AstraZeneca, A Psychiatrist And Big Seroquel Bucks
11 CommentsBy Ed Silverman // November 11th, 2009 // 8:48 am
In 2001, AstraZeneca execs faced a high-stakes dilemma - psychiatrist Michael Reinstein was bringing in a small fortune in sales and conducting research that made one of its most promising drugs look spectacular, The Chicago Tribune writes. But some worried his research might be too good to be true.
As Reinstein grew irritated with what he perceived as slights, a top exec outlined the scenario in an email to colleagues, the paper writes. “If he is, in fact, worth half a billion dollars to (AstraZeneca),” the drugmaker’s US sales chief wrote in 2001, “we need to put him in a different category.” To avoid scaring Reinstein away, he wrote, AstraZeneca should answer “his every query and satisfy any of his quirky behaviors.”
Nonetheless, AstraZeneca would continue its relationship with Reinstein, paying him $490,000 over a decade to travel the nation promoting its Seroquel antipsychotic. In return, Reinstein provided the company a vast customer base: thousands of mentally ill residents in Chicago-area nursing homes, the Trib continues.
During that time, Reinstein also faced accusations that he overmedicated and neglected patients who took a variety of drugs. But his research and promotional work went on, including studies and presentations examining many of the antipsychotics he prescribed on his daily rounds, according to the paper.
Reinstein tells the paper that industry payments he received for speeches and other engagements have had no bearing on his research results or patient care, and that he doesn’t “accept any money from corporations to study their medications. This eliminates any possible conflicts of interest.”
But he does receive money from the Uptown Research Institute, a for-profit business that conducts industry- and government-funded studies on psychotropic drugs to help mentally ill patients, the Trib writes. Reinstein’s office in Uptown is adjacent to the research institute, which is owned by John Sonnenberg, a clinical psychologist who tells the Trib Reinstein is “a mentor of mine” and “brilliant.”
Sonnenberg tells the Trib that drugmakers and others pay his institute to do research, and the group, in turn, pays Reinstein a consulting fee of “under $2,000 a month” and has for many years. A decade ago, Sonnenberg adds, Reinstein was an active researcher for the institute but since then has served only as an adviser.
Here’s the rest…
And here’s some related material courtesy of PharmaGossip
Joe
During the time Dr. Reinstein was claiming that Seroquel induced weight loss one has to wonder how many of his many of his patients he was monitoring for metabolic syndrome, if any.
Condor
Um. . . . none.
This is one awful (true) story — of excess and greed.
Read the whole Trib series.
Namaste
BP Watch
Wow! Disgusting. The very sad thing is that this story is not an isolated one. It’s commonplace. Consultants, advisors, speakers, opinion leaders, whatever you call them - many rake in hundreds of thousands of dollars from Big Pharma. I’ve been there and I’ve seen it, particularly with cardiologists and surgeons. They’re completely shameless. If the FDA, OIG, OAG, DOJ, IRS, SEC would start looking into these relationships, then many docs would have egg on their face and certainly be responsible for paying a lot of back taxes!!
CV Doc
Agreed. If anyone wants to see some real courting of physicians going on , they just need to be at the AHA next week. The money will be flowing there! Lots of Big Pharma sponsored meetings with highly-paid speakers drooling the company line to docs who have been enticed to attend their sessions.
MsPiggy
Move over Pharma “bad boys, bad boys, what’s you gonna do”, Nemeroff and Biederman.
“Doctor Death” has just busted down the front door of Grandma’s house, carrying his deadly pill bottle.
soulful sepulcher has some nice follow up on this topic:
http://bipolarsoupkitchen-stephany.blogspot.com/2009/11/effect-of-clozapine-quetiapine.html
Justice in Michigan
Any chance that AZ will also report its gifts to docs? And do these kinds of payments–which, as reported, appeared to be laundered-qualify?
Anonymous
And all of this is going on DURING an OIG Corporate Integrity Agreement.
what
Is this enough credit to the trib? This is just a reprinted story right? Can’t you just publish the link or make it a little clearer where the credit should go?
Ed Silverman
Dear What,
Thanks for your note. If you notice, there is attribution to the Trib in most every paragraph. And if you look closely, there is a link in the first paragraph where The Chicago Tribune is first mentioned.
Moreover, I have always included a fair amount of what is called aggregation on the site - compiling items from elsewhere along with some original material. That is nothing new and has been my practice since the site launched in January 2007.
Aggregation allows some people to quickly digest the thrust of an item or issue should they not wish to click on a link for a complete story, although obviously readers have that option as well. The link is the appropriate thing to provide for all of the obvious reasons.
I hope this helps,
ed
harpy
@ JiM - the fees he received for speaking/promo would be reportable (a la Lilly’s Speaker Bureau and the new “sunshine” laws) but the money for research/studies usually isn’t. And, from what I gathered from the article, his studies were done under the auspices of a third-party so that’s another degree removed.
elaine
So will there be consequences for the psychiatrist? He should lose his license!