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

At issue is Modafinil 200-milligram tablets to treat hypersomnia, unspecified. The case was auto-forwarded by the plan.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested clinical documentation identifying the specific cause for the diagnosis of hypersomnia, unspecified. We also requested documentation to support that the enrollee has satisfied the plans prior authorization coverage criteria. However, we did not receive the requested information.No medical records have been provided to determine if this enrollee has met the criteria for a medically acceptable indication per the approved Medicare compendia. 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. In addition, the plan has prior authorization requirements for this drug. These requirements must be met before coverage can be extended. The documentation does not satisfy the plans coverage criteria. 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 Teriparatide 620-microgram per 2.48-milliliter subcutaneous injection pen prescribed to treat other osteoporosis without current pathological fracture. The Part D plan denied the request because the drug was not on the formulary and the documentation did not support a formulary exception.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted.While the generic drug, Teriparatide, is not on the plans formulary, the brand version of Teriparatide, which is Forteo, is included in the plans formulary. The documentation in the case file from the plan shows the prescriber indicated that either form of the drug was acceptable, generic Teriparatide or brand Forteo. However, the diagnosis of other osteoporosis without current pathological fracture is not sufficient to determine if the drug is being prescribed for a medically accepted indication as outlined in the Medicare approved compendia. During this review, we requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested documentation to clarify the enrollees diagnosis and to address the plans prior authorization coverage requirements for the drug. The prescriber did not respond to our request. As such, there is insufficient documentation to determine if the drug is being 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 Ongentrys 50-milligram capsule to treat Parkinsons disease. The Part D plan denied the request. The requested drug is not on the plans formulary.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 prescriber has not provided patient specific clinical rationale, supported by documentation, as to why all formulary alternatives required by the plan would likely not be as effective as the requested drug for this diagnosis, and/or would likely cause adverse reaction(s) or other harm. Therefore, an exception to the plans formulary coverage criteria is not medically necessary. 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 Tymlos 80-microgram dose pen injector to treat 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 documentation satisfies the plans coverage criteria. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is eligible for Part D coverage.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is eligible for Part D coverage.s
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Voriconazole 200-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.At reconsideration a diagnosis of non-sporulating mold, unidentified/mycobacterial infection, unspecified was given. However, 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. Therefore, the 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 Albuterol Sulfate HFA 108-micrograms/Actuation to treat acute bronchospasm. The Part D plan denied the request. The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed 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.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 records do not support why other drugs on the plans formulary would not work for you.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 Ubrelvy 100-milligram tablets to treat acute migraines. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. In order to grant an exception for a drug not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried, failed, or deemed contraindicated. In this case, the documentation does not support why alternative drugs provided on the plans formulary list would likely not be as effective for this diagnosis, and/or would likely cause adverse reaction(s) or other harm.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Cyclobenzaprine 5-milligram tablet to treat radiculopathy, lumbar region. The plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed 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.  On 9/17/2021 the prescriber stated that the diagnosis was not muscle spasm.  At reconsideration on 9/28/2021 a diagnosis of other muscle spasm was given. Medical records were requested.  However, no medical records were provided by the prescriber to support this new diagnosis. It could not be determined whether the requested drug was being prescribed for a medically accepted indication. Therefore, the requested drug is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a request for coverage of Cinacalcet Hydrochloride 30-milligram tablets to treat unspecified hyperparathyroidism. 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.The provided diagnosis of unspecified hyperparathyroidism is not a medically accepted indication for the use of Cinacalcet Hydrochloride, as outlined in the Medicare approved compendia. During this review, a request was submitted to the prescriber to clarify the diagnosis and to address the plans prior authorization requirements for coverage of this drug. However, the prescriber did not respond to the request. As such, the available documentation indicates that the requested drug is being prescribed for a non-medically accepted indication and is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover the requested drug.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Fluticasone-Salmeterol 250/50-microgram Aerosol Powder to treat moderate persistent asthma, uncomplicated. The Part D plan denied the request. The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed 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.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 records do not support why other drugs on the plans formulary would not work for you.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 Fluorouracil 5 percent cream to treat an unknown diagnosis 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 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.A request was submitted to the prescriber to provide a diagnosis, to address the quantity limit criteria, and to provide supporting documentation. However, a reply from the prescriber was not received. Without the requested information, we cannot establish that the requested drug is medically necessary. Therefore, the requested drug is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part DA 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 Repatha Sureclick 140-milligram per milliliter pen-injector to treat hyperlipidemia. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support the enrollee has satisfied the plans prior authorization coverage criteria. However, we did not receive the requested information.  The plan has prior authorization requirements for this drug. These requirements must be met before coverage can be extended. The available 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 Atelvia 35 milligram tablet to treat 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 requested drug is not on the plans formulary. In order to grant an exception for a drug not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried, failed, or deemed contraindicated. In this case, the documentation does not support why alternative drugs provided on the plans formulary list would likely not be as effective for this diagnosis, and/or would likely cause adverse reaction(s) or other harm.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Sildenafil-Mango (RDT) compounded drug prescribed for unknown diagnosis. 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 compounded drug. However, there is missing information needed to consider the request. The documentation provided includes a universal claim form from the compounding pharmacy. The National Drug Codes provided are not valid codes, according to Medicare sources. The plan's Evidence of Coverage states, if an enrollee pays the full cost of a prescription, they may submit a request for reimbursement with proof of payment to ask the plan to pay its share of the cost. In this case, proof of payment in the form of a receipt showing the amount that the enrollee paid for the drug was not provided. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to reimburse the enrollee without the required documentation.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Pyridoxine Hydrochloride 100-milligrams/milliliter Vial to treat an unstated diagnosis. The Part D plan denied the request. We received a reconsideration request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed 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.Drugs prescribed for use as vitamins and minerals 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 Budesonide 0.5 milligram/2 milliliter suspension prescribed for the treatment of sarcoidosis. 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 requested drug is being administered through a nebulizer in the home setting. Medicare Part B may pay for supplies necessary for the effective use of durable medical equipment, including drugs and biologicals which must be put directly into the equipment in order to achieve the therapeutic benefit of the durable medical equipment. We determined that the Part D plan is not required to cover the requested drug.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Veltassa 8.4 gram packet to treat hyperkalemia. 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 a tiering exception request for Rytary 36.25-145 mg ER capsules to treat Parkinson's 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.Rytary ER 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 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 Lidocaine 5 percent ointment to treat pain in feet after failed back surgery. 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 coverage criteria that must be met prior to approval. The criteria indicates the enrollee must have a Food and Drug Administration approved indication. The Medicare approved compendia contain a citation to support the use of the drug for the enrollees noted diagnosis. Therefore, an exception to the plans coverage criteria is medically necessary.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 Solifenacin Succinate 5-milligram tablets to treat urge incontinence. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. In order to grant an exception for a drug not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried, failed, or deemed contraindicated. In this case, the documentation does not support why alternative drugs provided on the plans formulary list would likely not be as effective for this diagnosis, and/or would likely cause adverse reaction(s) or other harm.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Cosentyx Sensoready 150-milligram/milliliter auto-injector pen to treat psoriatic 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 documentation does not support why alternative drugs provided on the plans formulary list would likely not be as effective for this diagnosis, and/or would likely cause adverse reaction(s) or other harm.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Cyclobenzaprine Hydrochloride 5-milligram tablets to treat chronic skeletal muscle spasm. 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.  Also note that medical records were requested and no records were provided.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 Ingrezza 80-milligram capsules to treat tardive dyskinesia. 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.The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. In order to grant an exception for a drug not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried, failed, or deemed contraindicated. In this case, the documentation does not support why alternative drugs provided on the plans formulary list would likely not be as effective for this diagnosis, and/or would likely cause adverse reaction(s) or other harm.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Vital Tears Autologous Serum to treat 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.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 Vibativ 750-milligram intravenous solution. The Part D plan denied the request because the drug would be available for coverage under Medicare Part B, as the drug was going to administered by intravenous infusion in the enrollees home. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The submitted documentation supports the drug is going to be administered in the enrollees home by intravenous drip. According to Medicare rules, any agent administered in the home by intravenous drip or push injection would be covered under Part D. Therefore, since the drug is going to be administered by intravenous drip and not by intravenous infusion, coverage for the drug would be available under Medicare Part D.The documentation indicates the requested drug has been prescribed for the treatment of an osteomyelitis infection of the knee caused by Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA), Candida albicans, and enterococcus. However, the use of the requested drug to treat the provided 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 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.