Home > Depo-Provera Meningioma Lawsuit
Were You (or A Loved One) Diagnosed With A Meningioma Brain Tumor After Taking Depo-Provera Birth Control Shots/Injections?
Depo-Provera Meningioma Lawsuits & Settlements
Reviewed by Jacobs Kolton, Chtd. Attorneys at Law; Updated May 2026
Depo-Provera meningioma lawsuits involve claims that Pfizer and related companies may have failed to adequately warn that long-term or repeated use of Depo Provera, Depo-SubQ Provera, or medroxyprogesterone acetate birth control injections can increase the risk of developing meningioma brain tumors, including intracranial meningiomas that may require surgery, radiation, or other treatment.
Our team of drug injury lawyers and class action attorneys is investigating potential Depo-Provera meningioma lawsuit cases and settlement claims of women who were diagnosed with a meningioma brain tumor after receiving Depo-Provera or Depo SubQ Provera (medroxyprogesterone acetate) birth control injections/shots.
If you or a loved one were diagnosed with a meningioma brain tumor after receiving Depo-Provera or Depo-SubQ Provera birth control injections, you may be entitled to recover compensation from a Depo-Provera lawsuit case or settlement claim.
Depo-Provera and Depo-SubQ Provera (medroxyprogesterone acetate) are progestin hormone birth control shots or contraceptive medication injections used to prevent pregnancy (and/or treat endometriosis) by suppressing ovulation (preventing the ovaries from releasing eggs) and by thickening the cervical mucus to prevent sperm from getting to an egg. Depo Provera is typically given via a 150 mg intramuscular injection in the gluteal (buttocks) or deltoid (upper arm) muscle every three months.
Depo-Provera has been widely used in the United States. A 2023 CDC National Health Statistics Report found that 24.5% of U.S. women ages 15–49 who had ever had sexual intercourse reported using the Depo-Provera 3-month injectable contraceptive.
Unfortunately, according to a study in the British Medical Journal, women who used progestogen birth control medication like Depo-Provera may be at an increased risk of developing a meningioma (perhaps as much as 5.55 times more likely to develop a meningioma tumor). Meningiomas are tumors that begin in the middle layer of tissue (arachnoid) of the membrane (meninges) surrounding the brain and spinal cord. Meningiomas can lead to complications and, in rare cases, death.
Injured patients (and family members of victims who died) are now coming forward and filing Depo-Provera meningioma lawsuits seeking compensation and justice for harm and suffering they may have endured after receiving Depo Provera birth control injections.
Depo-Provera Meningioma Lawsuit: Overview
- What Is a Depo-Provera Birth Control Shot?
- What Health Issues May Be Linked to Depo-Provera Shots?
- What is a Meningioma Brain Tumor?
- What Is The Depo Provera Lawsuit About?
- Are Depo-Provera Lawsuits or Settlements Being Investigated?
- Who May Qualify For a Depo-Provera Lawsuit or Settlement?
- What Are Some Key Facts To Know About Depo Shot Cases?
- Are Depo-Provera Users More Likely to Develop Meningiomas?
- Does The Depo-Provera Label Warn About Meningiomas?
- What Are The Signs and/or Symptoms of Meningiomas?
- Are There Medical Treatments for Meningioma Tumors?
- What Are the Different Types of Meningiomas?
- What Companies Have Been Sued Over Depo-Provera?
- What is The Status of The Depo Provera Meningioma Lawsuits?
- Can I Recover Compensation From a Depo-Provera Lawsuit?
- Is There A Time Limit To Filing a Depo-Provera Lawsuit?
- Request A Free Case Review From A Depo-Provera Injury Lawyer
Depo-Provera Lawsuit & Settlement Cases
Depo-Provera lawsuit and settlement cases potentially being investigated include claims involving women who were diagnosed with meningioma brain tumors after using Depo-Provera, Depo-SubQ Provera and/or certain generic birth control shots, including:
- Depo-Provera
- Depo-SubQ Provera
- Depo Provera
- Depo-Provera Contraceptive Injection (DPCI)
- Depo Provera IM
- Depo medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA)
- Medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA or IM MPA)
- Depo-SubQ Provera 104
- Greenstone Medroxyprogesterone
- Greenstone MPA
- Prasco Medroxyprogesterone
- Prasco MPA
If you or someone you love suffered from a meningioma brain tumor after using depo provera, you may be eligible to seek compensation from a depo-provera lawsuit or settlement case.
Who May Qualify for a Depo-Provera Lawsuit
Individuals may qualify for a Depo Provera brain tumor lawsuit case or settlement claim if they (or a loved one):
- Received Depo-Provera Birth Control Shots: Used Depo-Provera or medroxyprogesterone acetate birth control for at least one year (at least 4 injections; although 2-3 injections may be sufficient if there was a meningioma diagnosis with surgical intervention).
- Subsequently Were Diagnosed With a Meningioma Brain Tumor: Diagnosed with a meningioma brain tumor at least two years following Depo Provera/Medroxyprogesterone acetate injections.
- Suffered Injury or Death: Suffered serious complications or injury, such as neurological damage, seizures, headaches, nerve damage, vision loss, hearing problems, loss of smell, speech or memory issues, hydrocephalus (fluid buildup in brain), bowel/bladder issues, pain, numbness, weakness, loss of balance or other injuries that required hospitalization, emergency treatment, surgery, ICU care, radiation or other medical treatment or died as a result of complications after receiving the birth control shots.
Other criteria may apply in order to be eligible. Not all individuals or cases qualify for a Depo Provera meningioma lawsuit. Individuals may not qualify if (1) the patient was over the age of 70 when diagnosed with a meningioma brain tumor; (2) medical factors or unclear timing make it difficult to link the diagnosis to Depo-Provera; (3) the claim is outside the statute of limitations period (if an individual waits too long they may be legally barred from suing); and/or (4) medical records do not support the claims. Individuals may not qualify for other reasons.
Depo Provera Lawsuit: Summary Of Key Information
| Key Information | What It Means |
|---|---|
| Depo-Provera | A prescription birth control injection containing medroxyprogesterone acetate, commonly given every three months. |
| Depo-SubQ Provera 104 | A lower-dose subcutaneous medroxyprogesterone acetate injection also used for contraception and other approved uses. |
| Meningioma | A tumor that forms in the meninges, the tissue layers surrounding the brain and spinal cord. |
| Meningioma Signs/Symptoms | Possible signs or symptoms of a meningioma tumor include seizures, blurred vision, seeing double, headaches, balance issues, arm or leg weakness, numbness, hearing loss, ringing in ears, memory loss, loss of sense of smell, difficulty speaking, slurred speech, confusion, lack of focus, aphasia, cognitive difficulties, dizziness, personality change palsy, pain and other possible signs or symptoms. |
| Depo-Provera Lawsuit | A legal action brought by plaintiffs (injured individuals or certain surviving family members or heirs of a deceased individual) against one or more defendant (the sued party) alleging that long-term or repeated Depo-Provera use caused or contributed to a meningioma brain tumor and seeking to recover compensation in the form of money damages. |
| Possible Injuries | Potential Depo-Provera injuries include meningioma, intracranial tumor, seizures, headaches, vision loss, hearing problems, memory issues, neurological damage, recurrence, or death. |
| Possible Treatments | Possible Depo-Provera meningioma treatment options may include observation with MRI monitoring, surgery, stereotactic radiosurgery, external beam radiation therapy, fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy, IMRT, proton therapy, medication to control symptoms such as seizures or swelling, rehabilitation, and long-term follow-up care. Treatment can depend on tumor size, location, symptoms, growth rate, tumor grade, recurrence history, and patient health. |
| Potential Defendants | Defendants may include Pfizer, Pharmacia & Upjohn, Greenstone, Viatris, Prasco, or other manufacturers, sellers, or distributors. |
| Possible Legal Claims | A depo-provera lawsuit may include claims for failure to warn, defective design, negligence, strict liability, misrepresentation, breach of warranty, and other possible claims. |
| Helpful Evidence | Injection records, pharmacy records, prescribing records, medical records, MRI/CT scans, pathology reports, surgical records, diagnosis date, and proof of product use, among others. |
| Possible Compensation | Depending on the facts of the case and jurisdiction, plaintiffs may seek compensation for medical bills for brain surgery, radiation, other medical care and other expenses, lost wages or income, reduced earning capacity, pain and suffering, emotional distress, lost financial support, loss of companionship and society and other damages. |
| Status of Litigation | Federal Depo-Provera cases are centralized in MDL No. 3140, and cases are also pending in some state courts. Attorneys are still reviewing new Depo-Provera meningioma cases. |
Depo Provera Brain Tumor Lawsuit Complaint
Plaintiffs in the Depo-Provera brain tumor lawsuits have alleged, among other things, that they suffered from meningioma and brain tumor complications or injury after using Depo-Provera and that defendants knew or should have known that Depo-Provera may cause meningiomas but did not provide an adequate warning about the risk of intracranial meningioma or the need for monitoring for resultant symptoms.
The Depo-Provera lawsuit complaints have asserted claims for, among other things, negligence, negligent failure to warn and design defect, strict liability (failure to warn and design defect), negligent misrepresentation fraudulent misrepresentation, and breach of warranty (express and implied). Plaintiffs in Depo Provera lawsuits seek to recover compensatory damages (including compensation for physical pain, mental suffering, inconvenience, loss of the enjoyment of life, expenses, incidental past and future expenses, medical expenses, and loss of earnings and earning capacity), statutory damages, punitive damages, and/or attorneys’ fees and costs, among others.
Depo-Provera lawsuits filed in federal court have been transferred into a multi-district litigation (MDL) for consolidation and coordination of pretrial proceedings to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida (Judge Casey Rodgers), styled as In Re Depo-Provera (Depot Medroxyprogesterone Acetate) Products Liability Litigation, MDL Case No. 3140. Depo-Provera lawsuit cases have also been filed in various state courts, including in Delaware, New York, California, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Connecticut and New Mexico.
Companies Sued Over Depo-Provera Injuries
Defendants in Depo-Provera lawsuits have included manufacturers, sellers and/or distributors of brand-name Depo-Provera or Depo-SubQ Provera and/or authorized generics, including, for example:
- Pfizer
- Pharmacia & Upjohn Company LLC
- Greenstone LLC
- Viatris
- Prasco LLC d/b/a Prasco Labs
Depo-Provera Lawsuit and Settlement Updates
Recent updates about Depo-Provera lawsuits and settlements include:
- May 2026: According to the U.S. JPML, 3,769 federal Depo Provera lawsuit cases were pending in the federal Depo Provera MDL litigation, as of May 1, 2026.
- April 2026: As of April 1 2026, there were 3,490 Depo-Provera brain tumor lawsuit cases pending in the federal Depo-Provera MDL litigation.
- December 2025: As of December 2, 2025, there were 1,470 Depo provera lawsuit cases pending in the federal Depo Provera MDL proceedings. In December 2025, the FDA approved a label update for Depo-Provera warning about the risks of meningioma brain tumors.
- November 2025: As of November 3, 2025, there were 1,225 Depo-Provera injury claims pending in the Depo-Provera MDL litigation.
- October 2025: The parties submitted a joint update and proposed agenda for their October 24 case management conference, including coordination with Delaware and New York state court Depo-Provera counsel (there are 10 cases comprising of 332 plaintiffs pending before Judge Kathleen M. Vavala in Delaware and 70 cases comprising 78 plaintiffs that have been consolidated and assigned to Justice Sabrina Kraus in New York), scheduling of expert disclosures and the status of proof of use/injury questionnaires.
- September 2025: On September 30, 2025 the Court held a hearing on Pfizer’s motion for summary judgment that asserts that federal preemption bars plaintiff’s failure to warn claims.
- May 2025: On May 6, 2025 the Court entered a Pretrial Order governing the identification of deficiencies with respect to Plaintiff Proof of Use/Injury Questionnaires and threshold documentary proof of use of Depo-Provera and meningioma diagnoses. On May 12, 2025 the Court issued Pretrial Order governing the identification of deficiencies in Plaintiff Depo-provera Complaints.
- March 2025: On March 13, 2025 the Court issued a Pretrial Order allowing Dep-provera lawsuit cases to be directly filed in the Depo-Provera MDL. The Court also issued several other pre-trial orders governing depositions, protective orders, production of documents, and appointment of attorneys to various leadership positions within the Depo-provera MDL.
- February 2025: On February 7, 2025 the JPML issued an order establishing a Depo Provera MDL and transferring federal Depo-Provera lawsuits to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida (Judge Casey Rodgers) for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings. The JPML found that the depo-provera lawsuits involved common questions of fact, such as “whether Depo-Provera causes meningioma, whether defendants knew of the alleged risk of meningioma, whether they failed to adequately warn of this risk, and whether defendants failed to promote safer alternatives, such as Depo-SubQ Provera 104, which plaintiffs argue is safer due to its lower dose of medroxyprogesterone acetate and its administration through subcutaneous injection (rather than the intramuscular injection used for Depo-Provera).” The JPML also determined that centralization would “eliminate duplicative discovery; prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings; and conserve the resources of the parties, their counsel, and the judiciary.”
- November 2024: On November 26, 2024 Plaintiffs in the Depo-Provera lawsuits filed a motion with the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation (“JPML”), captioned as In Re: Depo-Provera (Depot Medroxy-progesterone Acetate) Products Liability Litigation, MDL Case No. 3140, seeking to transfer federal Depo Provera injury cases into a multi-district litigation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407 for consolidation and coordination of pretrial proceedings.
Depo Provera Meningioma Lawsuit Cases: Brain Tumors
Depo-Provera meningioma lawsuit cases potentially being investigated include claims involving women who, after using Depo-Provera, Depo-SubQ Provera or a generic form of the birth control shot, were diagnosed with a meningioma, including the following types of meningiomas:
- Meningioma
- Brain tumor
- Primary brain tumor
- Intracranial meningioma
- Brain meningioma
- Meninges tumor
- Arachnoid tumor (not arachnoid cyst)
- Convexity meningioma
- Falcine meningioma
- Parasagittal meningioma
- Intraventricular meningioma
- Skull base meningioma
- Sphenoid wing meningioma
- Olfactory groove meningioma
- Posterior fossa/petrous meningioma
- Suprasellar meningioma
- Recurrent meningioma
- Foramen magnum meningioma
- Meningothelial meningioma
- Fibrous meningioma
- Psammomatous meningioma
- Angiomatous meningioma
- Secretory meningioma
- Other meningiomas or meningiomata
- Other Depo-Provera injury lawsuit cases
Meningiomas are the most common type of primary brain tumor, accounting for about 40 percent of all primary brain tumors. According to the National Organization for Rare Disorders (NORD), about 42,000 people in the United States are diagnosed with meningioma each year.
Meningiomas may be classified by grade, location, and histological subtype, and the different types of meningiomas may affect symptoms, treatment, recurrence risk, and damages in a Depo-Provera lawsuit.
For example, meningiomas are classified as either Grade I meningiomas (slow growing, low grade tumors, representing about 80 percent of all meningioma cases), Grade II meningiomas (faster growing, mid grade tumors such as chordoid and clear cell meningiomas, accounting for about 18 percent of all meningioma cases) or Grade III meningiomas (fastest growing and malignant or cancerous tumors, including anaplastic meningiomas such as papillary meningiomas and rhabdoid meningiomas, comprising about 2 percent of all meningioma cases).
Although the majority of meningiomas are benign, intracranial meningioma tumors can grow until they are very large, putting pressure on areas surrounding the affected areas of the brain or spinal cord.
Studies Linking Depo-Provera Use to Meningioma
Several recent scientific studies and publications have found a potential link between the use of Depo-Provera birth control injections or injectable medroxyprogesterone acetate (dMPA) and an increased risk of developing meningioma brain tumors.
| Medical Study or Warning | Summary |
|---|---|
| Roland N, Neumann A, Hoisnard L, Duranteau L, Froelich S, Zureik M, Weill A. Use of progestogens and the risk of intracranial meningioma: national case-control study. BMJ. 2024;384:e078078. doi:10.1136/bmj-2023-078078. | This national case-control study that involved 18,061 women living in France who had intracranial surgery for meningioma between January 1, 2009 and December, 31 2018 found that prolonged use (one year or more) of medroxyprogesterone acetate injections resulted in a 5.55-fold increase risk of developing an intracranial meningioma compared to a control group. |
| Griffin RL. The Association between Medroxyprogesterone Acetate Exposure and Meningioma. Cancers. 2024;16(19):3362. doi:10.3390/cancers16193362 | This epidemiologic analysis that involved 117,503 meningioma cases, found a 53% increased chance of developing cerebral meningioma for those who used medroxyprogesterone acetate (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.40–1.67), which risk became even stronger with longer duration of medroxyprogesterone acetate use: a 2.5-fold increased odds for exposure durations greater than 3 years (OR 2.50, 95% CI 2.06–3.04). |
| Frey C, Sodhi M, Fatehi M, Kezouh A, Etminan M. Use of medroxyprogesterone acetate and risk of meningiomas: a comparative safety study. Expert Opinion on Drug Safety. 2025:1–4. doi:10.1080/14740338.2025.2526787. | This nested case-control comparative safety study found that among women using medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) for more than one year, the adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) for meningiomas was 3.55 (95% CI: 1.85–6.85), indicating a significantly higher risk compared to women using oral contraceptives containing ethinylestradiol-levonorgestrel EE-LNG. |
| Griffin RL, Arend RC. A Matched Case-Control Study Examining the Association Between Exposure to Depot Medroxyprogesterone Acetate and Cerebral Meningioma Using an Active Comparator. Current Oncology. 2025;32(7):401. doi:10.3390/curroncol32070401. | This matched case-control study examined whether depot medroxyprogesterone acetate, or dMPA, was associated with increased odds of cerebral meningioma. The researchers studied 241 women diagnosed with cerebral meningioma from 2015 to 2024 at the University of Alabama at Birmingham and compared them with matched control patients who had other tumor diagnoses. The study used both an active contraceptive comparator group, involving levonorgestrel or norethindrone, and a non-active comparator group with no documented oral contraceptive use. The study found that recent dMPA exposure was associated with significantly increased odds of cerebral meningioma. In fully adjusted models, dMPA exposure within one year before diagnosis was associated with an odds ratio of 3.27 versus the active contraceptive comparator and 6.71 versus the non-active comparator. The authors concluded that the study adds to the growing body of literature reporting an association between Depo-Provera/dMPA exposure and cerebral meningioma, including prior French national data and U.S. commercial-insurance data. They stated that physicians may want to discuss the potential association between dMPA use and cerebral meningioma with patients. |
| Hudelist B, et al. Progestogen use and the risk of intracranial meningioma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. EClinicalMedicine. 2026. doi/source available via ScienceDirect. | This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the evidence linking progestogen use with intracranial meningioma. The authors screened 542 records, included 78 studies in the systematic review, and pooled 14 observational studies in the meta-analysis. They found increased meningioma risk for several high-dose progestogens, including depot medroxyprogesterone acetate, which was associated with a pooled odds ratio of 2.68 with a 95% confidence interval of 1.72–4.19. |
Depo-Provera Meningioma Warning Label
In December 2025, the FDA approved an update to the warning label for Depo-Provera to include information about a potential link between the drug and meningiomas. This change reflects emerging evidence that repeated use of medroxyprogesterone acetate, the hormone in Depo-Provera, may be associated with an increased risk of such tumors, a risk that was not previously noted on U.S. labeling.
Under the updated prescribing information, clinicians and patients are advised that cases of meningiomas have been reported with repeated administration and to monitor for related symptoms, with discontinuation recommended if a tumor is diagnosed:
5.4 Meningioma
Cases of meningiomas have been reported following repeated administration of medroxyprogesterone acetate,
primarily with long term use. Monitor patients on Depo-Provera CI for signs and symptoms of meningioma.
Discontinue Depo-Provera CI if a meningioma is diagnosed.
Meningioma Signs & Symptoms
Signs and symptoms of meningioma can include:
- Seizures
- Blurred vision
- Seeing double
- Headaches (worse in morning)
- Loss of balance
- Weakness in arm(s)
- Weakness in leg(s)
- Numbness
- Hearing loss
- Ringing in ears
- Memory issues
- Loss of sense of smell
- Difficulty speaking
- Slurred speech
- Confusion
- Trouble focusing
- Aphasia
- Cognitive difficulties
- Dizziness
- Personality change
- Palsy
- Pain
- Other Depo-Provera meningioma symptoms
Procedures and tests used by neurologists, oncologists, radiologists and other physicians to diagnose meningiomas can include a patient history, physical examination, neurological exam, brain scans (MRI with contrast, CT scans, X-rays, etc.) to check for “dural tail signs” or meningeal signs (i.e., thickening of the dura mater, the outer layer of the meninges), biopsy of tumor tissue, among others.
Meningioma Medical Treatment
Treatment for meningiomas can include surgery (e.g., a maximum gross total surgical resection), radiation treatment (external beam radiotherapy, brachytherapy, stereotactic radiosurgery SRS or Gamma Knife surgery, fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy SRT, intensity-modulated radiation therapy IMRT) and chemotherapy, among others.
If not treated, meningiomas can lead to serious complications and may be life-threatening, even when benign, since they can grow and intrude on brain tissue, nerves, blood vessels and other structures.
Compensation For Depo-Provera Injuries
Plaintiffs who bring depo-provera meningioma lawsuits may be able to recover compensation for injuries they suffered, including money damages for losses incurred as a result of their having been diagnosed with meningioma brain tumors, such as:
- Compensatory damages for pain and suffering
- Loss of wages or earnings due to missed work
- Loss of future earning capacity
- Medical care expenses incurred or to be incurred
- Other out of pocket expenses
- Loss of quality or enjoyment of life
- Mental anguish/emotional distress
- Loss of consortium
- Other possible monetary damages
Time Is Limited To File A Depo-Provera Lawsuit
Deadlines called statutes of limitation and statutes of repose may limit the time that women have to file a Depo-Provera lawsuit to try to recover compensation for injuries they claim to have suffered (e.g., complications relating to meningioma brain tumors) after using Depo-Provera, Depo-SubQ Provera or medroxyprogesterone acetate.
This means that if a Depo-Provera lawsuit claim is not filed before the applicable deadline or limitations period, the injured party may be barred from ever pursuing litigation or taking legal action regarding their Depo-Provera injury claim. That is why it is important to connect with a Depo-Provera injury lawyer or attorney as soon as possible.
If you or a loved one have suffered from meningioma brain tumors after using Depo-Provera or Depo-SubQ Provera, you may be entitled to recover compensation from a Depo-Provera lawsuit case or settlement claim. Contact a drug injury lawyer to request a free case review.
*This page is for informational purposes only and is not medical advice. Medical decisions should be made with a qualified healthcare provider. If you or a loved one are experiencing health issues, side effects or complications after taking a prescription drug or medication, we urge you to promptly consult with your doctor or physician for an evaluation.
**This page provides information about Depo-Provera meningioma lawsuits. It is not legal advice and should not be relied on as a substitute for speaking with an attorney. Reading this page or submitting a form does not create an attorney-client relationship, or any obligation to pursue a claim. Depo-Provera lawsuit eligibility, deadlines, and potential compensation depend on the specific facts of each case and other factors. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. If you believe you may have a claim, you should speak with an attorney as soon as possible because legal deadlines may limit the time to file a lawsuit.
***The listing of a company (e.g., Pfizer, Pharmacia & Upjohn Company LLC, Greenstone LLC, Viatris, Prasco) or product (e.g., Depo-Provera or Depo-SubQ Provera) is not meant to state or imply that the company acted illegally or improperly or that the product is unsafe or defective; rather only that an investigation may be, is or was being conducted to determine whether legal rights have been violated. The use of any trademarks, tradenames or service marks is solely for product identification and/or informational purposes.
Fill out the form to request a free attorney review.