RxDoctor Payments Data

Joseph Leach, MD

Medical Oncology · Maple Grove, MNNPI 1922083336

Payments from drug & device makers

What this record shows

This record is dominated by consulting fees: $5,465 of the $6,201 with a category attached, or 88.1%. AstraZeneca accounts for 91.9% of it on its own, with 7 other manufacturers making up the rest. Reporting peaked in 2019 at $5,669 and has fallen 99.1% since, to $51 in 2025.

$6,201in general payments, 2019–2025

Across 14 payments — averaging $442.93 each. Meals, travel, consulting and speaking fees, gifts and royalties reported by drug and device makers.

  • AstraZeneca$6K
  • GSK$168
  • Johnson & Johnson$118
  • ASD Specialty Healthcare, LLC$111
  • Merck$51
  • Astellas Pharma Global Development$26
  • plus $25 from 2 others
$580,560in research payments, 2019–2025

Across 23 payments — averaging $25,242 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$422K
  • AstraZeneca$100K
  • Geistlich Pharma, North America, Inc.$40K
  • Biontech SE$14K
  • Dynavax Technologies Corporation$3K
  • Amgen$1K
  • plus $50 from 1 others

What the payments were for

  • Consulting fees$5,46588%
  • Food & beverage$66011%
  • Education$761%

General payments by program year

19
21
22
23
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.

CompanyPaymentsTotal
AstraZeneca6$5,702
GSK1$168
Johnson & Johnson1$118
ASD Specialty Healthcare, LLC1$111
Merck2$51
Astellas Pharma Global Development1$26
Novocure Inc.1$13
Gilead1$12

What the payments were tied to

Products named in the reported payments. Only payments of $100 or more are attributed here — the typical reported payment nationally is a meal worth about $16, and listing those product-by-product would be noise.

How this compares

$6,201 in reported general payments places this provider in the 65th percentile of 133 medical oncology providers in Minnesota.

See all medical oncology providers in Minnesota

Medicare billing

Part B allowed, 2024
$16,706
Medicare patients
74
Services billed
170

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
TagrissoOsimertinib Mesylate47$790,173
EliquisApixaban12$13,981
Tamoxifen Citrate18$818
Anastrozole17$393
Letrozole15$345
Prochlorperazine Maleate30$327
Ondansetron Hcl16$213
Dexamethasone11$196
Prednisone17$135
Olanzapine13$97

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
AstraZenecaTagrisso$5,702$790,17347 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 65th percentile of 133 medical oncology providers in Minnesota.

Other medical oncology in Maple Grove

See the full list for Minnesota

Where these figures come from

Is this you, or does something look wrong? →