Who Paid My Doc
Denise Woo
Dermatology Detroit, MI Medical Doctor
NPI 1588863260 CMS profile 778767
3031 W Grand Blvd Ste 800, Detroit, MI 48202
General payments
$153
Research payments
$0
Ownership & investment interest
$0
Through program year 2023, Denise Woo of Detroit, MI is reported in the CMS Open Payments database as having received $153 across 2 general payments and $0 in research payments paid to them.
No combined total General, research and ownership are kept apart. Each is reported under its own rules, and ownership is not money that moved at all but the value of a stake held. A meal, a clinical trial grant and a shareholding do not add up to anything meaningful, so this site does not add them.
General payments for this record sit in the 12th percentile of Dermatology profiles with reported payments. Percentile describes the distribution, not the conduct.
By program year
1 row| Year | Kind | Relative to this record's peak year | Amount | Records |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | General | $153 | 2 |
Beside peers
- Denise Woo
- Dermatology median
- Middle half of Dermatology
- National median
In program year 2025, general payments to Denise Woo were reported at $0. Among 10,363 Dermatology profiles paid that year, the median was $788 and the middle half received between $207 and $1,974.
Show as a table
| Year | Denise Woo | Dermatology median | Middle half | National median |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | $0 | $454 | $129–$1,240 | $163 |
| 2020 | $0 | $235 | $81–$756 | $114 |
| 2021 | $0 | $377 | $108–$1,108 | $132 |
| 2022 | $0 | $514 | $143–$1,391 | $149 |
| 2023 | $153 | $607 | $159–$1,674 | $160 |
| 2024 | $0 | $751 | $204–$1,903 | $164 |
| 2025 | $0 | $788 | $207–$1,974 | $169 |
Breakdown
Prescribing to Medicare patients
Part D · data year 2024 · 26 drugsPart D claims
590
Drug cost
$483,941
Branded share of claims
29%
| Drug | Type | Relative to their largest | Claims | Drug cost |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cosentyx Sensoready (2 Pens) Secukinumab | Brand | 38 | $276,824 | |
| Dupixent Pen Dupilumab | Brand | 23 | $83,148 | |
| Dupixent Syringe Dupilumab | Brand | 16 | $57,180 | |
| Otezla Apremilast | Brand | 11 | $48,469 | |
| Clobetasol Propionate | Generic | 95 | $3,213 | |
| Calcipotriene | Generic | 27 | $2,699 | |
| Fluorouracil | Generic | 48 | $2,056 | |
| Betamethasone Diprop Augmented Betamethasone/Propylene Glyc | Brand | 27 | $1,567 | |
| Alclometasone Dipropionate | Generic | 15 | $1,552 | |
| Ivermectin | Generic | 13 | $823 |
The 10 drugs with the highest cost, of 26 counted.
Drug cost is what was paid for the drugs at the pharmacy — by Medicare, the patient and others — and is not money to the prescriber. Medicare Part D only: drugs dispensed to Medicare beneficiaries. A drug with fewer than 11 claims for this prescriber is not published, so a missing drug does not mean zero. The medians are for the 13,550 Part D prescribers listed as Dermatology; they describe a distribution and say nothing about conduct.
Records
2 reportedEvery payment, record by record
Date, company, amount, what it was for and the product named — filter by year, kind and company, or download as CSV.
Other Dermatology in Michigan
Related records
Dermatology in Michigan
Practitioners in the same specialty and state, ranked by reported value.
All Dermatology
Everyone recorded under this specialty, nationwide.
Doctors in Michigan
Every practitioner in the state with a reported payment.
How to read this page
What each amount means, and what it does not mean.
What this means
U.S. law requires drug and medical device manufacturers to report payments and transfers of value they make to physicians and teaching hospitals. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services publishes that record each year. This page shows what was reported about this person, and nothing else.
An ownership interest is different from the other two. It is not a payment: it is a stake — shares, options, a partnership holding — that a physician or an immediate family member held in a manufacturer during that year. The figure shown is what the stake was reported to be worth.
Research payments frequently pass through a clinician to the institution running a trial, and rarely represent personal income. They should be read differently from general payments.