Why are Medicare and Medicaid shown separately instead of combined?

They come from two different CMS data sources with no shared claim identifier, so they can't be reconciled into one number without double-counting or guessing. Every table and chart on this page keeps them fully separate.

Why is there no private/commercial revenue figure?

Private and commercial payer data comes from Transparency in Coverage files, which only publish negotiated rates — not claims or utilization volume. Without a volume figure, no revenue number can be computed for any provider from that data.

What does "Rank" mean in the Competitive Analysis & Benchmarks tables?

For a given CPT/HCPCS code, it's this provider's position by claims volume among all providers billing that same code at that geography level (State, National, or Tennessee for Medicaid) — rank 1 means the highest claims volume for that code.

Why is the Medicaid comparison limited to Tennessee only?

Medicaid is administered per-state with no single national fee schedule, so a state or national comparison the way Medicare has one isn't available. Tennessee (this provider's own state) is the only grouping that's conceptually meaningful.

Why are the numbers rounded to the nearest 10?

To avoid implying more precision than the underlying data supports at a single-provider level. Ratios are kept precise since they're a relative comparison, not a volume or dollar figure.

How current is this data?

The Medicare and Medicaid tables are both single current snapshots, not refreshed on a recurring schedule yet.

Mitchell Martin (NPI 1639179708)

Field	Value
Entity Type	Individual
Organization	Mitchell Martin
Address	7650 Dannaher Dr
City	Powell
State	TN
ZIP	37849
Taxonomy	Hematology & Oncology Physician
NPI Enumerated	July 29, 2005

Payer Source	Total Paid
Medicare	$4.7M
Medicaid	$0

Key Findings

MITCHELL MARTIN is a Hematology & Oncology Physician with a long-tenured NPI (enumerated 2005-07-29, ~21 years ago) and reported $4.7M in lifetime Medicare revenue; there is no Medicaid billing on file, so this provider operates effectively as a Medicare-focused practice. The absence of any Medicaid claims suggests payer mix and contracting analyses should treat this profile as single-payer (Medicare) for Medicaid-related market sizing and network gap work.

Revenue for this provider is highly concentrated in a handful of high-cost oncology agents: the precomputed top-3 Medicare codes account for 49.7% of total Medicare revenue, led by J9271 ($963.2K, 21.5%), J9299 ($745.9K, 16.6%), and J0897 ($521.6K, 11.6%). This concentration indicates the practice derives nearly half of its Medicare revenue from a small number of biologic/immunotherapy agents, which has implications for drug purchasing, inventory, and payer contracting leverage.

The overall CPT/HCPCS mix is consistent with an outpatient oncology infusion practice: high-revenue injectable oncology drugs (J9271, J9299, J9144) are paired with chemotherapy administration codes such as 96413 (945 claims, $88.8K revenue, 2.0%), and infusion add-on codes like 96417 (281 claims, $13.2K revenue, 0.3%). This combination suggests routine onsite administration of intravenous oncology therapies and supportive care rather than a purely consultative or diagnostic practice.

Several codes place this provider as a statistical high-volume outlier nationally on drugs and services commonly used for oncology supportive care and infusion delivery: J0897 ranks #105 of 10057 providers (99th percentile; extreme outlier), J1437 ranks #4 of 581 providers (99th percentile; extreme outlier), J2506 ranks #7 of 586 providers (99th percentile; extreme outlier), and 96413 ranks #99 of 7514 providers (99th percentile; extreme outlier). These outlier positions indicate this provider delivers far-above-typical national volumes for certain injectable agents and chemotherapy administration, which may reflect a specialized service line or regional referral role for these therapies.

By contrast, the top immunotherapies by revenue show more typical national positioning: J9271 (pembrolizumab) is $963.2K revenue and ranks #295 of 1841 providers (84th percentile; typical, unremarkable volume), and J9299 (nivolumab) is $745.9K revenue and ranks #73 of 505 providers (86th percentile; typical, unremarkable volume). In other words, while the practice is a major deliverer of some supportive and infusion services, its use of checkpoint inhibitors is within the range seen among many oncology peers rather than uniquely dominant.

The practice also reports substantial office-based evaluation-and-management activity alongside infusion services: 99214 appears with 1.3K claims and $116.2K revenue (2.6%), ranking #5383 of 479517 providers (99th percentile; extreme outlier), and 99215 contributes $35.2K revenue (0.8%) and ranks notably above typical volume. Elevated E/M volumes combined with high infusion volumes point to a hybrid model of frequent follow-up and in-clinic treatment visits, which matters for staffing, scheduling, and revenue cycle planning.

Biosimilars and supportive agents form a meaningful secondary revenue stream: Q5123 (rituximab biosimilar) accounts for $95.6K (2.1%) and ranks #10 of 40 providers (77th percentile; typical), Q5130 (pegfilgrastim biosimilar) accounts for $64.8K (1.4%) and ranks #1 of 4 providers (100th percentile; typical), and J1569 (immune globulin) contributes $486.4K (10.8%) and ranks #21 of 542 providers (96th percentile; typical). This mix indicates active use of growth factors, biologic supportive care, and biosimilar adoption that should factor into contracting and drug-supply analyses.

Operationally, the lack of Medicaid billing combined with a Medicare-centered revenue base ($4.7M) and the clinic’s set of extreme outlier drug and infusion codes suggests payers and competitors should treat this provider as a specialized outpatient infusion provider with concentrated exposure to high-cost biologics; network planning or competitive response should focus on Medicare coverage policies and buy/supply dynamics for the specific agents driving revenue.

Medicare: Complete Services Breakdown

The CPT/HCPCS codes generating the most Medicare revenue for this provider.

81 rows

CPT/HCPCS Code	Description	Claims	Avg Paid	Revenue
J9271	Injection, pembrolizumab, 1 mg	22,400	$40	$963.2K
J9299	Injection, nivolumab, 1 mg	31,080	$20	$745.9K
J0897	Injection, denosumab, 1 mg	28,980	$20	$521.6K
J9144	Injection, daratumumab, 10 mg and hyaluronidase‑fihj	13,680	$40	$519.8K
J1569	Injection, immune globulin, (gammagard liquid), non-lyophilized, (e.g., liquid), 500 mg	13,510	$40	$486.4K
J1437	Injection, ferric derisomaltose, 10 mg	16,900	$20	$287.3K
J2506	Injection, pegfilgrastim, excludes biosimilar, 0.5 mg	1,520	$90	$131.1K
J1449	Injection, eflapegrastim-xnst, 0.1 mg	5,150	$30	$128.7K
99214	The provider sees an established patient for an office visit or other outpatient visit involving evaluation and management. The visit involves a moderate level of medical decision making, and/or the…	1,320	$90	$116.2K
Q5123	Injection, rituximab-arrx, biosimilar, (riabni), 10 mg	2,730	$40	$95.5K

Showing 1–10 of 81

Medicare: Competitive Analysis & Benchmarks

How this provider's Medicare billing volume and revenue compare to other providers nationally and within its state, across 81 CPT/HCPCS codes.

View: State1 / 2

Claims Volume vs. Tennessee Distribution

Mitchell Martin — 14 of 25 codes billed far more than typical (above p95)

p5–p95 (all providers)p25–p75MedianThis providerOutlier

Rank Distribution — Tennessee

Full comparison — all codes billed, vs. state median

81 rows

CPT/HCPCS Code	Rank	Provider Count	Median Claims	Avg Paid	Average Revenue
J9271	10	50	17,400	$40	$776.1K
J9299	2	20	21,010	$20	$487.5K
J9144	9	20	10,080	$40	$466.3K
J1569	2	30	3,030	$40	$175.2K
J1449	2	10	3,630	$30	$98.6K
J1437	1	20	3,700	$20	$86.3K
J0897	3	240	2,940	$20	$85K
Q5123	3	10	1,960	$40	$70.9K
Q5130	1	10	440	$150	$64.8K
J0881	15	70	19,050	$1	$54.4K

Showing 1–10 of 81

Related Providers

Other providers that share a Tax Identification Number (TIN) with Mitchell Martin, ranked by combined Medicare and Medicaid revenue.

Provider	State	Taxonomy	Medicare Revenue	Medicaid Revenue
Ross Kerns	TN	Hematology & Oncology Physician	$4.5M	$0
Daniel Ibach	TN	Hematology & Oncology Physician	$4.3M	$0
Yi Feng	TN	Hematology & Oncology Physician	$4M	$0
Tennessee Cancer Specialists PLLC	TN	Hematology & Oncology Physician	$0	$2.7M
Dharmen Patel	TN	Hematology & Oncology Physician	$901.9K	$0
Tracy Dobbs	TN	Medical Oncology Physician	$853.5K	$0
Richard Lee	TN	Hematology & Oncology Physician	$643K	$0
Robert Schumaker	TN	Hematology & Oncology Physician	$587.3K	$0
Anil Tumkur	TN	Hematology & Oncology Physician	$491.1K	$24.3K
Saji Eapen	TN	Hematology & Oncology Physician	$487.3K	$0

Nearby Providers

Other providers in the same ZIP code as Mitchell Martin, ranked by combined Medicare and Medicaid revenue.

Provider	State	Taxonomy	Medicare Revenue	Medicaid Revenue
Metro Knoxville Hma LLC	TN	General Acute Care Hospital	$0	$28.7M
App Of East Tennessee Ed PLLC	TN	Emergency Medicine Physician	$0	$2.3M
Eye Surgery Center Of Knoxville, LLC	TN	Ambulatory Surgical Clinic/Center	$1M	$188.4K
Kevin Gallaher	TN	Ophthalmology Physician	$374.3K	$0
Tec North, LLC	TN	Ambulatory Surgical Clinic/Center	$366.6K	$0
Lee Congleton	TN	Urology Physician	$326.1K	$0
Christopher Ramsey	TN	Urology Physician	$299K	$0
Sean Delair	TN	Urology Physician	$208.9K	$0
Jared Spoons	TN	Internal Medicine Physician	$187.9K	$0
Rashmi Hottigoudar	TN	Clinical Cardiac Electrophysiology Physician	$178.3K	$0

Mitchell Martin — Billing Profile & Reimbursement Data

Sign up for Mitchell Martin — Billing Profile & Reimbursement Data policy alerts

Mitchell Martin — Billing Profile & Reimbursement Data

Sign up for Mitchell Martin — Billing Profile & Reimbursement Data policy alerts

Key Findings

Medicare: Total Revenue Breakdown by CPT/HCPCS Code

Medicare: Complete Services Breakdown

Medicare: Competitive Analysis & Benchmarks

Related Providers

Nearby Providers

Frequently Asked Questions

References