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

At issue is Lidocaine 4 percent cream to treat right forearm tendonitis. 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 Ondansetron Oral Disintegrating Tablet 4 milligram tablet to treat chronic nausea. 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 a tiering exception request for Humalog mix 75-25 Kwikpen 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. Humalog mix 75-25 Kwikpen is a biologic  on Tier 2 of the plans formulary. There are no biologics 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 Adacel vaccination. 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 Xtandi 40 milligram capsule to treat castration resistant (non-metastatic) prostate cancer. 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 documentation does not satisfy the plans coverage criteria. Please note that the plan denied the appeal stating that the prescriber said that the medication will not be used concurrently with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue and that the enrollee has not had a bilateral orchiectomy.  In the appeal the prescriber submitted office notes.  The office notes do not show that the plans requirements have been satisfied.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 Botox 200 unit solution reconstituted for the prophylaxis of migraine headache. 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 Shingrix 50 microgram per 0.5 milliliter kit prescribed for vaccination. The Part D plan denied the 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 submitted documentation shows the enrollee requested the Part D plan to provide reimbursement for the requested vaccine and administration fee. However, there is missing information needed to consider the request. The National Provider Identifier (NPI) number was provided for the facility. However, the prescribing physicians NPI number was not provided. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to reimburse the enrollee without this information.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Modafinil 100 milligram tablet to treat fatigue secondary to cognitive impairment. 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 Diclofenac Epolamine 1.3 percent patch to treat low back pain, 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 Budesonide delayed release 3 milligram capsule for unspecified 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.The plans Evidence of Coverage states, limits and restrictions are placed on drugs that are refilled too soon. The submitted documentation shows the enrollee purchased the requested drug on September 13, 2021. Therefore, the claim for fill date September 18, 2021 was rejected at point of sale for refill too soon, and the amount charged to the enrollee was an out-of-pocket expense. We determined this drug was paid correctly and no further reimbursement is required by the plan.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Diphenhydramine Hydrochloride 12.5 milligram prescribed for unspecified diagnosis. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the 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 submitted documentation shows the enrollee requested the plan to provide reimbursement for the requested drug. However, the plan indicates the enrollee was admitted to a hospital inpatient stay when the drugs were administered. According to Medicare rules, Part A pays for drugs received by an enrollee in an inpatient setting. Therefore, coverage is excluded for any drug for which payment would be available under Parts A or B. We determined the Part D plan is not required to cover or provide reimbursement for the requested drug. The decision does not address medical necessity of the drug. It only indicates that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Docusate Sodium prescribed for unspecified diagnosis. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the 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 submitted documentation shows the enrollee requested the plan to provide reimbursement for the requested drug. However, the plan indicates the enrollee was admitted to a hospital inpatient stay when the drugs were administered. According to Medicare rules, Part A pays for drugs received by an enrollee in an inpatient setting. Therefore, coverage is excluded for any drug for which payment would be available under Parts A or B. We determined the Part D plan is not required to cover or provide reimbursement for the requested drug. The decision does not address medical necessity of the drug. It only indicates that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Eliquis 2.5 milligram tablet prescribed for unspecified diagnosis. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the 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 submitted documentation shows the enrollee requested the plan to provide reimbursement for the requested drug. However, the plan indicates the enrollee was admitted to a hospital inpatient stay when the drugs were administered. According to Medicare rules, Part A pays for drugs received by an enrollee in an inpatient setting. Therefore, coverage is excluded for any drug for which payment would be available under Parts A or B. We determined the Part D plan is not required to cover or provide reimbursement for the requested drug. The decision does not address medical necessity of the drug. It only indicates that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Haloperidol 0.5 milligram prescribed for unspecified diagnosis. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the 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 submitted documentation shows the enrollee requested the plan to provide reimbursement for the requested drug. However, the plan indicates the enrollee was admitted to a hospital inpatient stay when the drugs were administered. According to Medicare rules, Part A pays for drugs received by an enrollee in an inpatient setting. Therefore, coverage is excluded for any drug for which payment would be available under Parts A or B. We determined the Part D plan is not required to cover or provide reimbursement for the requested drug. The decision does not address medical necessity of the drug. It only indicates that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is non priced medication prescribed for unspecified diagnosis. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the 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 submitted documentation shows the enrollee requested the plan to provide reimbursement for the requested drug. However, the plan indicates the enrollee was admitted to a hospital inpatient stay when the drugs were administered. According to Medicare rules, Part A pays for drugs received by an enrollee in an inpatient setting. Therefore, coverage is excluded for any drug for which payment would be available under Parts A or B. We determined the Part D plan is not required to cover or provide reimbursement for the requested drug. The decision does not address medical necessity of the drug. It only indicates that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Rosuvastatin Calcium 10 milligram prescribed for unspecified diagnosis. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the 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 submitted documentation shows the enrollee requested the plan to provide reimbursement for the requested drug. However, the plan indicates the enrollee was admitted to a hospital inpatient stay when the drugs were administered. According to Medicare rules, Part A pays for drugs received by an enrollee in an inpatient setting. Therefore, coverage is excluded for any drug for which payment would be available under Parts A or B. We determined the Part D plan is not required to cover or provide reimbursement for the requested drug. The decision does not address medical necessity of the drug. It only indicates that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Sertraline Hydrochloride 50 milligram prescribed for unspecified diagnosis. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the 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 submitted documentation shows the enrollee requested the plan to provide reimbursement for the requested drug. However, the plan indicates the enrollee was admitted to a hospital inpatient stay when the drugs were administered. According to Medicare rules, Part A pays for drugs received by an enrollee in an inpatient setting. Therefore, coverage is excluded for any drug for which payment would be available under Parts A or B. We determined the Part D plan is not required to cover or provide reimbursement for the requested drug. The decision does not address medical necessity of the drug. It only indicates that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Tylenol 325 milligram prescribed for unspecified diagnosis. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the 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 submitted documentation shows the enrollee requested the plan to provide reimbursement for the requested drug. However, the plan indicates the enrollee was admitted to a hospital inpatient stay when the drugs were administered. According to Medicare rules, Part A pays for drugs received by an enrollee in an inpatient setting. Therefore, coverage is excluded for any drug for which payment would be available under Parts A or B. We determined the Part D plan is not required to cover or provide reimbursement for the requested drug. The decision does not address medical necessity of the drug. It only indicates that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Cortef 10 milligram tablet to treat pituitary deficiency associated with septo-optic dysplasia. 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 coverage for Linzess 290 microgram capsule to treat irritable bowel syndrome with constipation. 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.  Please note that submitted medical records document current 'functional diarrhea' and state that the enrollee had irritable bowel syndrome with constipation 'in the past.'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 and failed, or deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not addressed all formulary alternatives to treat the enrollees condition and provided patient specific clinical rationale with supporting documentation as to why each formulary alternative would likely not be as effective as the requested drug and/or would likely cause adverse reactions or other harm. Therefore, the formulary exception criteria have not 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: Favorable

At issue is Ofev 150 milligram capsule to treat idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. 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 documentation satisfies the plans coverage criteria. The medical documentation submitted by the prescriber confirms the plans prior authorization coverage criteria of a forced vital capacity greater than or equal to 40 percent of the predicated value and that the idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis was diagnosed either by high resolution computed tomography indicating usual interstitial pneumonia.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Tymlos 80 microgram per dose pen injector to treat postmenopausal osteoporosis. 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 Cyclobenzaprine Hydrochloride 5 millligram tablet to treat skeletal muscle spasm (chronic musculoskeletal condition). 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 a tiering exception request for Praluent 150 milligram per milliliter pen to treat progressive ischemic heart disease. 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 biologic 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 biologics 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 Dextroamphetamine-Amphetamine 30 milligram tablets, 90 tablets per 30 days to treat narcolepsy with cataplexy 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 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 Dextroamphetamine-Amphetamine 30 milligram tablets to 60 tablets per 30 days. 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.