Persius/hicric huggingface dataset:
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Renacidin Irrigation solution. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. Based on the information provided, we determined the drug may be eligible for coverage under Part B under Medicare rules.The plan does not offer supplemental (additional) coverage for this drug. If the enrollee purchased drugs that are excluded, the enrollee must pay for them. This decision does not address the medical necessity or appropriateness of the drug. It only establishes that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Hyzaar 100-12.5-milligram tablet to treat hypertension. The case was auto-forwarded by the plan.  We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support all formulary alternatives were tried and failed or were contraindicated. We received additional documentation and included it in the review.The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. In order to grant an exception for a drug not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried, failed, or deemed contraindicated. In this case, the documentation does not support why alternative drugs provided on the plans formulary list would likely not be as effective for this diagnosis, and/or would likely cause adverse reaction(s) or other harm.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Dimethyl Fumarate 240-milligram capsules to treat multiple sclerosis, relapsing forms. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. In order to grant an exception for a drug not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried, failed, or deemed contraindicated. In this case, the documentation does not support why alternative drugs provided on the plans formulary list would likely not be as effective for this diagnosis, and/or would likely cause adverse reaction(s) or other harm.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Droxidopa 100-milligram capsules to treat neurogenic orthostatic hypotension. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The plan has prior authorization requirements for this drug. These requirements must be met before coverage can be extended. The submitted documentation does not satisfy the plans coverage criteria.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Betimol 0.2 percent ophthalmic solution to treat primary open-angle glaucoma of the right eye. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. In order to grant an exception for a drug not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried, failed, or deemed contraindicated. In this case, the documentation does not support why all alternative drugs provided on the plans formulary list would likely not be as effective for this diagnosis, and/or would likely cause adverse reaction(s) or other harm.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Trelegy Ellipta 100-62.5-25-microgram inhaler to treat asthma. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.Trelegy is a brand drug on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no brand drugs of the same type on the lower tiers of the plans formulary to treat the same diagnosis. Therefore, this drug is not eligible for a tiering exception.A physician reviewer determined that the tiering exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Flovent Hfa 110-microgram aerosol with adapter to treat the enrollee's condition.   The plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.Flovent Hfa 110-microgram aerosol with adapter is a brand drug on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no brand drugs drugs of the same type on the lower tiers of the plans formulary to treat the same diagnosis. Therefore, this drug is not eligible for a tiering exception.A physician reviewer determined that the tiering exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Posaconazole 100-milligram delayed release tablets prescribed to treat possible fungal lesions of the tongue in an enrollee with acute myeloid leukemia and neutropenia. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.  We requested additional information from the prescriber.  Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support the use of the requested drug.  However, we did not receive the requested information.The use of the requested drug to treat the noted condition is an off-label use. The Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug, as prescribed, for the treatment of this diagnosis. Therefore, the requested drug(s) is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Pacerone 400 milligram tablet prescribed for unknown diagnosis. The Part D plan denied the reimbursement request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review of this request for coverage. We reviewed all documentation submitted for review, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. The enrollee submitted documentation indicating the requested drug was purchased at a network pharmacy with a tier 4 copay. The enrollee indicates an appeal was filed with the plan to consider the drug as a tier 2 exception, and the appeal was approved. However, there is no evidence provided by the enrollee, or the plan of an approved decision for the requested drug, at a tier 2 cost share level. Therefore, further reimbursement is not required by the plan at this time.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Dronabinol 10 milligram capsules to treat refractory nausea/vomiting and weight loss due to diabetic gastroparesis. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The use of the requested drug to treat the provided diagnosis is an off-label use. The Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug, as prescribed, for the treatment of this diagnosis. Therefore, the requested drug(s) is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Mycophenolate Mofetil 250-milligram capsules prescribed for transplant immunosuppression following a kidney transplant. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. We also researched Medicare systems and reviewed the enrollment data available. We determined that the plan is not required to cover the drug. Per the enrollee's transaction reply report (TRR) provided by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the enrollee received a CMS-provided kidney transplant on December 4, 2013. Therefore, the transplant is considered a Medicare covered transplant and the requested drug is eligible under Medicare Part B. Medicare rules state that a drug covered under Part B cannot be covered under Part D. This decision does not address the medical necessity or appropriateness of the drug. It only establishes that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Eliquis 5-milligram tablets to treat paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support all formulary alternatives were tried and failed or were contraindicated. However, we did not receive the requested information.The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. In order to grant an exception for a drug not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried, failed, or deemed contraindicated. In this case, the documentation does not support why alternative drugs provided on the plans formulary list would likely not be as effective for this diagnosis, and/or would likely cause adverse reaction(s) or other harm.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Pradaxa 150-milligram capsules to treat atrial fibrillation. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support the enrollee has satisfied the plans prior authorization coverage criteria. However, we did not receive the requested information.The plan has prior authorization requirements for this drug. These requirements must be met before coverage can be extended. The submitted documentation does not satisfy the plans coverage criteria.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Forteo 620-microgram per 2.48-milliliter subcutaneous injection syringe prescribed to treat age-related osteoporosis for a 90-day supply. The Part D plan approved the drug for a 30-day supply. The case was auto-forwarded by the plan.  We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.Forteo is included as a specialty drug in the plans formulary. Specialty drugs are limited to a recurring 30-day supply by the plan. An exception to the quantity limit criteria will not be granted by the plan for a specialty drug. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover more than a recurring 30-day supply of the requested drug.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Horizant ER 600-milligram tablet to treat lumbar radiculopathy. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The use of the requested drug to treat the provided diagnosis is an off-label use. The Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug, as prescribed, for the treatment of this diagnosis. Therefore, the requested drug is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Ozempic 2-milligram/1.5-milliliter pen injector to treat obesity and diabetes mellitus. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.Drugs prescribed to treat weight gain (promote weight loss) are excluded from coverage under Medicare Part D. Therefore, the requested drug is excluded from coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Luspatercept 0.25-milligrams to be given subcutaneously to treat anemia due to the presence of myelodysplastic syndrome with ring sideroblasts and without thrombocytosis. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The submitted medical records indicate that the enrollee has anemia due to the presence of myelodysplastic syndrome with ring sideroblasts and has a history of the use of Aranesp without success.  As outlined in the Medicare approved compendia, Luspatercept is indicated for the treatment of anemia due to myelodysplastic syndrome with ring sideroblasts after erythropoiesis stimulating agent failure in enrollees requiring two or more blood red blood cell (RBC) transfusions over eight weeks. There is no indication in the records that the enrollee has required any blood transfusions.  As well the enrollee does not have thrombocytosis as the submitted platelet count was 198,000/uL (normal).  As such, the drug is being prescribed for a non-medically accepted indication. Therefore, the requested drug is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Trulicity 1.5-milligram/0.5-milliliter pen injector to treat Type 2 diabetes mellitus. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.Trulicity is a biologic on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no biologic of the same type on the lower tiers of the plans formulary to treat the same diagnosis. Therefore, this biologic is not eligible for a tiering exception.A physician reviewer determined that the tiering exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Kineret solution prefilled syringe 100 milligram/0.37 milliliter prescribed for spondylosis with myelopathy, cervical region and personal history of other disease of the musculoskeletal system and connective tissue. The Part D plan denied your request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we read your case file carefully. We reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. The documentation shows Kineret was prescribed to treat spondylosis with myelopathy, cervical region and personal history of other disease of the musculoskeletal system and connective tissue. Psoriatic arthritis and polymyalgia rheumatica are also mentioned in May, 2021 note. The medical records do not establish a definitive diagnosis that is considered a medically accepted indication. The Medicare approved compendia do not support the use of this drug for the enrollees conditions. A physician reviewed your appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover Kineret.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Hydroxyzine Hydrochloride 25 milligram tablets to treat Alzheimers disease with dementia and delirium. The documentation also indicates the enrollee is unable to sleep due to dementia and sun downing. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support the enrollee has satisfied the plans prior authorization coverage criteria. We received additional documentation and included it in the review.The use of the requested drug to treat the provided diagnosis is an off-label use. The Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug, as prescribed, for the treatment of this diagnosis. Therefore, the requested drug is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D. Although additional documentation has been provided for review, this does not change the QICs initial decision.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a prior authorization request for Kynmobi 10-milligram film prescribed for Parkinsons disease. The Part D plan denied coverage.We performed an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we read the case file carefully. We reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan, and any records submitted at the reconsideration level. The submitted documentation does not indicate that the enrollee satisfies the plan's prior authorization coverage criteria.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Lidocaine 5 percent patch to treat an unknown diagnosis. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support that the enrollee has satisfied the plans prior authorization requirements. However, we did not receive the requested information.Without a diagnosis it cannot be established that the requested drug is being prescribed for a medically accepted indication. Therefore, the requested drug is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a request for reimbursement of $57.25 for Eplerenone 25-milligram tablets for the date of service of July 31, 2021, which have been prescribed for the treatment of congestive heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. The Part D plan denied the request for reimbursement.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The Part D plan has noted that a tiering exception request review for the drug was denied. Please refer to the decision letter from the plan regarding the tiering exception denial for more details. Since the tiering exception has been denied, the plan is not required to reimburse the amount paid for the drug.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Corlanor 5 milligram tablets to treat chronic congestive heart failure and tachycardia. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The plan has prior authorization requirements for this drug. These requirements must be met before coverage can be allowed. The submitted documentation does not satisfy the plans coverage criteria.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Lidocaine 5 percent patch to treat low back pain. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support that the enrollee has satisfied the plans prior authorization requirements. However, we did not receive the requested information.The use of the requested drug to treat the provided diagnosis is an off-label use. The Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug, as prescribed, for the treatment of this diagnosis. Therefore, the requested drug(s) is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.