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

At issue is Tagrisso 80-milligram tablet to treat malignant neoplasm of brain and recurrent glioblastoma. 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. Medicare-approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug as prescribed, for treatment of the noted diagnosis. There was no peer-reviewed, clinically relevant, medical literature from an approved journal submitted to support this appeal. Therefore, the requested drug is not being prescribed for a medically accepted indication as defined by Medicare.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 Uloric 80-milligram tablets to treat gout. 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 the formulary alternatives, required by the plan 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 Aptiom 600-milligram tablet to treat seizure disorder, unspecified. 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 coverage for Procrit 40,000-unit per milliliter injection solution prescribed to decrease the need for red blood cell transfusion in an enrollee who has anemia secondary to chronic kidney disease. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage.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 that must be met before coverage can be approved. The submitted documentation does not confirm that all of the plans requirements for coverage have been met.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 coverage for Testosterone Lipoderm compounded cream, which includes Testosterone Powder. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage. 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 a multi-ingredient compounded drug containing the following ingredients: Testosterone Powder, Propylene Glycol Liquid, and PCCA Lipoderm Cream Base. For a compounded medication to be covered under Medicare Part D, the compound must contain at least one ingredient that meets the definition of a Part D drug. The requested compounded medication does not contain any ingredients that meet the definition of a Part D drug, as the Testosterone Powder is a bulk powder and bulk powders do not meet the definition of a Part D drug. The Propylene Glycol Liquid and PCCA Lipoderm Cream Base are compounding ingredients and do not meet the definition of a Part D drug. Therefore, the Testosterone Lipoderm compounded cream is not eligible for coverage under Medicare 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 Lidocaine 5-percent patch 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.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.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 Opzeulura 1.5-percent cream to treat atopic dermatitis. 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 the formulary alternatives, required by the plan 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

Butalbital/Acetaminiophen/Caffeine 50-milligram/325-milligram/40-milligram tablets, 150 tablets per 30 days to treat migraine headaches.  The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform 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 information submitted at the reconsideration level.The plan limits the amount of Butalbital/Acetaminiophen/Caffeine 50-milligram/325-milligram/40-milligram tablets to 60 tablets per 30 days.  We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support the quantity prescribed was medically necessary for the enrollee.  However, we did not receive the requested information.  The prescriber has not indicated that the number of doses of the requested drug allowed by the plan would likely be ineffective in treating the diagnosis or would be likely to cause harm. Therefore, an exception to the plans coverage criteria is not supported. 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 Fentanyl 100-microgram per hour patch to treat pain. 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.Fentanyl is a generic drug on Tier 4  of the plans formulary. We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support all lower-tier drugs to treat the enrollees condition were tried and failed or were contraindicated. However, we did not receive the requested information.The prescriber has not indicated if all alternatives required by the plan have been tried and failed, or why the plans lower tiered drugs would likely not be as effective as the requested drug. Therefore, this drug is not eligible for a tiering exception.A physician reviewer determined that tiering exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Lynparza 150-milligram tablets to treat malignant neoplasm of unspecified part of unspecified bronchus or lung (non-small cell lung cancer with CHEK2 mutation). 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.  Medicare-approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug as prescribed, for treatment of the noted diagnosis. There was no peer-reviewed, clinically relevant, medical literature from an approved journal submitted to support this appeal. Therefore, the requested drug is not being prescribed for a medically accepted indication as defined by Medicare. 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 Novolog Flexpen 100 unit/milliliter solution pen injector prescribed for diagnosis not provided.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 plan submitted documentation showing the enrollee was in the catastrophic coverage stage when the requested drug was purchased. The plans 2021 Evidence of Coverage states that during this stage, the cost of a covered drug will be either coinsurance of 5 percent or a copayment, whichever is the larger amount. In this case, the enrollee cost share was based on the larger amount of 5 percent coinsurance of a 90 day supply. We determined that the plan calculated the coinsurance correctly and no further reimbursement is required.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Nuedexta 20-10-milligram capsule to treat pseudobulbar affect. 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 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 600-milligram/2.4-milliliter Pen Injector, 3-Pen Injectors/84-days to treat the enrollees diagnosis of age-related osteoporosis without current pathological fracture. 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 limits the amount of Forteo 600-milligram/2.4-milliliter Pen Injector, a Specialty Tier drug, provided as a 30-day supply of 1-Pen Injector/28-days. Therefore, an exception to the plans coverage criteria is not supported. Please note that the Qualified Independent Contractor cannot change the quantity requested at the reconsideration level.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 Dextroamphetamine-Amphetamine 15-milligram tablet to treat attention deficit disorder. 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.This drug is being provided by the plan under a formulary exception. It is not on the plans formulary but they have agreed to provide it at a cost sharing level assigned to all formulary exceptions. Per Medicare rules, non-formulary drugs are not eligible for a tiering exception.A physician reviewer determined that tiering exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Envarsus Extended Release (XR) 0.75-milligram tablet prescribed daily for renal 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. Medicare records indicate the enrollee received a renal transplant, which was covered by Medicare Part A. 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 a tiering exception request for Dilantin 100 mg capsule to treat seizure disorder. 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. Dilantin 100 mg capsule is a brand drug on Tier 4 of the plans formulary.  The prescriber has not indicated if all alternatives required by the plan have been tried and failed, or why the plans lower tiered drugs would likely not be as effective as the requested drug. Therefore, this drug is not eligible for a tiering exception. A physician reviewer determined that tiering exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Xeljanz XR (extended release) 11-milligram tablet to treat rheumatoid arthritis. 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 medical record documentation does not support why the formulary alternatives, required by the plan 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 Sildenafil 50-milligram tablets to treat erectile dysfunction. 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. Sexual/erectile dysfunction drugs prescribed to treat sexual/erectile dysfunction or other diagnoses for which the drug is not Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved, 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 a tiering exception request for Dilantin 100-milligram capsules. 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.Dilantin 100-milligram capsule is brand drug on Tier 4 of the plans formulary. There are no brand drugs 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 Freestyle Libre 14 day reader device prescribed for diabetes. 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. Supplies for testing and monitoring blood glucose levels are not considered Part D drugs and may be covered under the Medicare Part B durable medical equipment benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Timolol-Brimonidine-Dorzolamide 1.5/0.15/2 percent drops prescribed for 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. We determined that the plan is not required to cover the compounded drug. The National Drug Codes provided are not listed with the Food and Drug Administration as valid codes. Therefore, the compounded drug is excluded from coverage under Medicare Part D. This decision does not concern the medical necessity or appropriateness of the requested drug. It only establishes if payment can be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Methylphenidate 20-milligram tablets. 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. Methylphenidate is a generic drug on Tier 2 of the plans formulary. There are no drugs 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 Victoza 18 mg/3 ml 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.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 the formulary alternatives, required by the plan 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 Azelaic Acid-Metronidazole-Ivermectin 15/1/1 percent compounded drug prescribed for 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. We determined that the plan is not required to provide reimbursement at this time. The submitted documentation includes an invoice for the requested compounded drug. However, it is a poor copy and the information provided is not legible. Therefore, we cannot determine drug quantity, National Drug Codes for each ingredient in the compound, and the amount billed and paid. Therefore, reimbursement criteria have not been met. This decision does not concern the medical necessity or appropriateness of the requested drug. It only establishes if payment can be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Triamcinolone Acetonide topical cream 0.5 percent. The Part D plan auto-forwarded 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. Triamcinolone Acetonide is a generic drug on Tier 2 of the plans formulary. There are no 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.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Lumigan 0.01-percent eye drops. 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. Lumigan 0.01-percent eye drops is a brand drug on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no brand drugs 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.