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

At issue is a tiering exception request for Trulicity 0.75 milligrams per 0.5 milliliter solution pen-injector to treat type 2 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.Trulicity is a biologic drug on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no biologic drugs of the same type on the lower tiers of the plans formulary to treat the same diagnosis. Therefore, this biologic 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 Humalog 100 units per milliliter solution to treat type 1 diabetes mellitus with hyperglycemia. 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 Olopatadine Hydrochloride 0.1 percent ophthalmic drops. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the submitted documentation to perform an independent and de novo review.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support the enrollee has satisfied the plans step therapy requirements/the quantity prescribed was medically necessary for the enrollee.) We received additional documentation and included it in the review/However, we did not receive the requested information.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 Dronabinol 2.5 milligram capsule to treat nausea and vomiting, anorexia, and weight loss. 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 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 diagnoses. 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 Cyclobenzaprine Hydrochloride 10 milligram tablet to treat muscle spasms secondary to chronic cervicalgia. 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 Budesonide Formoterol 80 microgram/4.5 microgram per actuation inhaler to treat chronic cough and sinusitis. 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: Favorable

At issue is Testosterone gel 1.62 percent to treat male hypogonadism. 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 prescribed for a medically accepted indication. The plan though has prior authorization requirements for this drugs coverage. The documentation provided supports an exception to the plans coverage criteria. Surgical orchiectomy was performed for testicular cancer. Testosterone level was drawn prior to surgery. Castration level testosterone is reached within hours of surgery. Immediate replacement is considered medically appropriate. 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 a tiering exception request for Xarelto 15 milligram tablet for prophylaxis for thromboembolism in patients 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.Xarelto 15 milligram tablet 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.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Favorable

At issue is a direct member reimbursement for HIB vaccine. The case was auto-forwarded by the plan.We received a 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 the enrollee received the vaccine in the providers's office and submitted a claim for payment with a valid receipt. 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. We determined that the plan is required to reimburse the enrollee for their share of the cost for the vaccine at issue.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Lidocaine 5 percent ointment to treat chronic 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 Methadone 10 milligram tablets 150 per 30 days to treat chronic pain due to failed back surgery. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we 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 Methadone 10 milligram tablets to 120 per 30 days. The prescriber has indicated that the number of doses of the requested drug allowed by the plan would likely be ineffective. However, there are no records to confirm the need for the requested amount.  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: Favorable

At issue is Austedo 9 milligram tablets to treat tardive dyskinesia. 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. We received additional documentation and included it in the review.The documentation satisfies the plans coverage criteria. The submitted documentation supports the enrollee has a diagnosis of tardive dyskinesia, which is a medically accepted indication. Furthermore, the claim is for continuation of therapy, and the prescriber attests the enrollee is benefitting from therapy and the risks versus benefits of the drug were discussed with the enrollee.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 Armodafinil 250 milligram tablets to treat idiopathic hypersomnia. 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 a tiering exception request for Brilinta 90 milligram tablets for prophylaxis of cardiovascular events. 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.Brilinta 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 Almotriptan Malate 12.5 milligram tablet to treat migraines. 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 addressed all of the formulary alternatives required by the plan to treat the enrollees condition and provided patient specific clinical rationale with supporting documentation as to why each formulary alternative 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 a tiering exception request for Myrbetriq ER 25 milligram extended-release tablet to treat urge urinary incontinence. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.Myrbetriq ER is a brand drug on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no brand drugs of the same type to treat the noted condition on the lower tiers of the plans formulary. If there are no brand drugs of the same type on a lower tier, the drug is 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 a reimbursement request for Diclofenac 1 percent gel. The Part D plan denied the request.We received a case to perform an independent and de novo review of this request for coverage. We reviewed all documentation submitted for review, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. The submitted documentation does not include a valid proof of purchase for the drug at issue. Therefore, the request for reimbursement cannot be granted.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a reimbursement request for Gabapentin 100 milligram capsules. The Part D plan denied the request.We received a case to perform an independent and de novo review of this request for coverage. We reviewed all documentation submitted for review, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. The submitted documentation does not include a valid proof of purchase for the drug at issue. Therefore, the request for reimbursement cannot be granted.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a reimbursement request for Novolog Flexpen. The Part D plan denied the request.We received a case to perform an independent and de novo review of this request for coverage. We reviewed all documentation submitted for review, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. The submitted documentation does not include a valid proof of purchase for the drug at issue. Therefore, the request for reimbursement cannot be granted.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a reimbursement request for Oxycodone 5 milligram tablets. The Part D plan denied the request.We received a case to perform an independent and de novo review of this request for coverage. We reviewed all documentation submitted for review, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. The submitted documentation does not include a valid proof of purchase for the drug at issue. Therefore, the request for reimbursement cannot be granted.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a reimbursement request for Ventolin HFA inhalant. The Part D plan denied the request.We received a case to perform an independent and de novo review of this request for coverage. We reviewed all documentation submitted for review, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. The submitted documentation does not include a valid proof of purchase for the drug at issue. Therefore, the request for reimbursement cannot be granted.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Jardiance 25 milligram tablet to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic neuropathy. 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.Jardiance is a brand drug on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no brand drugs of the same type to treat the noted condition on the lower tiers of the plans formulary. If there are no brand drugs of the same type on a lower tier, the drug is 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 Mepron 750 milligram per milliliter oral suspension prescribed for the prevention of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PCP) infection in a non- human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected enrollee with bronchiectasis as well as granulomatosis with polyangiitis, which requires immunosuppressive therapy. 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.As outlined in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) product label and the Medicare approved compendia, Atovaquone [Mepron] is used alone or in conjunction with pyrimethamine (and leucovorin) as an alternative for prevention of Pneumocystis jirovecii infections in HIV-infected adults, adolescents, and children who cannot tolerate co-trimoxazole. Since the enrollee does not have an HIV infection, the requested 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: Favorable

At issue is coverage for Dulera 100-5 microgram per actuation aerosol inhaler to treat severe persistent asthma. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage because the drug was not on the formulary and the documentation did not support that the enrollee tried and failed, or had a contraindication to, the formulary alternative drugs, Breo Ellipta and Trelegy Ellpta.  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 drug at issue is not on the plans formulary. At reconsideration, the prescriber has provided patient specific clinical rationale supported by documentation indicating why the formulary 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. The prescriber statement and medical records indicate that after the Dulera was denied by the plan, the enrollee was provided with samples of Trelegy Ellipta to try. The prescriber notes that the enrollee was having difficulty with the powder inhaler, feeling nauseated and gagging while using the inhaler. In addition, the prescriber states that the enrollees asthma was uncontrolled while using the Trelegy Ellipta inhaler. The prescriber indicates the enrollee then had the same reaction to Breo Ellipta, another powder inhaler. The prescriber goes on to explain in the progress notes that the enrollee has had adverse effects from powdered inhalers, including thrush and nausea/choking/gagging episodes. As such, the documentation submitted at reconsideration supports a formulary exception 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 a tiering exception request for Anoro Ellipta 62.5-25 microgram actuation 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.Anoro Ellipta 62.5-25 microgram actuation 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.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Repatha solution prefilled syringe 140 milligram per milliliter to treat hyperlipidemia in an enrollee 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 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 Epclusa 400/100 milligram tablet to treat chronic hepatitis C with cirrhosis of liver. 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 Promacta 50 milligram tablets to treat thrombocytopenia in myelodysplastic syndrome. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The plan has prior authorization requirements for this drug. These requirements must be met before coverage can be extended. The submitted documentation does not satisfy the plans coverage criteria.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.