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

At issue is Linzess to treat irritable bowel syndrome with constipation. 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 Vyzulta 0.024-percent ophthalmic solution to treat primary open-angle glaucoma, bilateral, severe stage. 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 Testosterone 20.25-milligrams/actuation 1.62-percent gel 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 medically accepted indication, medical records, laboratory results, and a prescriber statement to support that the enrollee has satisfied the plans prior authorization coverage criteria. However, we did not receive the requested information.No documentation was provided by the prescriber. We requested information from the prescriber but no information was received. We are not able to determine whether the requested drug was prescribed for a medically accepted indication. Therefore, the 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 Januvia 100-milligram tablet. 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.Januvia 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 condition. 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 Toviaz 4-milligram tablet. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the submitted documentation to perform an independent and de novo review. The submitted documentation does not include medical records or evidence of a prescribed diagnosis. Therefore, we cannot determine if the drug was prescribed for a medically accepted indication. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage. In conclusion, the decision of the Qualified Independent Contractor (QIC) is unfavorable.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is  Xifaxan 550-milligram tablet to treat long standing small intestinal bacterial overgrowth symptoms. 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 Dexilant 60-milligram delayed release capsule. 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.Dexilant is a brand drug on Tier 4 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 condition. 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 Anastrozole 1 milligram tablet for diagnosis not provided. 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The submitted documentation shows the enrollee purchased a 90 day supply of Anastrozole on February 14, 2022 prior to the plans approval and paid the full cost of the drug. A second fill for a 90 day supply was purchased by the enrollee on March 1, 2022 and a copay was charged. According to the plans 2022 Evidence of Coverage, limits and restrictions are placed on drugs that are refilled too soon. Therefore, the claim for fill date February 14, 2022 does not qualify for reimbursement. 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 Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen 10-325 milligram tablet to treat dorsalgia. The plan approved this drug at a specific quantity limit based on a safety edit.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 Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen 10-325 milligram tablet provided to 360 tablets/30 days and an accumulated morphine milligram equivalent (MME) dose of 90-milligram per day. The prescriber has not provided patient specific clinical rationale indicating 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 Lidocaine 5-percent patch to treat chronic 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 a medically accepted indication, pain etiology and history, medical records, and a prescriber statement to support that the enrollee has satisfied the plans prior authorization coverage criteria. We received additional documentation and included it in the review.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 Levothyroxine Sodium 50 microgram tablet prescribed for diagnosis not provided. The Part D plan denied the enrollees request for additional reimbursement.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 that shows the claim for the requested drug was approved and copayment was charged correctly to the enrollee at the point of sale. The plans 2022 Evidence of Coverage indicates reimbursement is calculated based on the total cost of the drug, minus the required copayment/coinsurance amount, and minus the difference between what the plan approves for the drug and what the pharmacy charges. 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 Zolpidem tartrate 10-milligram tablets to treat insomnia. 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 Albuterol Sulfate HFA 90 Microgram Aerosol prescribed for diagnosis not provided. The case was auto-forwarded by the plan.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 that shows the claim for the requested drug was approved and copayment was charged correctly to the enrollee at the point of sale. The plans 2022 Evidence of Coverage indicates reimbursement is calculated based on the total cost of the drug, minus the required copayment/coinsurance amount, and minus the difference between what the plan approves for the drug and what the pharmacy charges. 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 Humira (cystic fibrosis) 40-milligram per 0.4-milliliter pen to treat leukocytoclastic vasculitis and cutaneous vasculitis. 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 Hydrocodone-Homatropine to treat cough secondary to other medical conditions. 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 for the symptomatic treatment of cough (and not the underlying condition) and colds 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 Acetaminophen 325 milligram tablet. 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 that are available over-the-counter are excluded from coverage under Medicare Part D. Therefore, the requested drug is excluded from coverage and not eligible for reimbursement.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Atorvastatin 40 milligram tablet for diagnosis not provided. 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 submitted documentation shows the enrollee was given the requested drug while in a hospital outpatient stay. Self-administered drugs are processed as out-of-network benefits and reimbursement is based on the difference in what the hospital/out-of-network pharmacy charges and what the plan allows, minus the enrollee's deductible, copayment or coinsurance. However, in this case, the National Drug Code (NDC) provided is for a repackaged drug that is not covered under the Part D benefit. Therefore, the 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 Celecoxib 200 milligram capsule for diagnosis not provided. 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 submitted documentation shows the enrollee was given the requested drug while in a hospital outpatient stay. Self-administered drugs are processed as out-of-network benefits and reimbursement is based on the difference in what the hospital/out-of-network pharmacy charges and what the plan allows, minus the enrollee's deductible, copayment or coinsurance. However, in this case, the National Drug Code (NDC) provided is for a repackaged drug that is not covered under the Part D benefit. Therefore, the 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 Docusate Sodium 100 milligram capsule. 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 that are available over-the-counter are excluded from coverage under Medicare Part D. Therefore, the requested drug is excluded from coverage and not eligible for reimbursement.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Famotidine 20 milligram tablet for diagnosis not provided. 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 submitted documentation shows the enrollee was given the requested drug while in a hospital outpatient stay. Self-administered drugs are processed as out-of-network benefits and reimbursement is based on the difference in what the hospital/out-of-network pharmacy charges and what the plan allows, minus the enrollee's deductible, copayment or coinsurance. However, in this case, the National Drug Code (NDC) provided is for a repackaged drug that is not covered under the Part D benefit. Therefore, the 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 Pantoprazole Sodium delayed release 40 milligram tablet for diagnosis not provided. 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 submitted documentation shows the enrollee was given the requested drug while in a hospital outpatient stay. Self-administered drugs are processed as out-of-network benefits and reimbursement is based on the difference in what the hospital/out-of-network pharmacy charges and what the plan allows, minus the enrollee's deductible, copayment or coinsurance. However, in this case, the National Drug Code (NDC) provided is for a repackaged drug that is not covered under the Part D benefit. Therefore, the 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 Senna Plus 8.6-50 milligram tablet. 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 that are available over-the-counter are excluded from coverage under Medicare Part D. Therefore, the requested drug is excluded from coverage and not eligible for reimbursement.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Zoster vaccine prescribed for vaccination. The case was auto-forwarded by the plan.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. We reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The enrollee is requesting additional reimbursement for the Zoster vaccine obtained and administered in the physicians office. Payment for vaccines including administration fee is required up front when provided at an out of network pharmacy or prescriber's office. The documentation does not include a National Drug Code (NDC) for the requested drug. Therefore, the reimbursement criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Armour Thyroid. 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 that are not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are excluded from Medicare Part D coverage. Therefore, the requested drug is excluded from coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Eszopiclone 2-milligram tablet to treat sleep 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 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 Grastek Sublingual Tablet: 2800 BAU (bioequivalent index of reactivity) to treat grass pollen-induced allergic rhinitis. 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 Bystolic 20-milligram tablet to treat essential hypertension. 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 a tiering exception request for Budesonide delayed release 3-milligram capsule to treat collagenous colitis. 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.Budesonide delayed release is a generic drug on Tier 4 of the plans formulary. There are no generic 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.