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

You requested Shingrix 50 microgram/0.5 vaccine prescribed for shingles vaccination. The Part D plan denied your 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 record shows you received the Shingrix vaccine from your physician on December 7, 2020. Medicare rules allow a Part D plan to apply coinsurance and copayments to covered drugs. According to your plan's Evidence of Coverage, if you pay the full cost of a prescription, you may submit a request for reimbursement with proof of payment to ask the plan to pay its share of the cost. The plans formulary shows the drug is covered as a Tier 3 drug. The documentation submitted includes a receipt indicating you paid for the vaccine and its administration fee in full. We determined that the plan is required to reimburse you for their share of the cost for the Shingrix vaccine and administration fee.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Favorable

You requested Shingrix 50 microgram/0.5 vaccine prescribed for shingles vaccination. The Part D plan denied your 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 record shows you received the Shingrix vaccine from a clinic on January 29, 2021. Medicare rules allow a Part D plan to apply coinsurance and copayments to covered drugs. According to your plan's Evidence of Coverage, if you pay the full cost of a prescription, you may submit a request for reimbursement with proof of payment to ask the plan to pay its share of the cost. The plans formulary shows the drug is covered as a Tier 2 drug. The documentation submitted includes a receipt indicating you paid for the vaccine and its administration fee in full. We determined that the plan is required to reimburse you for their share of the cost for the Shingrix vaccine and administration fee.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

You requested Lidocaine 5 percent patches prescribed daily for low back pain. The Part D plan denied your request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we read your case file carefully. We reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. We also researched Medicare systems and reviewed the enrollment data available. 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 condition. Therefore, the drug cannot be considered for payment under the Part D benefit.A physician reviewed your appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover the Lidocaine 5 percent patches.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

You requested Azathioprine 50 milligram oral tablet prescribed twice daily for sarciodosis. The Part D plan denied your request because the requested drug was not prescribed for a medically accepted indication. We received a reconsideration request. We performed an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we read your case file carefully. We reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. Your prescriber submitted a supporting statement and medical records that show Azathioprine was prescribed to treat sarciodosis. However, the Medicare approved compendia do not support the use of this drug for this condition. As such, the requested drug, as prescribed, does not meet the definition of a Medicare Part D drug. Therefore, the requested drug is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D for the noted condition.A physician reviewed your appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover Azathioprine.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Lidocaine 5% Patch to treat lumbar spinal stenosis pain. The Part D plan denied the request stating that the provided diagnosis is a non-medically accepted indication. We performed 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 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 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.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

You requested Albuterol sulfate inhalation solution prescribed for unknown diagnosis. The Part D plan was unable to review your case timely and auto-forwarded your request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we read your 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 record shows you filled a prescription for Albuterol sulfate on February 13, 2021. According to your plan's Evidence of Coverage, reimbursement is based on the total cost of the drug, minus your required co-payment amount, and the difference between what the plan normally pays for the drug and what the pharmacy charged you. If you pay the full cost of a prescription, then you 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 you paid for the Albuterol sulfate was not provided. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to reimburse you without the required documentation. Please submit proof of payment to your plan for reimbursement.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

You requested Benzonatate 200 milligram capsules prescribed for unknown diagnosis. The Part D plan was unable to review your case timely and auto-forwarded your request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we read your 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 record shows you filled a prescription for Benzonatate on February 13, 2021. According to your plan's Evidence of Coverage, reimbursement is based on the total cost of the drug, minus your required co-payment amount, and the difference between what the plan normally pays for the drug and what the pharmacy charged you. If you pay the full cost of a prescription, then you 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 you paid for the Benzonatate was not provided. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to reimburse you without the required documentation. Please submit proof of payment to your plan for reimbursement.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

You requested Pantoprazole 40 milligram tablets prescribed for unknown diagnosis. The Part D plan was unable to review your case timely and auto-forwarded your request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we read your 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 record shows you filled a prescription for Pantoprazole on February 13, 2021. According to your plan's Evidence of Coverage, reimbursement is based on the total cost of the drug, minus your required co-payment amount, and the difference between what the plan normally pays for the drug and what the pharmacy charged you. If you pay the full cost of a prescription, then you 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 you paid for the Pantoprazole was not provided. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to reimburse you without the required documentation. Please submit proof of payment to your plan for reimbursement.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

You requested Prednisone 10 milligram tablets prescribed for unknown diagnosis. The Part D plan was unable to review your case timely and auto-forwarded your request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we read your 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 record shows you filled a prescription for Prednisone on February 13, 2021. According to your plan's Evidence of Coverage, reimbursement is based on the total cost of the drug, minus your required co-payment amount, and the difference between what the plan normally pays for the drug and what the pharmacy charged you. If you pay the full cost of a prescription, then you 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 you paid for the Prednisone was not provided. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to reimburse you without the required documentation. Please submit proof of payment to your plan for reimbursement.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

You requested Xarelto 10 milligram tablets prescribed for unknown diagnosis. The Part D plan was unable to review your case timely and auto-forwarded your request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we read your 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 record shows you filled a prescription for Xarelto on February 13, 2021. According to your plan's Evidence of Coverage, reimbursement is based on the total cost of the drug, minus your required co-payment amount, and the difference between what the plan normally pays for the drug and what the pharmacy charged you. If you pay the full cost of a prescription, then you 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 you paid for the Xarelto was not provided. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to reimburse you without the required documentation. Please submit proof of payment to your plan for reimbursement.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Tremfya 100 milligram/milliliter prescribed as directed for plaque psoriasis. The Part D plan denied the request.We performed 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 record shows that your doctor prescribed Tremfya to treat your condition. There are no medical records to support all alternative drugs on the plans formulary have been tried or why you cannot take them. Therefore, the drug is not eligible for an off-formulary exception. A physician reviewed your appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover the Tremfya.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Cyproheptadine HCL 4 milligram tablets prescribed to treat the diagnoses of bilateral sensorineural hearing loss and Menieres disease. The Part D plan denied the request stating that the provided diagnosis is a non-medically accepted indication.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we read your 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 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 condition. Therefore, the requested drug is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D.A physician reviewed your appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover Cyproheptadine HCL.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

You requested Modafinil 200 milligram tablets prescribed daily for Parkinson's disease. The Part D plan denied your request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we read your case file carefully. We reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. We also researched Medicare systems and reviewed the enrollment data available. The use of the requested drug to treat the provided diagnoses 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 these conditions. Therefore, the drug cannot be considered for payment under the Part D benefit.A physician reviewed your appeal and  determined that the plan is not required to cover the Modafinil.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

You requested Azithromycin 250 milligram tablets prescribed for unknown diagnosis. The Part D plan denied your 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 plan submitted documentation that shows you were in the initial coverage stage of the Part D benefit when this drug was purchased. The plans Evidence of Coverage indicates reimbursement is calculated based on the total cost of the drug, minus your required copayment amount, and minus the difference between what the plan normally pays for the drug and what the pharmacy charged you. The record shows the plan paid its share of the cost for the Azithromycin and the remaining amount was your copay for a tier 2 drug filled at a preferred pharmacy. We determined this drug was paid correctly and no further reimbursement is required by the plan.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

You requested Mycophenolic Acid 180 milligram tablets prescribed twice daily for interstitial pulmonary disease, anti-synthetase syndrome, and dermatomyositis. The Part D plan denied your request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we read your case file carefully. We reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. We also researched Medicare systems and reviewed the enrollment data available. Your medical records show your doctor prescribed Mycophenolic Acid to treat your interstitial pulmonary disease, anti-synthetase syndrome, and dermatomyositis. However, the Medicare approved compendia do not support the use of this drug for your condition. Therefore, the drug cannot be considered for payment under the Part D benefit. A physician reviewed your appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover Mycophenolic Acid.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Repatha Sureclick 140 milligrams/milliliter injection to treat primary hyperlipidemia. The Part D plan denied the request. We received a reconsideration request.We performed 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 prescribers statement provided addressed the plans coverage criteria, and those criteria were not 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 a tiering exception request for Myrbetriq 24-hour Extended Release 25-milligram tablet to treat the enrollees condition. The Part D plan denied the request. We performed 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.Myrbetriq 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.Our physician reviewer's opinion is that tiering exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Ilumya 100 milligram/milliliter syringe prescribed for plaque psoriasis. The Part D plan denied your request because the documentation did not support an off-formulary exception. We received a reconsideration request. We performed an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we read your 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 prescriber submitted a supporting statement and medical records. The prescriber statement indicates Ilumya was prescribed to treat moderate to severe plaque psoriasis and that the enrollee had tried and failed many topical steroids and Cosentyx. However, the prescriber has not indicated if all alternatives required by the plan have been tried and failed, or why the plans preferred alternative drugs would likely not be as effective as the requested drug.   A physician reviewed your appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover Ilumya syringe. The records do not show why the enrollee cannot take other drugs on the plans formulary for the condition.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

You requested Budesonide ER 9 milligram tablets prescribed daily for collagenous colitis. The Part D plan denied your request.We performed an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we read your case file carefully. We reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. This drug is being provided by the plan at the cost sharing level of the Specialty tier. Specialty tier drugs are not available for a tiering exception per Medicare rules. Therefore, this drug is not eligible for a tiering exception.A physician reviewed your appeal and determined that a tiering exception cannot be granted for a drug on the specialty tier of this plan.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Lidocaine 5% Patch to treat age related osteoporosis and shoulder pain associated with osteoarthritis. The Part D plan denied the request stating that the provided diagnosis is a non-medically accepted indication. We performed 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 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 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. We determined that the plan is not required to reimburse you for your cost.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

You requested Nexletol 180 milligram tablets prescribed daily for hyperlipidemia. The Part D plan denied your request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we read your case file carefully. We reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. We also researched Medicare systems and reviewed the enrollment data available. Your medical records show your doctor prescribed Nexletol to treat your hyperlipidemia. However, the Medicare approved compendia do not support the use of this drug for your condition. Therefore, the drug cannot be considered for payment under the Part D benefit. A physician reviewed your appeal and  determined that the plan is not required to cover Nexletol.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue Travatan Z 0.004% solution prescribed for an unknown diagnosis. The Part D plan denied your request because the documentation did not support an off-formulary exception. We received a reconsideration request. We performed an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we read your case file carefully. We reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. Your physician submitted a supporting statement. The supporting statement did not indicate all formulary alternatives would be ineffective. Your physician did not indicate all alternatives to treat your condition on the plans formulary have been tried and failed.A physician reviewed your appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover Travatan Z.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Ubrelvy 50-milligram tablet to treat migraine without aura and with status migrainosus, not intractable. The Part D plan denied the request. The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. We performed 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 prescriber has not provided patient specific clinical rationale, supported by medical records, as to why all alternatives required by the plan would likely not be as effective as the requested drug; and/or would likely cause adverse reaction(s) or other harm. Therefore, an exception to the plans formulary coverage criteria is not supported.Our physician reviewer's opinion is that formulary exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

You requested Synthroid 112 microgram tablets prescribed daily for Hashimoto's disease. The Part D plan denied your request. We performed and independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we read your case file carefully. We reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. Synthroid is a brand drug on Tier 4 of the plans formulary. There are no brand drugs of the same type on the lower cost sharing tiers of the plans formulary. A physician reviewed your appeal and determined that this drug is not eligible for a tiering exception.