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

At issue is Potassium Chloride 10 milliequivalent capsule ER (extended release) date of service 7/19/2021, prescribed for unknown diagnosis. 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. Medicare records show the enrollee was not enrolled with the Part D plan for the dates of service requested. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to provide coverage or reimbursement for the requested drug.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Prednisolone Acetate 1 percent suspension date of service 1/5/2022, prescribed for unknown diagnosis. 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 plan submitted documentation that shows the enrollee was in the initial coverage stage of the Part D benefit when this drug was purchased. According to the plans Evidence of Coverage, the full cost for Prednisolone Acetate suspension at a network pharmacy was less than the copay amount. Therefore, the enrollees charge was based on the total cost of the drug. We determined this drug was paid correctly and no further reimbursement is required by the plan.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Ropinirole Hydrochloride 2 milligram tablet date of service 10/15/2020 and 12/8/2020, prescribed for unknown diagnosis. 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. Medicare records show the enrollee was not enrolled with the Part D plan for the dates of service requested. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to provide coverage or reimbursement for the requested drug.At issue is Ropinirole Hydrochloride 2 milligram tablet date of service 12/2/2022, prescribed for unknown diagnosis. 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 plan submitted documentation that shows the enrollee was still in the deductible stage of the Part D benefit when the requested drug was purchased. The plans Evidence of Coverage states that the enrollee is responsible for the full cost of covered drugs until the deductible amount is satisfied. We determined this drug was paid correctly and no reimbursement is required by the plan.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Rosuvastatin Calcium 10 milligram tablet date of service 12/2/2020 and 3/24/2021, prescribed for unknown diagnosis. 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. Medicare records show the enrollee was not enrolled with the Part D plan for the dates of service requested. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to provide coverage or reimbursement for the requested drug.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Sutab 1479/225/188 milligram tablet date of service 7/19/2022, prescribed for 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. 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 requested drug was purchased. The plans Evidence of Coverage states that the enrollee is responsible for the full cost of covered drugs until the deductible amount is satisfied. We determined this drug was paid correctly and no reimbursement is required by the plan.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Warfarin Sodium 2.5 milligram tablet date of service 1/19/2023 and 2/21/2023, prescribed for unknown diagnosis. 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. Medicare records show the enrollee was not enrolled with the Part D plan for the dates of service requested. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to provide coverage or reimbursement for the requested drug.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Lidocaine 5 percent patch to treat an unspecified condition. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage.  We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation. In order for a drug to be covered by Medicare Part D, it must be prescribed for a medically accepted indication outlined in the Medicare approved compendia. The submitted documentation does not include medical records or evidence of a prescribed diagnosis. This information was requested by the Part D plan with no response from the prescriber/prescribers office. The documentation submitted at reconsideration also does not include medical records or evidence of a prescribed diagnosis. As such, there is insufficient documentation available to establish that the requested drug has been 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 coverage for Farxiga 5 milligram tablet to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus without complication. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation.The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. To grant an exception for a drug that is not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried and failed or must be deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not provided patient-specific clinical rationale as to why the alternative drugs on the plans formulary to treat the enrollees condition would likely not be as effective as the requested drug and/or would likely cause adverse reactions or other harm. Additionally, the submitted documentation does not support that the enrollee has tried and failed all of the formulary alternative drugs. Therefore, the formulary exception requirements have not been met.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Ropinirole extended release (ER) 2 milligram tablet to treat Parkinsons disease. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage.  We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation. The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. To grant an exception for a drug that is not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried and failed or must be deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not provided patient-specific clinical rationale as to why the alternative drugs on the plans formulary to treat the enrollees condition would likely not be as effective as the requested drug and/or would likely cause adverse reactions or other harm. Additionally, the submitted documentation does not support that the enrollee has tried and failed all of the formulary alternative drugs. Therefore, the formulary exception requirements have not been met. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Favorable

At issue is coverage for Xospata 40 milligram tablet to treat FLT3 positive acute myeloid leukemia. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation.In order for a drug to be covered by Medicare Part D, it must be prescribed for a medically accepted indication outlined in the Medicare approved compendia. The Medicare approved compendium, National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), includes an off-label citation for the use of the requested drug to treat FLT3 positive acute myeloid leukemia. The NCCN states it is a 2B recommendation for the drug at issue to be used in combination with Azacitidine in patients with FLT3 mutation for low-intensity treatment induction when not a candidate for intensive induction therapy. Therefore, the requested drug is being prescribed to treat a medically accepted indication.The plan has prior authorization requirements that must be met before coverage of this drug is provided. However, the plans prior authorization requirements are diagnosis-specific and not related to the condition being treated. Since the condition being treated is a medically accepted indication outlined in NCCN, an exception to the plans diagnosis-specific coverage requirements is supported. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Favorable

At issue is coverage for Lenvima 8 milligram capsule to treat metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation.The plan has prior authorization requirements for this drug that must be met before coverage will be provided. These requirements include Lenvima can only be used as first line therapy in hepatocellular cancer. Patient with metastatic hepatocellular cancer, request is for Lenvima as third line therapy due to progression. Per the NCCN (National Comprehensive Cancer Network), it is a 2A recommendation to use Lenvima as subsequent treatment as a single agent for progressive disease in those (Child-Pugh Class A only) who have metastatic disease or extensive liver tumor burden. The submitted documentation indicates that the patient fits NCCN (National Cancer Comprehensive Network criteria. Therefore, the documentation supports an exception to the prior authorization requirement(s). A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Favorable

At issue is coverage for Evenity 105 milligram per 1.17 milliliter solution prefilled syringe, 2.34 milliliters per 30 days, to treat post-menopausal osteoporosis. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation. The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. To grant an exception for a drug that is not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried and failed or must be deemed contraindicated. The prescriber has provided patient-specific clinical rationale as to why the alternative drugs on the plans formulary to treat the enrollees condition would likely not be as effective as the requested drug and/or would likely cause adverse reactions or other harm. Specifically, the prescriber clarified the medical history and states the enrollee has a contraindication to Forteo/Teriparatide and Tymlos due to hyperparathyroidism. Medical records and laboratory results were provided with the request for reconsideration. The medical records document hyperparathyroidism and an elevated parathyroid hormone level of 95. The following citation in DrugDex, a Medicare approved compendium, states that the uses of Tymlos and Forteo are not recommended in patients with existing hypercalcemia or those with underlying hypercalcemic disorder (eg primary hyperparathyroidism). The prescriber is requesting 2 syringes (2.34 milliliter) per month, which is a quantity supported in the dosage and administration section of the FDA label. Therefore, a formulary exception is supported in this case. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Hydroquinone 4 percent cream to treat disorder of pigmentation on face . The Part D plan denied the request for coverage.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation. Drugs prescribed for cosmetic purposes are excluded from the Part D coverage. Therefore, the requested drug is excluded from Medicare Part D coverage.This decision does not address the medical necessity of the drug. It only establishes that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Gocovri 137 milligram capsule to treat unknown diagnosis. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the case to us for review.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation.In order for a drug to be covered by Medicare Part D, it must be prescribed for a medically accepted indication outlined in the Medicare approved compendia. The submitted documentation does not include medical records or evidence of a prescribed diagnosis. This information was requested by the Part D plan with no response from the prescriber/prescribers office. As such, there is insufficient documentation available to establish that the requested drug has been 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 coverage for Repatha Pushtronex System 420 milligram per 3.5 milliliter solution cartridge to treat hyperlipidemia, unspecified. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage.  We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation. The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. To grant an exception for a drug that is not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried and failed or must be deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not provided patient-specific clinical rationale as to why the alternative drugs on the plans formulary to treat the enrollees condition would likely not be as effective as the requested drug and/or would likely cause adverse reactions or other harm. Additionally, the submitted documentation does not support that the enrollee has tried and failed all of the formulary alternative drugs. Therefore, the formulary exception requirements have not been met. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Dextroamphetamine/Amphetamine 30 milligram extended release (ER) tablet to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, predominantly inattentive type. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation.The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. To grant an exception for a drug that is not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried and failed or must be deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not provided patient-specific clinical rationale as to why the alternative drugs on the plans formulary to treat the enrollees condition would likely not be as effective as the requested drug and/or would likely cause adverse reactions or other harm. Additionally, the submitted documentation does not support that the enrollee has tried and failed all of the formulary alternative drugs. Therefore, the formulary exception requirements have not been met.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Corlanor 5 milligram tablet to treat congestive heart failure. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation.The plan has prior authorization requirements for this drug that must be met before coverage will be provided. The submitted documentation does not indicate that all of the plans requirements for coverage have been satisfied. Furthermore, the documentation does not support the medical necessity for an exception to the plans prior authorization requirements.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Tacrolimus 0.5 milligram tablets prescribed for liver and kidney transplant rejection prophylaxis. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the case to us for review. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation. Additionally, we researched Medicare systems.Medicare systems show that the enrollee was eligible for Medicare Part A coverage from January 1, 2000, to Present. Therefore, the enrollee was eligible for Medicare Part A coverage when undergoing a liver and kidney transplant on November 21, 2023. If the enrollee was eligible for Medicare Part A coverage on the date of the transplant, immunosuppressive drugs prescribed for transplant rejection prophylaxis would be covered under Medicare Part B. Medicare rules state that any drug available for coverage under Medicare Part B cannot be covered under Part D. Therefore, the requested drug is not eligible for Medicare Part D coverage.This decision does not address the medical necessity of the drug. It only establishes that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit. Please submit the request for coverage through Medicare Part B.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Tacrolimus 1 milligram tablets prescribed for liver and kidney transplant rejection prophylaxis. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the case to us for review. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation. Additionally, we researched Medicare systems.Medicare systems show that the enrollee was eligible for Medicare Part A coverage from January 1, 2000, to Present. Therefore, the enrollee was eligible for Medicare Part A coverage when undergoing a liver and kidney transplant on November 21, 2023. If the enrollee was eligible for Medicare Part A coverage on the date of the transplant, immunosuppressive drugs prescribed for transplant rejection prophylaxis would be covered under Medicare Part B. Medicare rules state that any drug available for coverage under Medicare Part B cannot be covered under Part D. Therefore, the requested drug is not eligible for Medicare Part D coverage.This decision does not address the medical necessity of the drug. It only establishes that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit. Please submit the request for coverage through Medicare Part B.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Tacrolimus 5 milligram tablets prescribed for liver and kidney transplant rejection prophylaxis. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the case to us for review. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation. Additionally, we researched Medicare systems.Medicare systems show that the enrollee was eligible for Medicare Part A coverage from January 1, 2000, to Present. Therefore, the enrollee was eligible for Medicare Part A coverage when undergoing a liver and kidney transplant on November 21, 2023. If the enrollee was eligible for Medicare Part A coverage on the date of the transplant, immunosuppressive drugs prescribed for transplant rejection prophylaxis would be covered under Medicare Part B. Medicare rules state that any drug available for coverage under Medicare Part B cannot be covered under Part D. Therefore, the requested drug is not eligible for Medicare Part D coverage.This decision does not address the medical necessity of the drug. It only establishes that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit. Please submit the request for coverage through Medicare Part B.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Crestor 20 milligram tablet to treat hyperlipidemia. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation.The plan has prior authorization requirements for this drug that must be met before coverage will be provided. The submitted documentation does not support that all of the plans requirements for coverage have been satisfied. Furthermore, the documentation does not support the medical necessity for an exception to the plans prior authorization requirements.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Favorable

At issue is coverage for Doptelet 20 milligram tablet to treat chronic immune thrombocytopenic purpura. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all available documentation.The plan has prior authorization requirements for this drug that must be met before coverage will be provided. The submitted documentation supports that all of the plans requirements for coverage have been satisfied. Specifically, the prescriber submitted medical records showing prior treatments prior to surgery using prednisone with excellent results. Later the patient was started on Rituximab, which was completed on October 9, 2020. Rituximab was discontinued because of no response in the following months. Doptelet was prescribed resulting in stabilized platelet counts. Therefore, the plans prior authorization requirements have been met and coverage for the drug is supported.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is eligible for Part D coverage.