When Oncologists Sell Out to Pharma

Patients should look up oncologists on OpenPayments; Docs take money and are strangely not critical

Recently, I got yet another unsolicited email. This time it was offering to educate me about Triple Class Myeloma on VuMedi. Vu-nderful!

Although it was sent by a third party website with the reputation of a used car dealership, the email said it was from Joshua Richter an actual physician at an actual place, Mt Sinai

I listened to the linked lecture (and some of the discussion), and found the content to be braindead, empty, pharmaceutical hype. The speaker did not adequately discuss the limitations of CAR-T cells, for instance. I have outlined those limitations in this piece in Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology.

“We have an abundance of riches” said one speaker, again without pointing out the huge limitations of these products. For instance, I think drug induced Parkinsonism should be discussed for at least 5 mins out of 52.

Why are 3 random oncologists working with a third party entity to email blast me unsolicited education, which lacks thoughtfulness and nuance?

Why are these doctors basically sending me an advertisement for new products that lack GOOD RCTs (Bispecific Ab still have no positive randomized trials for clinical endpoints)? Did one of them let the company use his name for the email blast?

I looked up the doctors on OPEN PAYMENTS, as you should for all doctors you see. Link is here. I was shocked.

Wow, these gentlemen are stuffing their pockets with pharmaceutical cash. Remember general payments are how much money they took personally— for themselves. These sums are disgusting. In several cases they exceed the average household income in the US.

How is it acceptable in oncology that Mr. Richter, for example, has collected nearly $200,000 from Celgene?

Why are these payments not considered bribes?

Any honest patient has to wonder if a doctor who takes money from a company might recommend that companies drugs even when the evidence is unclear or debated. Worse, the lecture provides no reassurance, but heightened my worries.

I find no sign that the 3 panelists are good at critically appraising evidence. They are promoting several products without randomized data and without appropriate caveat and nuance. They even go beyond FDA approvals, and discuss things like second CAR-T.

How does VuMed get the money to run these talks and host the website? Well, prominently displayed is a pharma ad. It’s to the same product that these speakers shamelessly push.

What am I to think?

Oncologists stuff their pockets with pharma cash. They give a lecture that lacks good critical appraisal skills. They push specific drug products. They do this for a third party website, which email blasts me (and presumably other oncologists) this propaganda, using the name of one of the doctors. The website has pharma ads on it for the same products discussed in the video.

Doctors have no ethics or decency is my conclusion.

These 3 gentleman may die with more money in the bank, but, in my opinion, this discussion actually harms patients and the field by failing to properly discuss the harms and limitations of the products. The discussion also harms my inbox because I don’t want propaganda; I want interesting and unique ideas, when requested.

I did my part and hit the button to block this website, but I wish Google could give me a button to block all oncologists who sell out to Pharma, and I wish all patients could hit that button when they see their cancer doctor.

PS: I have never taken a dime from a pharma company. I lectured at Pfizer and Takeda and others for free. And, if you work in pharma, and invite me, I will lecture you for free too!

At Pfizer, I brought my own thermos of coffee and fasted the entire day. I certainly would never take $100,000 from these companies, because, as someone with self respect, then I would have break all the mirrors in my house.