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

At issue is a tiering exception request for Budesonide EC 3-milligram capsules to treat microscopic colitis/collagenous 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.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support all lower-tier drugs to treat the enrollees condition were tried and failed or were contraindicated. We received additional documentation and included it in the review.Budesonide is a generic drug  on Tier 4 of the plans formulary. The prescriber has not indicated if all alternatives required by the plan have been tried and failed, or why the plans lower tiered drugs would likely not be as effective as the requested drug. Therefore, this drug is 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 Nurtec oral disintegrating tablet 75-milligram tablets to treat migraine without aura, not intractable, without status migrainosus. 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. The prescriber has not indicated why all alternatives required by the Plan would likely not be as effective for the enrollee as the requested drug; and/or would likely cause adverse reaction(s) or other harm to the enrollee. 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 a 2022 tiering exception request for Gentamicin Sulfate 80-milligrams/2-milliliter Vial to treat urinary tract infection. 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.Gentamicin Sulfate is a generic drug on Tier 4 of the plans 2022 formulary. There are no generic drugs of the same type on the lower tiers of the plans 2022 formulary to treat the same diagnosis. Therefore, this drug is not eligible for a 2022 tiering exception.A physician reviewer determined that the tiering exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Xifaxan 200-milligram tablets to treat small intestinal bacterial overgrowth. 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 Stelara 90-milligram/milliliter solution prefilled syringe to treat hidradenitis suppurativa. 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 Cyanocobalamin 1000-microgram/milliliter injectable solution to treat malabsorption of cyanocobalamin. 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 for use as vitamins and minerals 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 Revlimid 2.5-milligram capsule to treat myelodysplastic syndrome with isolated 5Q chromosomal abnormality and anemia, unspecified.. 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 Tadalafil 20-milligram tablet to treat erectile dysfunction. 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.Sexual/erectile dysfunction drugs prescribed to treat sexual/erectile dysfunction or other diagnoses for which the drug is not Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved 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 Anoro Ellipta 62.5-25-microgram inhaler to treat . 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 alternative drugs provided on the plans formulary list 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 Adacel TDAP vaccine prescribed for vaccination. The case was auto-forwarded by the plan.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 submitted documentation shows the vaccine was provided by the prescriber and administered in the prescribers office. The plan's Evidence of Coverage states, that if an enrollee pays the full cost of a prescription, the enrollee may submit a request for reimbursement with proof of payment to ask the plan to pay its share of the cost. However, proof of payment by the enrollee in the form of a receipt was not provided. Therefore, reimbursement criteria has not been met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Jatenzo 237-milligram capsule prescribed for low testosterone. 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.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support all formulary alternatives were tried and failed or were contraindicated. We received additional documentation and included it in the review.The medical records show the diagnoses of erectile dysfunction and hypogonadism. 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. Per the compendia, The safety and efficacy of testosterone therapy have not been established in men with late-onset (age-related) hypogonadism. 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 Zolpidem 10-milligram tablet 30-tablets/30-days to treat insomnia. 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 Zolpidem to 90-tablets/365-days or 7-tablets/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. 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 Nourianz 20 milligram tablet to treat Parkinson's 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 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.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is reimbursement for Nystop 100,000-units per gram powder. 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 documentation states Nystop 100,000-units per gram powder was provided on October 6, 2021. The enrollees Part D plan requires proper proof of payment from the pharmacy, which must include valid Food and Drug Administration National Drug Codes. There was no documentation supporting this. In addition, the plan has prior authorization requirements for this drug. There was no documentation provided to support the prior authorization requirement was completed prior to the drug being dispensed. Therefore, we have determined that the plan is not required to cover and provide reimbursement for Nystop 100,000-units per gram powder.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Xiidra 5 percent droperette to treat keratoconjunctivitis sicca with associated ophthalmic inflammation. 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.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Semglee 100 unit/milliliter pen injector to treat type II 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.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support all formulary alternatives were tried and failed or were contraindicated. We received additional documentation and included it in the review.The requested biologic is not on the plans formulary. In order to grant an exception for a biologic not on the plans formulary, formulary alternatives must have been tried, failed, or deemed contraindicated.  The prescriber has not indicated why all alternatives required by the Plan would likely not be as effective for the enrollee as the requested drug; and/or would likely cause adverse reaction(s) or other harm to the enrollee. Therefore, an exception to the Plans coverage criteria is not supported.  A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested biologic is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Restasis 0.05 percent eye emulsion to treat 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, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.Restasis 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 a 2021 and 2022 tiering exception request for Eliquis 5-milligram tablet to treat paroxysmal 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 2021 and 2022 formularies. There are no brand drugs of the same type on the lower tiers of the plans formularies to treat the same diagnosis. Therefore, this drug is not eligible for a 2021 or 2022 tiering exception.A physician reviewer determined that the tiering exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Tymlos 3120-microgram/1.56-milliliter solution pen injector to treat osteoporosis, unspecified osteoporosis type, unspecified pathological fracture presence. 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.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Favorable

At issue is Xifaxan 550-milligram tablets to treat hepatic encephalopathy. 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 prescriber ordered Xifaxan for the enrollee's diagnosis of hepatic encephalopathy. Furthermore, the medical records submitted document a previous treatment and failure to Lactulose.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 Abiraterone Acetate 1000-milligram tablets to treat non-metastatic, hormone sensitive prostate 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. The submitted documentation did not include medical records. A request for information and medical records was sent to the prescriber; however, no documentation has been submitted. Without medical records, we are unable to determine if the enrollee meets the criteria for a medically accepted indication. 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 Gleostine 10 milligram capsule prescribed for malignant neoplasm of brain. The Part D plan denied the request as an excluded drug in the Medicare Part D program.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.For the drug at issue to be covered under Medicare Part D, the manufacturer must participate in the Medicare Coverage Gap Discount Program. This manufacturer is not participating in the program; therefore, the drug is excluded from Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Gleostine 100 milligram capsule prescribed for malignant neoplasm of brain. The Part D plan denied the request as an excluded drug in the Medicare Part D program.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.For the drug at issue to be covered under Medicare Part D, the manufacturer must participate in the Medicare Coverage Gap Discount Program. This manufacturer is not participating in the program; therefore, the drug is excluded from Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Trelegy Ellipta 100-microgram/62.5-microgram/25-microgram inhaltation aerosol powders 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.Trelegy Ellipta 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 a tiering exception request for Shingrix 50-microgram/0.5 kit for shingles prophylaxis. 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.Shingrix is a biologic on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no biologics of the same type on the lower tiers of the plans formulary to treat the same diagnosis. Therefore, this biologic 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 Modafinil 200-milligram tablets to treat obstructive sleep apnea and 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 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.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Ciclopirox 8-percent solution to treat onychomycosis of the toenails. 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. Ciclopirox topical solution is used as a component of a comprehensive management program in the treatment of mild-to-moderate onychomycosis of fingernails and toenails, without lunula involvement. 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.