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

At issue is coverage for Clonazepam 0.5 milligram tablet, 450 per 90 days, to treat seizure disorder. 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 available documentation.The plans quantity limit for the requested drug is 120 per 30 days. The prescriber has not provided patient-specific clinical rationale as to why the amount allowed by the plan would be ineffective in treating the diagnosis and/or would be contraindicated. Furthermore, the submitted documentation does not support the medical necessity for an exception to the plans quantity limit for the drug. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug at the requested amount is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Vraylar 1.5 milligram capsule, 60-day supply, to treat bipolar affective disorder. The Part D plan approved coverage for the drug but denied the request for a 60 day supply.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation.The requested drug is a specialty drug. Specialty drugs are limited to a recurring 30-day supply by the plan. The submitted documentation does not support the medical necessity for an exception to the plans quantity limit for this 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 coverage for Eplerenone 25 milligram tablet to treat hypertension. 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 available documentation.The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. To grant an exception for a drug that is not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried and failed or must be deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not provided patient-specific clinical rationale as to why the alternative drugs on the plans formulary to treat the enrollees condition would likely not be as effective as the requested drug and/or would likely cause adverse reactions or other harm. Additionally, the submitted documentation does not support that the enrollee has tried and failed all of the formulary alternative drugs. Therefore, the formulary exception requirements 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 Icatibant 30 milligram per 3 milliliter solution to treat hereditary angioedema. 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 submitted documentation supports the drug at issue was prescribed for the prophylaxis of hereditary angiodedma. The prescriber has submitted laboratory results indicating a low C4 level and a C1 functional level of 12 percent.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 coverage for Lidocaine 5 percent patch to treat lumbar disc degeneration and osteoarthritis of the shoulder. 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 available documentation. In order for a drug to be covered by Medicare Part D, it must be prescribed for a medically accepted indication outlined in the Medicare approved compendia. 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 condition. Therefore, the drug is being prescribed for a non-medically accepted indication.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 coverage for Famotidine 40 milligrams per 5 milliliter suspension to treat gastroesophageal reflux 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 available documentation.In order for a drug to be covered by Medicare Part D, it must be prescribed for a medically accepted indication outlined in the Medicare approved compendia. The use of the requested drug to treat the noted condition is a medically accepted indication for the drug as outlined in the Medicare approved compendium, Micromedex. Therefore, the drug is being prescribed for a medically accepted indication.Additionally, Famotidine 40 milligrams per 5 milliliter suspension is listed on page 51 of the Plans formulary without restrictions. As such, the drug is allowed for the treatment of the patients condition.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 coverage for Cosopt Preservative Free (PF) 2/0.5% solution to treat primary open angle glaucoma. 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 available documentation. We determined that the plan is not required to cover the Cosopt PF. The National Drug Code of the requested drug is not listed with the Food and Drug Administration. 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 coverage for Ozempic 2 milligram per 1.5 milliliter solution auto-injector prescribed to promote weight loss in an enrollee with obesity, coronary artery disease, chronic back pain, neuropathy, and chronic leg weakness. 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 available documentation.Drugs prescribed to treat obesity and/or to promote weight loss are excluded from the Part D coverage. Therefore, the requested drug is excluded from Medicare Part D coverage.This decision does not address the medical necessity 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 coverage for Wegovy 0.25 milligram per 0.5 milliliter solution auto-injector prescribed to promote weight loss in an enrollee with obesity, coronary artery disease, chronic back pain, neuropathy, and chronic leg weakness. 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 available documentation.Drugs prescribed to treat obesity and/or to promote weight loss are excluded from the Part D coverage. Therefore, the requested drug is excluded from Medicare Part D coverage.This decision does not address the medical necessity 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 coverage for Taltz 80 milligram per milliliter solution auto injector to treat psoriasis. 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 available documentation.The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. To grant an exception for a drug that is not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried and failed or must be deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not provided patient-specific clinical rationale as to why the alternative drugs on the plans formulary to treat the enrollees condition would likely not be as effective as the requested drug and/or would likely cause adverse reactions or other harm. Additionally, the submitted documentation does not support that the enrollee has tried and failed all of the formulary alternative drugs. Therefore, the formulary exception requirements 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: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Fluorouracil 5 percent cream to treat actinic keratosis. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the case to us for review.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation.Fluorouracil is a generic drug on Tier 4 of the plans formulary. The prescriber has not provided patient-specific clinical rationale as to why all of the lower-tiered alternative drugs on the plans formulary to treat the enrollees condition are contraindicated. Therefore, the tiering exception requirements have not been met. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for a tiering exception.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Lokelma 10 gram powder packet to treat hyperkalemia. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the case to us for review. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation.The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. To grant an exception for a drug that is not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried and failed or must be deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not provided patient-specific clinical rationale as to why the alternative drugs on the plans formulary to treat the enrollees condition would likely not be as effective as the requested drug and/or would likely cause adverse reactions or other harm. Additionally, the submitted documentation does not support that the enrollee has tried and failed the formulary alternative drugs. Therefore, the formulary exception requirements 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: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Systane Complete PF (preservative free) 0.6 percent drops. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the case to us for review.  We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation. Systane Complete PF (preservative free) 0.6 percent drops is available over the counter without a prescription. Drugs available without a prescription, even when a prescription has been written, are excluded from coverage under Medicare Part D. Therefore, the requested drug is excluded from Medicare Part D coverage.  This decision does not address the medical necessity 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 coverage for Otezla 30 milligram tablets to treat arthropathic psoriasis. 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 available documentation.The plan has prior authorization requirements for this drug that must be met before coverage will be provided. The submitted documentation does not support that all of the plans requirements for coverage have been satisfied. Furthermore, the documentation does not support the medical necessity for an exception to the plans prior authorization requirements.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 Eliquis 5 milligram tablet to treat the enrollee's condition . The Part D plan auto-forwarded the case to us for review.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation.Eliquis is a brand drug on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no brand drugs of the same type to treat the same condition on the lower tiers of the plans formulary. If there are no drugs of the same type on a lower tier, the drug is not eligible for a tiering exception. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for a tiering exception.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Hizentra 10 gram per 50 milliliter vial to treat common variable immunodeficiency. 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 available documentation. The diagnosis of common variable immunodeficiency is a primary immune deficiency disorder. The administration of intravenous and/or subcutaneous immune globulin therapy for the treatment of a primary immune deficiency disorder would be covered under Medicare Part B. Medicare rules state that any drug available for coverage under Medicare Part B cannot be covered under Part D. Therefore, the requested drug is not eligible for Medicare Part D coverage.This decision does not address the medical necessity of the item. It only establishes that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit. Please submit the request for coverage through Medicare Part B.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Ciprofloxacin/Dexamethasone 7.5/12 milligram otic suspension to treat otorrhea. 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 available documentation.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 condition. Therefore, the drug is being prescribed for a non-medically accepted indication. A drug is not eligible for coverage, cannot be eligible for a formulary exception.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 Humalog Kwikpen 100 units per milliliter insulin pen to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus with hyperglycemia. 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 available documentation.Humalog Kwikpen is included on Tier 6 of the plans formulary. There are no lower cost-sharing tiers on the plans formulary. Since it is already on the lowest possible cost-sharing tier, the requested drug is not eligible for a tiering exception.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for a tiering exception.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Eszopiclone 3 milligram tablet to treat insomnia. 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 available documentation.The plan has prior authorization requirements for this drug that must be met before coverage will be provided. The submitted documentation does not support that all of the plans requirements for coverage have been satisfied. Furthermore, the documentation does not support the medical necessity for an exception to the plans prior authorization requirements.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 Ozempic 8 milligram per 3 milliliter (2 milligram per dose) pen injectors to treat pre-diabetes. 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 available documentation.In order for a drug to be covered by Medicare Part D, it must be prescribed for a medically accepted indication outlined in the Medicare approved compendia. 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 condition. Therefore, the drug is being prescribed for a non-medically accepted indication.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 Freestyle Libre 14 day sensor to treat diabetes. 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 available documentation. Medicare classifies continuous glucose monitoring systems as durable medical equipment. Medicare rules state that Medicare Part B pays for the rental and purchase of durable medical equipment. Additionally, payment will be made under Medicare Part B for the supplies necessary for the effective use of durable medical equipment, including supplies for a continuous glucose monitoring system. Any drug/item available for coverage under Medicare Part B cannot be covered under Part D, per Medicare rules. Therefore, the requested item is not eligible for Medicare Part D coverage.This decision does not address the medical necessity of the item. It only establishes that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit. Please submit the request for coverage through Medicare Part B.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Dupixent 300 milligram per 2 milliliter solution pen injector to treat atopic dermatitis. 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 available documentation.The plan has prior authorization requirements for this drug that must be met before coverage will be provided. The submitted documentation does not support that all of the plans requirements for coverage have been satisfied. Furthermore, the documentation does not support the medical necessity for an exception to the plans prior authorization requirements.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 Taltz 80 milligram per milliliter subcutaneous solution auto-injector to treat rheumatoid arthritis. 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 available documentation. In order for a drug to be covered by Medicare Part D, it must be prescribed for a medically accepted indication outlined in the Medicare approved compendia. 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 condition. Therefore, the drug is being prescribed for a non-medically accepted indication. 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 Dovato 50/300 milligram tablet to treat human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) 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 available documentation.Dovato is a brand drug on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. The prescriber has not provided patient-specific clinical rationale as to why all of the brand drugs on the lower tiers of the plans formulary to treat the enrollees condition are contraindicated. Additionally, the submitted documentation does not indicate that the enrollee has tried and failed all of the lower-tiered alternative brand drugs. Therefore, the tiering exception requirements have not been met. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for a tiering exception.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Zylet 0.5/0.3 percent suspension to treat stenosis of bilateral lacrimal punctum. 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 available documentation.Zylet suspension is a brand 3 drug on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no brand drugs of the same type to treat the same condition on the lower tiers of the plans formulary. If there are no drugs of the same type on a lower tier, the drug is not eligible for a tiering exception. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for a tiering exception.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Xifaxan 550 milligram tablet to treat irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea. 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 available documentation. Xifaxan 550 milligram tablet is included on Tier 5 of the plans formulary. Tier 5 of the formulary is the tier reserved for specialty drugs. The Specialty tier is exempt from tiered cost-sharing expectations, per Medicare rules. Therefore, this drug is not eligible for a tiering exception.  A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for a tiering exception.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Hydrocodone Acetaminophen 10/325 milligram tablet to treat other intervertebral disc displacement, lumbar region. 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 available documentation.The plan has prior authorization requirements for this drug that must be met before coverage will be provided. The submitted documentation does not support that all of the plans requirements for coverage have been satisfied. Furthermore, the documentation does not support the medical necessity for an exception to the plans prior authorization requirements.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.