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

At issue is Lidocaine 5% patch prescribed for fibromyalgia and history of post-herpetic neuralgia. 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 your 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 shows Lidocaine was prescribed to treat fibromyalgia and history of post-herpetic neuralgia. However, the Medicare approved compendia do not support the use of this drug for the enrollees condition. A physician reviewed your appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover Lidocaine.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

The enrollee requested Dexcom G6 Sensor prescribed for diabetes, type 1. The Part D plan denied your request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we read your 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 Dexcom G6 Sensor because it is not considered a medical supply directly associated with the injection of insulin. Although, this supply is not covered under Part D, it may be covered under Part B. Please submit your request to Medicare Part B. This decision does not address the medical necessity or appropriateness of the supply. It only establishes that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

You requested Lidocaine 5% patch for chronic low back 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 read your 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 asked the prescriber to send us information regarding the enrollees condition. We also asked for medical records or other documentation to show why the enrollee needs Lidocaine. We received the documentation and included it in our reviewThe documentation shows Lidocaine 5% patch was prescribed to treat chronic low back pain. However, the Medicare approved compendia do not support the use of this drug for the enrollees condition. A physician reviewed your appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover Lidocaine.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a formulary exception request for Kristalose 20 milligram packet prescribed for unspecified cirrhosis of liver without encephalopathy. 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 asked the prescriber to send us information regarding the enrollees condition. We also asked for medical records or other documentation to show why the enrollee needs the medication. Specifically, we asked for records to show why other medications on the plan's formulary would not work for the enrollee. However, we did not receive the documentation.The submitted documentation indicates the prescriber ordered Kristalose for unspecified cirrhosis of liver without encephalopathy. The Medicare approved compendia do not support the use of the drug at issue for the enrollees condition. As the drug was not prescribed for a medically accepted indication, coverage cannot be allowed.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover the requested drug.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Hetlioz 20-milligram capsule to treat circadian rhythm sleep disorder, free running type (Non-24).   The Part D plan denied the request.  We received a reconsideration 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.The documentation does not satisfy the plans coverage criteria. The prescriber has not sufficiently addressed the plans coverage criteria and/or the coverage criteria are not satisfied by the provided medical records.  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 Humira Starter Pack 80 milligram/0.8 milliliter and 40 milligram/0.4 milliliter pen injector prescribed for disseminated granuloma annulare. 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.The submitted documentation indicates the prescriber ordered Humira for disseminated granuloma annulare. The Medicare approved compendia do not support the use of the biologic at issue for the enrollees condition. As the biologic was not prescribed for a medically accepted indication, coverage cannot be allowed.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover the requested biologic.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Victoza 18 milligram/3 milliliter injection prescribed for the enrollees condition. The Part D plan denied the request for a tiering exception.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.Victoza is a biologic on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no biologics of the same type on the lower cost sharing tiers. Therefore, this biologic is not eligible for a tiering exception.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the plan is not required to grant the request for a tiering exception.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a request for coverage of Spironolactone Powder and Syrspend Sf Liquid compounded suspension prescribed for the treatment of primary hyperaldosteronism. 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.Medicare Part D provides coverage for compounded medications when the individual ingredients meet the definition of Medicare Part D covered drugs. Spironolactone Powder is a bulk powder. Bulk powders do not satisfy the definition of a Part D drug and are not covered by Part D. Additionally, Syrspend Sf Liquid is a non-active ingredient that does not meet the definition of a Part D drug and is not eligible for coverage under Part D. Therefore, the Spironolactone Powder and Syrspend Sf Liquid compounded suspension does not include a covered Part D drug and is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D. 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 Diazepam 5 milligram tablets prescribed for Menieres disease. 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.The submitted documentation indicates the prescriber ordered Diazepam for Menieres disease. The Medicare approved compendia do not support the use of the drug at issue for the enrollees condition. As the drug was not prescribed for a medically accepted indication, coverage cannot be allowed.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover the requested drug.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

You requested Syndros 5 milligram/milliliter solution prescribed for protein-calorie malnutrition. The Part D plan denied your We performed and independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we read your 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 Syndros because it was used to treat anorexia. Drugs to treat anorexia, weight loss, or weight gain are excluded from coverage. Your plan does not offer supplemental (additional) coverage for this drug. If you purchased drugs that are excluded, you must pay for them yourself. 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 Buprenorphine Hydrochloride 2 milligram sublingual tablets prescribed for chronic pain. 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.The submitted documentation indicates the prescriber ordered Buprenorphine Hydrochloride sublingual tablets for chronic pain. The Medicare approved compendia do not support the use of the drug at issue, in this formulation  sublingual tablets, for the enrollees condition. As the drug was not prescribed for a medically accepted indication, coverage cannot be allowed.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover the requested drug.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Eliquis 5 milligram tablets prescribed for chronic 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 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. Eliquis 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 cost sharing tiers. 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 reviewed the appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover the requested drug at a lower cost tier level.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a request for coverage of Modafinil 200 milligram tablets. 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 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 indicates that Modafinil has been prescribed for excessive daytime sleepiness due to insomnia at night and the presence of Parkinsons disease. However, the Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug, as prescribed, for the treatment of the noted conditions. Therefore, the drug is being prescribed for non-medically accepted indications and is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover the requested drug.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a request for coverage of Estradiol 0.01% (0.1 milligram per 1 gram) vaginal cream. 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 indicates that Estradiol cream has been prescribed for urinary tract infection prophylaxis in a postmenopausal female. However, the Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug, as prescribed, for the treatment of the noted condition. Therefore, the drug is being prescribed for a non-medically accepted indication and is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover the requested drug.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a request for coverage of Hizentra 20% (2 gram per 10 milliliter) solution for subcutaneous injection. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage because the plans prior authorization requirements were not met.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 indicates that Hizentra to be given by subcutaneous injection has been prescribed for the treatment of myasthenia gravis. However, the Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the use of subcutaneous Hizentra for the treatment of the myasthenia gravis.  Therefore, the drug is being prescribed for a non-medically accepted indication and is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D. Since the drug is not eligible for coverage under Part D, the plans prior authorization requirements are not applicable to this review. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover the requested drug.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a request for coverage of Marinol 2.5 milligram capsules. 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 indicates that Marinol has been prescribed for abnormal weight loss due to decreased appetite (anorexia) and anemia. Drugs when used for anorexia, weight loss, or weight gain (even if used for a non-cosmetic purpose) are excluded from Part D coverage. This decision does not address the medical necessity or appropriateness of the requested 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 request for coverage of Abiraterone Acetate 250 milligram capsules to be given along with Prednisone for the treatment of non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. The Part D plan denied the request. We received a reconsideration 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.The Medicare-approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug, as prescribed, for treatment of the noted condition. The documentation does not include any peer-reviewed, clinically relevant medical literature from an approved journal to support the use of the requested drug for the treatment of the noted condition. Therefore, the requested drug is not being prescribed for a medically accepted indication as defined by Medicare. As such, an exceptions request based on medical necessity cannot be considered because the requested drug, as prescribed, does not meet the definition of a Medicare Part D drug. Therefore, the requested drug is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D for the noted condition.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Cyclobenzaprine Hydrochloride 10 milligram tablets prescribed for acute hip pain, greater trochanteric bursitis. 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.The submitted documentation indicates the prescriber ordered Cyclobenzaprine Hydrochloride for acute hip pain, greater trochanteric bursitis. The Medicare approved compendia do not support the use of the drug at issue for the enrollees condition. As the drug was not prescribed for a medically accepted indication, coverage cannot be allowed.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover the requested drug.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Latuda 20 milligram tablets prescribed for the enrollees condition. The Part D plan denied the request for a tiering exception.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.This drug is included on Tier 5 of the plans formulary. This tier is identified as a Specialty Tier. The plan is not required to grant a tiering exception for drugs available on their Specialty Tier. Therefore, a tiering exception cannot be considered.A physician reviewed your appeal and determined that the plan is not required to grant the request for a tiering exception.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a request for coverage of Timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution prescribed for the treatment of glaucoma of both eyes. 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 read your case file carefully. We reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. Timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution is not included in the plans formulary (list of covered drugs). The prescriber has not provided patient specific clinical rationale, supported by medical records, as to why the formulary alternatives that are included in the plan to treat the enrollees condition would likely not be as effective as the requested drug and/or would likely cause adverse reaction(s) or other harm. Therefore, an exception to the plans coverage criteria is not supported. Our physician reviewer's opinion is that formulary exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Rivastigmine 4.6 milligram per 24 hour transdermal patches. 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 your case file carefully. We reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. Rivastigmine transdermal patches are a generic drug on Tier 4 of the plans formulary. The prescriber has not provided patient specific clinical rationale, supported by medical records, as to why all the  drugs on the lower tiers of the plans formulary to treat the enrollees condition have been tried and failed, or are contraindicated. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover the requested drug at a lower cost tier.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Myrbetriq ER 25 milligram tablets prescribed for overactive bladder associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia. 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. 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 cost sharing tiers. 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 reviewed the appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover the requested drug at a lower cost tier level.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Candesartan Cilexetil 8 milligram tablet prescribed twice daily for primary hypertension. 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. This medication is not on your plan's list of medications. The prescriber has not given a clear and valid medical reason why all medications required by the plan, on that list, did not work for you. This reason has to be in the medical record with details of when you tried those medications. The reason the medications on the formulary won't work or could cause you harm have to be stated. Why the other medications required by the plan will not work must be discussed. Therefore, an exception to the plans formulary coverage criteria is not supported. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover Candesartan Cilexetil.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Pancreaze DR 10,500 unit capsule prescribed three capsules three times daily for chronic pancreatitis. 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. 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 medical records do not support why the formulary drug Zenpep would not work for the enrollee. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover Pancreaze DR.