CMS Open Payments · Tool
Axsome Therapeutics, Inc. vs Alphatec Spine, Inc
Side-by-side comparison of CMS Open Payments data for Program Year 2024. Select different companies below to start a new comparison.
A larger reported total is not "better" or "worse", it is a neutral fact about disclosure volume; a reported payment documents a financial relationship, not evidence of wrongdoing.
Compare Different Companies
Relationship comparison
Which recorded payment profile is more concentrated?
Alphatec Spine, Inc has the more concentrated recorded General Payments recipient profile in Program Year 2024: its recipient-distribution HHI is 1,321, versus 45 for the other company. Its single largest recorded recipient represents 35.3% of that company's General Payments recipient total.
HHI summarizes how payments are distributed across recorded recipients: higher means a less evenly distributed recipient pattern. This is a description of CMS-reported General Payments only, not a finding about conduct, prescribing, quality, or wrongdoing. Read it with the recipient count and underlying records below.
- Axsome Therapeutics, Inc.
- HHI 45 · top recipient 2.0%
- Ranked #1,768 of 1,838 companies by HHI
- Alphatec Spine, Inc
- HHI 1,321 · top recipient 35.3%
- Ranked #911 of 1,838 companies by HHI
Payment Overview
Axsome Therapeutics, Inc.
- Total Payments
- $23.6M
- % of Industry
- 0.2%
- Transactions
- 80,352
- Avg per Transaction
- $293.15
- Recipients
- 79,802
- Avg per Recipient
- $295.17
- Payment Types
- 6
- Top Payment Type
- Consulting Fee
Alphatec Spine, Inc
- Total Payments
- $22.3M
- % of Industry
- 0.2%
- Transactions
- 6,836
- Avg per Transaction
- $3.3K
- Recipients
- 6,836
- Avg per Recipient
- $3.3K
- Payment Types
- 4
- Top Payment Type
- Royalty or License
Highlighted values indicate the higher figure for each metric.
Total payments compared
Axsome Therapeutics, Inc. vs Alphatec Spine, Inc - total reported payments in CMS Open Payments PY2024
General Payment Types Breakdown
Category shares use each company's General Payments total, not the all-tracks (General + Research + Ownership) hero figure.
Axsome Therapeutics, Inc.
70.8%
19.5%
7.7%
2.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Alphatec Spine, Inc
78.7%
13.2%
6.6%
1.6%
Top 5 General-Payment Recipients
This list uses CMS detailed General Payments records only; it excludes research and ownership/investment records, so it does not equal the all-category totals above. A reported payment documents a financial relationship, not evidence of wrongdoing; a higher total reflects reporting volume, not conduct. Verify directly at openpaymentsdata.cms.gov.
Axsome Therapeutics, Inc.
- 1
LEON ROSENBERG
$249,399.95 · 22 txns
- 2
GREGORY MATTINGLEY
$175,349.15 · 164 txns
- 3
SCOTT WIENER
$162,397.43 · 234 txns
- 4
CRAIG CHEPKE
$152,275.59 · 118 txns
- 5
ANDREW CUTLER
$149,850.96 · 133 txns
Alphatec Spine, Inc
- 1
ROGER JACKSON
$7,883,492.91 · 4 txns
- 2
ANTOINE TOHMEH
$666,512.50 · 50 txns
- 3
STACEY BEDERMAN
$636,913.14 · 19 txns
- 4
JUAN URIBE
$599,126.20 · 164 txns
- 5
VEDAT DEVIREN
$533,109.71 · 41 txns
Summary Comparison
| Metric | Axsome Therapeutics, Inc. | Alphatec Spine, Inc |
|---|---|---|
| Total Payments | $23.6M | $22.3M |
| % of Industry Total | 0.2% | 0.2% |
| Transaction Count | 80,352 | 6,836 |
| Avg per Transaction | $293.15 | $3.3K |
| Recipient Count | 79,802 | 6,836 |
| Avg per Recipient | $295.17 | $3.3K |
| Payment Type Count | 6 | 4 |
| Top Payment Type | Consulting Fee | Royalty or License |
Data Source: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Open Payments, Program Year 2024. Data includes general payments, research payments, and physician ownership/investment interests as required by the Physician Payments Sunshine Act. All companies in the CMS Open Payments company corpus are available in the selector. Browse all companies →
Every figure on PlainPharmaWatch is rendered directly from federal source data, no number is typed in by an editor. This page draws directly on federal source data, no figure is typed in by an editor. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these numbers, or report a data error.