RxDoctor Payments Data

Elizabeth Kessler, MD

Medical Oncology · Aurora, CONPI 1245386879

Payments from drug & device makers

What this record shows

Almost everything reported here is food and beverage — 100.0% of the total across 5 separate payments, which is the pattern of a clinician who attends manufacturer presentations rather than one with a consulting arrangement. 4 manufacturers reported payments, led by Pfizer at 58.0% of the total. That places this record below the midpoint for medical oncology clinicians in CO, where the typical reported total is $1,342.

$391in general payments, 2019–2025

Across 5 payments — averaging $78.13 each. Meals, travel, consulting and speaking fees, gifts and royalties reported by drug and device makers.

  • Pfizer$227
  • Astellas Pharma US Inc$93
  • Genentech, Inc.$57
  • Myovant Sciences Inc.$13
$5,125,805in research payments, 2019–2025

Across 203 payments — averaging $25,250 each. Payments tied to a research study. These frequently flow through the physician to a hospital or research institution rather than to the physician personally.

  • Merck$2.6M
  • Pfizer$1.8M
  • E.r. Squibb & Sons, L.L.C.$367K
  • Janssen Research & Development, LLC$149K
  • Eli Lilly$116K
  • Astellas Pharma Global Development$75K
  • plus $53K from 3 others

What the payments were for

  • Food & beverage$391100%

Most of this is food and beverage — typically meals provided during product presentations at a clinic or hospital. Nationally that is the single largest category of reported payments by count.

General payments by program year

20
22
24
25

Who reported the general payments

Companies are grouped under their corporate parent — a single manufacturer often files under several CMS reporting entities. Research and ownership payments are counted separately and are not in this table.

How this compares

$391 in reported general payments places this provider in the 35th percentile of 96 medical oncology providers in Colorado.

See all medical oncology providers in Colorado

Medicare billing

Part B allowed, 2024
$79,757
Medicare patients
235
Services billed
937

What this is not: this is the amount Original Medicare Part B allowed for services this provider billed in 2024. It is not their income. It excludes Medicare Advantage — now more than half of all Medicare enrollment — along with Medicaid and all commercial insurance, and it is gross practice revenue before staff, rent, supplies and malpractice premiums. CMS also suppresses any figure covering ten or fewer patients, so low-volume providers appear smaller than they are.

Most prescribed under Part D

DrugClaimsCost to plans & patients
NubeqaDarolutamide75$904,517
XtandiEnzalutamide67$790,634
LenvimaLenvatinib Mesylate22$505,807
CabometyxCabozantinib S-Malate23$496,324
ErleadaApalutamide13$196,403
Abiraterone Acetate174$164,655
OrgovyxRelugolix50$120,779
Pazopanib Hcl14$105,210
EliquisApixaban22$37,403
Everolimus15$13,773
XareltoRivaroxaban13$9,748
SavaysaEdoxaban Tosylate16$6,122
Dexamethasone47$1,103
Bicalutamide27$682
Prednisone75$639

Paid to pharmacies, not to this prescriber.

Companies that both paid and supply prescribed drugs

These companies both reported payments to this provider and make drugs the provider prescribed under Medicare Part D in 2024. For most specialties this overlap is expected — a cardiologist who is paid by a cardiology drugmaker also treats heart disease. It is shown so the reader can see it, not because it implies anything on its own.

CompanyPaid to this providerPart D cost of their drugs
Astellas Pharma US IncXtandi$93$790,63467 claims
PfizerEliquis$227$37,40322 claims

Reading this fairly. The Part D column is what drug plans and patients paid pharmacies — this provider received none of it, and it reflects how many patients they treat and what those drugs cost. Against peers, this provider's reported payments sit in the 35th percentile of 96 medical oncology providers in Colorado.

Other medical oncology in Aurora

See the full list for Colorado

Where these figures come from

Is this you, or does something look wrong? →