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

At issue is coverage for Amphetamine/Dextroamphetamine 30 milligram tablet. The Part D 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.The submitted documentation does not include medical records or evidence of a prescribed diagnosis. During this review, a request was submitted to the prescriber to provide the diagnosis and supporting medical records and to address the plans coverage requirements for this drug. The prescriber did not respond to the request. Without a diagnosis, it cannot be established that the drug is being prescribed for a 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 Lidocaine 5 percent topical ointment to treat radiculopathy lumbar region and hip pain. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested 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 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 Diazepam/Silica 5 milligram gel prescribed to treat an 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.Drugs that fall into the category of bulk ingredients do not meet the definition of a Part D drug. The requested drug is consistent of bulk ingredients and is excluded from coverage under Part D 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 Butylated Hydroxytoluene, prescribed as an ingredient for a compounded drug, to treat the enrollees condition. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. The plan provided documentation showing the request is for a compounded drug. The requested product is not an approved drug by the United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA). Products not approved as drugs by the USFDA are excluded from coverage under the Medicare Part D drug benefit. We determined the plan is not required to cover the requested drug because it is excluded from coverage under Part D.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Clobetasol 17 Propionate, prescribed as an ingredient for a compounded drug, to treat the enrollees condition. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. The plan provided documentation showing the request is for a compounded drug. The requested product is not an approved drug by the United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA). Products not approved as drugs by the USFDA are excluded from coverage under the Medicare Part D drug benefit. We determined the plan is not required to cover the requested drug because it is excluded from coverage under Part D.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Ethoxydiglycol Reagent, prescribed as an ingredient for a compounded drug, to treat the enrollees condition. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. The plan provided documentation showing the request is for a compounded drug. The requested product is not an approved drug by the United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA). Products not approved as drugs by the USFDA are excluded from coverage under the Medicare Part D drug benefit. We determined the plan is not required to cover the requested drug because it is excluded from coverage under Part D.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Foamil, prescribed as an ingredient for a compounded drug, to treat the enrollees condition. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. The plan provided documentation showing the request is for a compounded drug. The requested product is not an approved drug by the United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA). Products not approved as drugs by the USFDA are excluded from coverage under the Medicare Part D drug benefit. We determined the plan is not required to cover the requested drug because it is excluded from coverage under Part D.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Minoxidil, prescribed as an ingredient for a compounded drug, to treat the enrollees condition. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. The plan provided documentation showing the request is for a compounded drug. The requested product is not an approved drug by the United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA). Products not approved as drugs by the USFDA are excluded from coverage under the Medicare Part D drug benefit. We determined the plan is not required to cover the requested drug because it is excluded from coverage under Part D.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Tacrolimus Monohydrate, prescribed as an ingredient for a compounded drug, to treat the enrollees condition. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. The plan provided documentation showing the request is for a compounded drug. The requested product is not an approved drug by the United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA). Products not approved as drugs by the USFDA are excluded from coverage under the Medicare Part D drug benefit. We determined the plan is not required to cover the requested drug because it is excluded from coverage under Part D.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Ozempic 2 milligram per 5 milliliter (0.25 or 0.5 milligram per dose) pen injector to treat obesity. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.Drugs prescribed to treat weight gain (promote weight loss) 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 a tiering exception request for Ursodiol 300 milligram capsule to treat autoimmune hepatitis. 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.Ursodiol is a generic drug on Tier 3 of the plans 2023 formulary. There are no generic drugs of the same type on the lower tiers of the plans formulary to treat the same diagnosis. Therefore, this drug is not eligible for a tiering exception.A physician reviewer determined that the tiering exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Alcensa 150 milligram capsule to treat metastatic colon cancer. 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 Cyclobenzaprine Hydrochloride 5 milligram tablet. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the submitted documentation to perform an independent and de novo review.The submitted documentation does not include medical records or evidence of a prescribed diagnosis. Therefore, it cannot be determined if the drug was prescribed for a medically accepted indication.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Livalo 4 milligram tablet to treat hyperlipidemia. 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 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 Tibsovo 250 milligram tablet prescribed for malignant melanoma. The Part D plan 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.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. This decision does not speak to the medical necessity of this drug; it speaks to whether the Part D drug plan is responsible for payment under the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) rules.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 Metformin 1000 milligram extended release oral tablet to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus. 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 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. Please note, this reconsideration decision was based on the plans 2022 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 Cyclobenzaprine Hydrochloride 10 milligram tablet to treat chronic pain in hips. 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 Progesterone Micronized bulk powder prescribed for other ovarian dysfunction. 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.We determined that the plan is not required to cover the compound at issue. Drugs compounded from bulk powders are not Food and Drug Administration approved and are therefore not covered under Part D.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Hydroxychloroquine Sulfate 200 milligram tablet to treat other specified arthritis, multiple sites, systemic involvement of connective tissue, unspecified, osteoarthritis of both hands, and musculoskeletal pain. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.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 Synjardy 12.5/1000 milligram tablet, 180 per 90 days to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus. The Part D plan forwarded the request.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.The plan limits the amount of Synjardy 12.5/1000 milligram tablet to 60 tablets per recurring 30 days. The prescriber has not indicated 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. This drug is a Brand drug on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no drugs of the same type on the lower tiers of the plans formulary to treat the same diagnosis. Therefore, it is not eligible for a tiering exception.A physician reviewer determined that the tiering exception criteria are not met.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is eligible for Part D coverage only up to the plans quantity limit. Therefore, an exception to the plans coverage criteria is not supported.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Mounjaro 2.5 milligram per 0.5 milliliter pen injector to treat weight loss/obesity. 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 Mounjaro solution pen injector 2.5 milligrams per 0.5 milliliter to treat metabolic syndrome and encounter for screening for diabetes mellitus. 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 Contrave Extended Release 8 milligram/90 milligram tablet to treat weight loss/obesity. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.Drugs prescribed to treat weight gain (promote weight loss) 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 a tiering exception request for Vascepa 1 gram capsule to treat an 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. Vascepa 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 coverage for Rinvoq ER (extended release) 15 milligram tablet 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 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. Furthermore, the documentation does not include sufficient patient-specific clinical rationale to support 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: Favorable

At issue is Repatha Sureclick 140 milligram per milliliter pen injector to treat hyperlipidemia with atherosclerotic cardiovascular 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 documentation satisfies the plans coverage criteria. The drug is being prescribed by a cardiologists and medical records submitted support an intolerance to statin medications. 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 Budesonide 1 milligram per 2 milliliter ampule for nebulization. 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.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Eliquis 5 milligram tablet prophylaxis for cerebrovascular accident and embolism in a patient 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. Eliquis is a brand drug on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no brand drugs of the same type on the lower tiers of the plans formulary to treat the same diagnosis. Therefore, this drug is not eligible for a tiering exception. A physician reviewer determined that the tiering exception criteria are not met.