterone from contributing to the cancer’s growth.

Drug manufacturers can receive approval from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for their drugs to be used in this dual treatment plan. Erleada is one such drug. Manufactured by Johnson & Johnson (J&J), Erleada received FDA approval for the dual treatment plan in 2019 and is one of many prostate cancer drugs on the market.

J&J’s Alleged Misrepresentations  

In a 2026 advertising campaign, J&J made representations about the effectiveness of Erleada as compared to other, similar drugs. Namely, J&J advertised that Erleada users experienced a 51% reduction in the risk of death compared to Nubeqa users. J&J assured consumers that this was a “real world head-to-head analysis” conducted over 24 months, that the analysis complied with FDA analysis requirements, and that the results were devoid of any bias.

J&J’s Claims Are Contested

A lawsuit was recently filed that alleged that J&J’s above claims are false. The suit alleges that the data that J&J relied on to make the representations was collected prior to Nubeqa’s FDA approval for use in the dual treatment method and that the analysis did not adhere to the FDA’s standards for determining drug superiority.

Nubeqa was FDA approved for dual treatment in June of 2025, and the data relied upon by J&J was allegedly collected prior to that approval. Consequently, Nubeqa was being prescribed off-label during the data collection period, but the data allegedly does not account for the various reasons why a patient would be prescribed an off-label treatment. Indeed, the Nubeqa patients may have been prescribed Nubeqa because they had other complications not represented in the data set. 

Additionally, the data was allegedly garnered from patient information entered by physicians and other healthcare personnel, not collected during a clinical trial. If the data was not collected in a controlled scientific environment, it does not contain the level of specificity nor the guardrails that data collected in such an environment would. Thus, the data also allegedly does not adhere to the strict guidelines that the FDA mandates be used to determine when a drug is superior to another drug.

What Does This Mean for Consumers?

The alleged false advertisement could have misled consumers about the effectiveness of each drug, thereby undermining a consumer’s ability to make an informed decision about their treatment. Consumers deserve to feel confident that any representations made by a drug company are complete and accurate. J&J’s reported misrepresentations undermine that surety.

The experienced class action lawyers at Shub Johns & Holbrook want to hear from individuals who were misled by J&J’s Erleada advertisement. If you’re one of those impacted, fill out the form below to get in contact!