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

At issue is coverage for Nivestym 480 microgram per 0.8 milliliter prefilled syringe, 16 milliliters per 84 days, prescribed for neutropenia in an enrollee with large granular leukemia, currently in remission, and a long history of neutropenia. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The prescriber statement and medical records submitted at reconsideration support that the enrollee has chronic neutropenia, as the enrollees leukemia has been in remission and the enrollee still has neutropenia. The records show that the enrollees neutropenia has been treated with Neupogen since 2010. However, Neupogen is no longer on the enrollees Part D plans formulary. Therefore, the formulary alternative, Nivestym, has been requested by the prescriber to replace the Neupogen to treat the enrollees neutropenia. As noted in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) product label for the drug, Nivestym is indicated for chronic administration for chronic neutropenia to reduce the incidence and duration of neutropenia sequelae, including fever, infections, or oropharyngeal ulcers, in symptomatic patients with congenital neutropenia, cyclic neutropenia, or idiopathic neutropenia. The records support that the enrollees chronic neutropenia is idiopathic since the enrollees leukemia has been in remission and the enrollee still has neutropenia. As such, the documentation supports the drug is being prescribed for a medically accepted indication. The plans prior authorization requirement for the drug is that the enrollee has a medically accepted indication for the drug. As such, the plan prior authorization requirement for the drug has been met. Therefore, coverage for the drug is supported by the documentation submitted at reconsideration.However, the prescriber has requested 16 milliliters per 84-day supply of the requested drug. This specialty drug is limited to a recurring 30-day supply by the plan. The plans quantity limit for the requested drug is 11.2 milliliters per 30-day supply.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is eligible for Part D coverage at an amount of 11.2 milliliters per recurring 30-day supply.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Wakix 17.8 milligram tablets to treat narcolepsy with cataplexy. 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 submitted documentation supports the drug at issue was prescribed for narcolepsy. The Medicare approved compendia contain citations to support the use of the drug for this diagnosis. Therefore, the drug has been prescribed for a medically accepted indication. However, the requested drug is not on the plans formulary. In order to grant an exception for a drug not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried, failed, or deemed contraindicated. In this case, the documentation does not support why the formulary alternatives, required by the plan would likely not be as effective for this diagnosis, and/or would likely cause adverse reaction(s) or other harm.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Forteo 600 microgram per 2.4 milliliter subcutaneous injection pen to treat postmenopausal osteoporosis with high risk for fracture. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The plan has prior authorization requirements for this drug that must be met before coverage can be approved. The submitted documentation does not support that all of the plans requirements for coverage have 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 Dupixent 300 milligram per 2 milliliter prefilled subcutaneous syringe 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 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 and failed, or deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not provided sufficient patient specific clinical rationale as to why the formulary alternative drugs required by the plan would likely not be as effective as the requested drug and/or would likely cause adverse reactions or other harm. Therefore, the formulary exception criteria have not been met.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Lynparza 100 milligram tablets to treat recurrent peritoneal carcinoma, CHEK2 mutated and breast cancer following one line of platinum therapy. 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. Medicare-approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug as prescribed, for treatment of the noted diagnosis. There was no peer-reviewed, clinically relevant, medical literature from an approved journal submitted to support this appeal. Therefore, the requested drug is not being prescribed for a medically accepted indication as defined by Medicare.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 Asmanex (120 Metered Doses) 220 microgram per inhalation aerosol inhalation powder to treat asthma. 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.Asmanex (120 Metered Doses) aerosol inhalation powder is being provided by the plan under a formulary exception. This drug is not on the plans formulary but they have agreed to provide it at a cost sharing level assigned to all formulary exceptions. Per Medicare rules, non-formulary drugs are not eligible for a tiering exception.A physician reviewer determined that tiering exception criteria have not been met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Daliresp 500 microgram tablet to treat emphysema, which is a chronic obstructive pulmonary 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 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 that must be met before coverage can be approved. The submitted documentation does not confirm that all of the plans requirements for coverage have 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 Stelara 45 milligram per 0.5 milliliter prefilled injection syringe to treat hidradenitis suppurativa. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.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 Promacta 25 milligram tablets to treat chronic thrombocytopenia in an enrollee with hepatic failure and alcoholic cirrhosis. 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 Vraylar 1.5 milligram capsules to treat chronic interictal psychosis. 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 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 coverage for Methotrexate 2.5 milligram tablet to treat chronic kidney disease, stage 3. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.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 Saxenda 18 milligram per 3 milliliter subcutaneous auto injection pen prescribed for weight loss promotion in an enrollee with obesity. 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 documentation submitted.Drugs prescribed to treat/promote weight loss (even if used for a non-cosmetic purpose, such as morbid obesity) are excluded from the Part D coverage. Therefore, the requested drug is excluded from coverage.This decision does not address the medical necessity or appropriateness of the drug. It only establishes that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Vimpat 100 milligram tablets to treat seizure disorder. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we 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 Eliquis 5 milligram tablets for prophylaxis of cerebral vascular accident and systemic embolism in an enrollee with atrial fibrillation. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.This drug is being provided by the plan under a formulary exception. It is not on the plans formulary but they have agreed to provide it at a cost sharing level assigned to all formulary exceptions. Per Medicare rules, non-formulary drugs are not eligible for a tiering exception.A physician reviewer determined that tiering exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Mesalamine 1.2 gram tablets to treat ulcerative 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.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 direct member reimbursement request for Tobradex 0.1 percent - 0. 3 percent eye ointment to treat unspecified diagnosis. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, 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 Oxycodone Hydrochloride 15 milligram tablets, 120 tablets per 30 days to treat the enrollees condition. The plan denied the request for exceeding the morphine equivalents per day.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, medical records, and a prescriber statement to support that the quantity prescribed was medically necessary for the enrollee. However, we did not receive the requested information.The plan limits the amount of morphine equivalents to equal to or less than 200 morphine equivalents 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 Freestyle Libre 14 day sensor prescribed for diabetes. The Part D plan auto-forwarded 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. Supplies for testing and monitoring blood glucose levels are not considered Part D drugs and may be covered under the Medicare Part B durable medical equipment benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Bi-Estrogen 50/50 1.25 milligram vaginal capsule prescribed for an unspecified 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 reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The documentation submitted shows the enrollee purchased the requested drug from a compounding pharmacy. The enrollee provided receipts for the requested drug. However, the Pharmacy Universal Claim Form for Compounded Drugs including a valid National Drug Code is not provided. Therefore, the reimbursement criteria have not been met. This decision does not address 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 Progesterone E4M 150 milligram veggie compounded capsule prescribed to treat an unspecified diagnosis. The Part D plan auto-forwarded 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.Drugs that fall into the category of bulk powders are excluded from coverage under Part D. In addition, over the counter drugs are excluded from coverage under Medicare Part D. The requested compounded drug includes both bulk powder ingredients and over the counter ingredients and is therefore, excluded from coverage and not eligible for reimbursement. This decision does not address 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 Adacel injection prescribed for vaccination. The Part D plan auto-forwarded 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 plan submitted documentation that indicates the enrollee was administered the requested drug for vaccination in the prescriber's office. The plans Evidence of Coverage states, if the enrollee pays the full cost of a prescription, then 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 was paid by the enrollee, and a physician's statement including the prescriber's National Provider Identifier (NPI) number and a valid National Drug Code (NDC) of the requested vaccine was not provided. Therefore, the reimbursement criteria have not been met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Shingrix 50 microgram per 0.5 milliliter suspension prescribed for vaccination. The Part D plan auto-forwarded 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 plan submitted documentation that shows the enrollee was still in the deductible stage of the Part D benefit when the vaccine was administered at the pharmacy. The plans Evidence of Coverage states that enrollee is responsible for the full cost of covered drugs until the deductible amount is satisfied. We determined the amount the enrollee paid was applied to the deductible and no reimbursement is required by the plan.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Omega-3-Acid Ethyl Esters 1 gram capsule to treat diabetes and hypertension. The Part D plan auto-forwarded 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 Daliresp 250 microgram tablet to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary 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. 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 Sinuva nasal implant 1350 microgram. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.Based on the information provided, we determined the drug may be eligible for coverage under Part B under Medicare rules.The plan does not offer supplemental (additional) coverage for this drug. If the enrollee purchased drugs that are excluded, the enrollee must pay for them. This decision does not address the medical necessity or appropriateness of the drug. It only establishes that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.