Posts Tagged ‘Dollars for Docs’

Doctors Paid Millions To Promote Drugs and Medical Devices

Thursday, September 29th, 2011

InjuryBoard Blog Network – September 29, 2011

AstraZeneca paid one Chicago doctor, Dr. Michael Reinstein nearly half-a-million dollars to promote Seroquel. In return, Dr. Reinstein provided AstraZeneca with a vast customer base.

The Chicago Tribune reportedthat drug companies paid more than $25 million to Illinois doctors to promote and use drugs from the pharmaceutical companies. Nearly 40 physicians got payments and perks exceeding $100,000 between 2009 and early 2011.

Eight drug companies paid more than $220 million to doctors and promotional speakers in 2010 to promote their drugs.

Starting in 2013, all drug and medical device companies must report such information to the federal government which will make these disclosures available to the public.

The most controversial payments involve consulting arrangements and promotional speeches. Drug company officials say they are funding talks that provide much-needed medical education, led by physicians who are experts in their fields. Critics say financial relationship between doctors and drug companies can threaten patient care by influencing physicians to prescribe certain medications whether or not they are the best choice.

Until 2009, drug company payments to doctors and other health professionals were closely held as trade secrets. However, some companies have begun reporting this information in advance of the 2013 requirements and pressure from lawmakers or as a condition of settling federal whistle-blower lawsuits.

ProPublica has created a database called Dollars for Docs identifying amounts paid to doctors for promotion of drugs and medical devices. Dollars for Docs has identified more than $760 million in disclosed marketing payments from only 12 companies between 2009 and the 2nd quarter of 2011.

“[The drug company payments] make it look like physicians are not impartial or are in the service of the drug companies, and can cause patients to wonder if physicians’ recommendations for treatment are being made because it was the best option based on their clinical expertise or because they have a relationship with the company,” [Hastings Center research scholar Josephine] Johnston said. “I don’t think many physicians have taken that risk (of patient distrust) as seriously as they should.”

In 2009, the Chicago Tribune reported on the millions of dollars paid by foreign drug maker AstraZeneca to doctors in order to promote its anti-psychotic drug, Seroquel. AstraZeneca paid one Chicago doctor, Dr. Michael Reinstein nearly half-a-million dollars to promote Seroquel. In return, Dr. Reinstein provided AstraZeneca with a vast customer base.

Dr. Reinstein was traveling the country telling doctors that Seroquel would help patients lose weight while the FDA was warning about Seroquel’s link to weight gain and diabetes. Even Seroquel executives called Dr. Reinstein’s conclusion that patients experienced no adverse side effects “suspect” and “hard to believe”. When faced with the choice of protecting patients or protecting profits, AstraZeneca and Dr. Reinstein chose profits over safety.

Johnson & Johnson’s DePuy Orthopaedics division also paid millions — more than $80 million — to surgeons to promote its artificial hip systems. The US Department of Justice brought charges against four medical device companies – including DePuy – in 2007, claiming the companies were using kickbacks to doctors in promoting their products. However, DePuy kept paying doctors:

  • $48 million to doctors in 2009
  • $33 million from January to September 2010

Some surgeons received more than $1 million in single year.

These payments create a direct conflict of interest between doctor and patient. Drug company sponsored research potentially taints results and doctors create the impression – and sometimes the actual effect – of choosing profits and drug company kickbacks over patient safety.

Read More:

« Return to news items


Share

Dollars for Docs Update: Now With 12 Companies, More Than $760 Million in Payments

Wednesday, September 7th, 2011

ProPublica – September 7, 2011

by Dan Nguyen, Charles Ornstein and Tracy Weber

Drug companies have long kept secret details of the payments they make to doctors and other health professionals for promoting their drugs. But 12 companies have begun publicizing the information. ProPublica pulled their disclosures into a database so patients can search for their doctor.

For decades, drug companies kept the names of their speakers — and how much they paid them — secret. But over the past two years, companies have begun posting this information on their web sites, some as the result of legal settlements with the federal government.

ProPublica took these disclosures and assembled them into a single, comprehensive database that allows patients to search for their physician.

It was not easy. Some of the firms constructed their sites in a way that made it near impossible to analyze or, in some cases, even download their data. And each firm disclosed its data differently. Some, for example, simply included speaking. Others also detailed consulting. Sometimes, research, business travel costs and meals were listed, too.

ProPublica will update the database from time to time as additional companies release their payment data. Federal law requires that all companies publicly report this data beginning in 2013. That information will be posted on a government web site.

Several things to bear in mind about the data:

  • Only the companies that have disclosed payments on their web sites are included. Their combined prescription drug sales amounted to about 40 percent of the U.S. market in 2010. Though a substantial share, the data may not be wholly representative of the industry.
  • The data is from payments made in 2009, 2010 and, in some cases, the beginning of 2011. But not all companies reported payments for every quarter during that period.
  • Companies are continually updating their data, so the most recent additions may not be included in our database.
  • Although most of the money went to physicians, other practitioners, including nurses and pharmacists, also work with pharmaceutical companies and are listed. Some drug firms include these payments; others do not.
  • Practitioner names and addresses (city/state) are listed as the companies released them and may vary. For instance, some companies include a middle initial, and others do not. Some companies also list different cities for the same individual. This may happen because professionals may have practices in multiple locations or because they provided different addresses for payment.
  • As noted above, the companies’ reports cover different periods and include payments for different services. Some companies include payments only to speakers, while others include consultants and advisers, as well as research, meals and business travel. (Details are included on each company’s page.)
  • The reports include both the name of the health provider who performed the service as well as the entity paid. They may be different.
  • Research payments are distinct from speaking and consulting. Payments for clinical studies may include costs associated with patient care, supplies, as well as the time spent by health care professionals treating patients and managing the study. The figure listed may not reflect the actual compensation received by the physician listed as the principal investigator.
  • A physician on the list may be getting money from other companies that have yet to disclose payments.
  • Eli Lilly has in some cases used different middle initials for the same individual.
  • This list does not include payments for speaking at continuing medical education courses, which are run independently from the pharmaceutical companies.

http://www.propublica.org/

 

« Return to news items


Share