This article orig­i­nally appeared in ProP­ublica on September 16, 2011

By Tracy Weber and Charles Ornstein — ProPublica

This story was co-published with the Wash­ington Post

Two years ago, drug­maker Eli Lilly pleaded guilty to ille­gally marketing [1] its block­buster antipsy­chotic Zyprexa for elderly patients. Lilly paid $1.4 billion in criminal penalties and settle­ments in four civil lawsuits.

But a doctor named as a co-defendant in one suit – for allegedly taking kick­backs to prescribe the drug exten­sively at nursing homes – never was pursued.

Last year, Alpharma paid $42.5 million to settle federal alle­ga­tions [2] that it paid kick­backs to doctors to prescribe its painkiller Kadian.

Health-care deci­sions must be based solely upon what is best for the indi­vidual patient and not on which phar­ma­ceu­tical company is paying the doctor the biggest kickback,” Rod J. Rosen­stein, U.S. attorney for the District of Maryland, said in a statement announcing the settlement.

But the doctors accused of trading prescrip­tions for paid speaking gigs faced no consequences.

At least 15 drug and medical-device companies have paid $6.5 billion since 2008 to settle accu­sa­tions of marketing fraud or kick­backs. However, none of the more than 75 doctors named as partic­i­pants were sanc­tioned, despite alle­ga­tions of fraud or of conduct that put patients at risk, a review by ProP­ublica found.

Reporters reviewed hundreds of pages of court records and inter­viewed current and former federal pros­e­cutors, state medical board offi­cials, attorneys for whistle­blowers and, when possible, the doctors. For each doctor iden­tified in a suit, ProP­ublica checked for state medical board disci­pline, penalties from the Medicare program and federal criminal charges.

In many of the cases, it appears that not even a cursory inves­ti­gation was done to see whether the physi­cians had behaved inappropriately.

Doctors have kind of gone under the radar,” said Tavy Deming, a Philadelphia lawyer who repre­sents drug company whistleblowers.

Amid concerns about the influence of drug company money on medicine, whistle­blower lawsuits have emerged as a headline-grabbing tool for holding manu­fac­turers accountable.

Yet, despite their power to secure large settle­ments from drug­makers, the suits have failed to resolve the culpa­bility of physi­cians. Doctors often are not named as defen­dants, even though descrip­tions of their alleged misconduct are used to bolster the suits. And even when settling, many companies, including Alpharma, continue to deny the allegations.

After cases are resolved, the internal company docu­ments used as evidence remain confi­dential, preventing further explo­ration of the physi­cians’ behavior. Patients have no way of knowing whether their doctor’s judgment has been compro­mised, and doctors may be tarnished by spurious accusations.

Medical boards, which normally pursue tips or complaints of wrong­doing, do not routinely scan for such cases. Justice Department lawyers, wary of spending more time and effort on a case, usually are not inter­ested in going after lesser players.

Tony West, the assistant attorney general who oversees civil liti­gation nationwide for the Justice Department, declined through a spokes­woman to discuss the issue. In announcing settle­ments with the drug companies, however, West has said that kick­backs undermine doctors’ credibility.

Sen. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa), the ranking Repub­lican on the Judi­ciary Committee, said in a written statement that it takes “two sides to perpetuate this fraud” and that both need to be held accountable.

Otherwise, regardless of how big of a civil settlement a drug company makes, the incentive to cheat the taxpayers will still be in place for those willing to take part,” said Grassley, who has led inves­ti­ga­tions into conflicts of interest in medicine.

Doctors less-attractive targets

In recent years, phar­ma­ceu­tical and medical-device companies have been barraged by whistle-blower lawsuits [3] detailing how the pursuit of profit allegedly fueled fraud and corruption.

The suits are typi­cally filed by former employees who say that the companies promoted drugs for unap­proved uses or paid doctors to prescribe drugs or use medical devices. The suits seek to recover millions – even billions – of dollars spent on these products by government health programs.

The Justice Department joins the cases 2013 known as “qui tam” suits, from Latin – if it believes they have merit. Whistle-blowers and their lawyers get a cut of any money collected. The government has come to rely on such cases to police companies’ conduct.

For Justice Department lawyers, big drug companies make attractive targets. They are flush with profits and deter­mined to avoid crip­pling legal defeats. Their bureau­cratic sprawl often leaves an inad­vertent trail of incrim­i­nating e-mail and memos. The massive financial settle­ments they are willing to pay are often modest in light of their annual sales and profits.

Zyprexa, for example, had U.S. sales of nearly $3 billion in 2010 alone. Kadian, Alpharma’s painkiller, brought in nearly $263 million, according to IMS Health, which tracks prescription drug sales.

Also, the rules governing drug and device companies are strict: They are banned from pushing their products for uses not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Next page

ProP­ublica

ProP­ublica is an inde­pendent, non-profit newsroom that produces inves­tigative jour­nalism in the public interest. Our work focuses exclu­sively on truly important stories, stories with “moral force.” We do this by producing jour­nalism that shines a light on exploitation of the weak by the strong and on the failures of those with power to vindicate the trust placed in them.

More PostsWebsiteTwitterFacebook

Pages: 1 2 3