Depo Provera Linked to Brain Tumors

As of early May, there were roughly 3790 cases consolidated for pre-trial proceedings in the Depo Provera MDL. Bellwether trials are expected to begin in December 2026, and settlement negotiations may follow.

More than a bad headache

McCree received Depo Provera shots from 2007 to 2025. During those 18 years she began to suffer from the severe symptoms often associated with growing brain tumors, like the tumor she eventually developed. Intracranial meningioma symptoms may include:

• Persistent or worsening headaches that do not respond to usual treatments;
• Sudden, unexplained seizures or unusual neurological activity;
• Mood swings or personality changes;
• Blurred vision, double vision or vision loss in one or both eyes;
• Gradual or sudden hearing impairment, often accompanied by ringing in the ears (tinnitus);
• Difficulty with concentration, forgetfulness or noticeable cognitive decline;
• Frequent vertigo, unsteadiness or coordination difficulties;
• Persistent tiredness that does not improve with rest and affects daily activities;
• Slurred speech or trouble finding the right words in conversation; and
• Unexplained gastrointestinal symptoms, like nausea or vomiting.

Depo Provera, scientifically known as “medroxyprogesterone acetate” has been credibly linked to cranial meningiomas, pseudotumor cerebri (idiopathic intracranial hypertension) and spinal tumors. Depending on their size and location, these slow-growing tumors and related conditions may interfere with brain tissue and neurological function and can require surgical intervention or long-term monitoring. Depo side effects have troubled drug regulators since at least 1983.

Depo Provera dangers were no secret

According to McCree’s Complaint, the defendant drug companies either knew or had reason to know that Depo Provera was dangerous.

In 2024, a French study concluded that prolonged use of injectable medroxyprogesterone acetate, a widely used contraceptive (marketed as Depo Provera) increased the risk of intracranial meningioma. According to the study, Depo-Provera users faced a 5.55-fold higher risk of developing meningiomas compared to women who had never used the contraceptive.

In 2025, a safety study conducted at the University of British Columbia concluded that women who received Depo Provera injections for at least one year were 3.55 times more likely to develop intracranial meningiomas than women using oral contraceptive pills. A 2025 review of the U.S. insurance database appears to have confirmed these conclusions.

A JAMA Neurology Study concluded that women over the age of 31 who used medroxyprogesterone acetate had a 2.43-fold greater risk of developing meningiomas than women who used other contraceptives. No increased risk of meningioma diagnosis was found with any other contraceptive.

In late 2025, the FDA authorized updated warning label language for Depo-Provera to address meningioma risks. The updated label now includes the following language: “Cases of meningiomas have been reported following repeated administration of medroxyprogesterone acetate, primarily with long-term use.”

But by then, for many women like Christina McCree, the damage had already been done.

Negligent or intentional?

In many ways, the cases are going to boil down to the old Watergate question – “What did they know and when did they know it?” McCree presents claims of:

• failure to warn;
• design defect;
• negligence;
• negligent failure to warn;
• negligent design defect;
• negligent misrepresentation;
• fraudulent misrepresentation; and
• breach of warranty.

She seeks both compensatory and punitive damages.

What happens next in Depo Provera MDL?

There are still many months to go before Christina McCree’s Depo Provera lawsuit reaches a conclusion. The MDL is currently focused on expert testimony. Competing “Daubert” motions will focus on what testimony is sufficiently reliable to be admitted into evidence. Medical personal injury lawsuits often turn into a proverbial “war of experts.”

In addition to the issue of knowledge, arguments about causation – whether, in fact, long-term Depo Provera use had anything to do with brain tumor development – will loom large. The parties will also likely argue about whether the cases will be tried in state or federal court. A move to state court would likely delay the proceedings.

Thereafter, the court will move on to selecting and scheduling bellwether trials. The outcome of those trials will likely trigger settlement negotiations. There is a long way to go yet for McCree and the other plaintiffs, but the legal twists and turns are likely to have a significant impact on the outcome.