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

At issue is Ubrelvy 100-milligram tablet to treat chronic 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 documentation satisfies the plans coverage criteria. The January 5, 2022, physicians note states the Ubrelvy is effective while having acute episodes of migraines.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 Fluzone high-dose quadrivalent vaccine.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. We reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The submitted documentation shows the enrollee received the requested vaccine at their prescribers office. Based on the information provided, we determined the drug may be eligible for coverage under Medicare Part B. A drug that is covered under Part B is not eligible for coverage under Part D. Therefore, the Part D plan is not required to cover or provide reimbursement for the requested vaccine.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Orgovyx 120-milligram tablets to treat stage IIB prostate cancer. 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. Medicare-approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug as prescribed, for treatment of the noted diagnosis. There was no peer-reviewed, clinically relevant, medical literature from an approved journal submitted to support this appeal. Therefore, the requested drug is not being prescribed for a medically accepted indication as defined by Medicare.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Rocklatan 0.02-0.005 percent drops to treat moderate primary open angle glaucoma, right eye/severe primary open angle glaucoma, left eye. 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 being provided by the plan under a formulary exception. It is not on the plans formulary but they have agreed to provide it at a cost sharing level assigned to all formulary exceptions. Per Medicare rules, non-formulary drugs are 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 Boostrix 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, the reimbursement criteria have not been met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Methylphenidate ER 36-milligram extended release tablet to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. 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, all alternative formulary drugs must have been tried and failed, or deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not addressed the formulary alternatives required by the plan to treat the enrollees condition and provided patient specific clinical rationale 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 a tiering exception request for Gabapentin 300-milligram capsules. The Part D plan denied the tiering exception request. Additionally, the plan denied coverage for the drug because it was being used for a non-medically accepted indication. 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 diagnoses initially provided to the plan for the requested drug were low back pain and meralgia paresthetica. Upon appeal to the plan, the diagnosis provided for the requested drug was neuralgia and neuritis. At reconsideration, the diagnosis provided for the requested drug was radiculopathy, lumbar region. However, all of the noted conditions are off-label uses for the requested drug. The Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug, as prescribed, for the treatment of these conditions. Therefore, the drug is being prescribed for non-medically accepted indication(s) and is not eligible for coverage under the Medicare Part D plan. Since the drug is not eligible for coverage, a tiering exception is no longer relevant.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 Ozempic 4-milligram/3-milliliter Solution Pen-Injector to treat impaired fasting glucose, metabolic syndrome and obesity. The Part D plan denied the request.  We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. The use of the requested drug to treat the provided diagnosis is an off-label use. The Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug, as prescribed, for the treatment of this diagnosis. Therefore, the requested drug(s) is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D. Additionally, 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: Favorable

At issue is Tadalafil 20-milligram tablets to treat pulmonary arterial hypertension secondary to congenital heart disease. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The documentation satisfies the plans coverage criteria. The submitted documentation supports the enrollee has a diagnosis of pulmonary arterial hypertension that is secondary to congenital heart disease, placing the enrollee in World Health Organization group I. In addition, the prescriber has submitted a right heart catheterization report to support the diagnosis.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 Cimzia 400-milligram/2-milliliter subcutaneous syringe kit to treat rheumatoid arthritis with rheumatoid factor. 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 a tiering exception request for Rexulti 0.5-milligram tablet to treat generalized anxiety disorder and major depressive disorder, recurrent, moderate. 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 being provided by the plan at the cost sharing level of the Specialty tier. Specialty tier drugs are not available for a tiering exception per Medicare rules.  A physician reviewer determined that tiering exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Isentress 400 milligram tablet. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.This biologic is being provided by the plan at the cost sharing level of the Specialty tier. Specialty tier biologics are not available for a tiering exception per Medicare rules. A physician reviewer determined that tiering exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Botox. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.  Based on the information provided, we determined the drug may be eligible for coverage under Medicare Part B, per Medicare rules. The plan does not offer supplemental (additional) coverage for this drug. If the enrollee purchased drugs that are excluded, the enrollee must pay for them. This decision does not address the medical necessity or appropriateness of the drug. It only establishes that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Progesterone micronized powder to treat an 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, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. Drugs prescribed that are bulk powders are excluded from coverage under Medicare Part D. Bulk powders used in pharmacy compounding are not reviewed and approved for safety and efficacy by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)  and therefore do not meet the definition of a Part D drug. Therefore, the requested drug is excluded from coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Testerone powder to treat an 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, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. Drugs prescribed that are bulk powders are excluded from coverage under Medicare Part D. Bulk powders used in pharmacy compounding are not reviewed and approved for safety and efficacy by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)  and therefore do not meet the definition of a Part D drug. Therefore, the requested drug is excluded from coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Metformin Extended Release Osmotic 1000-milligram tablet to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus without mention of complication. 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

Vytorin 10-20-milligram tablet was requested to treat the enrollees condition. The Part D plan denied your 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.A request was submitted to the prescriber to provide a diagnosis and supporting medical records.  A reply from the prescriber was not received. Without a diagnosis, it cannot be established that the requested drug is being prescribed for a medically accepted indication. As such, the requested drug does not satisfy the definition of a Medicare Part D drug. Therefore, the requested drug is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D.A request for a formulary exception cannot be reviewed for the requested drug because it cannot be established that the requested drug is being prescribed for a medically accepted indication.A physician reviewed your 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 hour. 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 a tiering exception request for Nabumetone 750-milligram tablet to treat rheumatoid arthritis. 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. Nabumetone is a generic drug on Tier 3 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 Estradiol 0.12 percent 0.12-milligram/gram prescribed for unknown 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The documentation submitted shows the enrollee purchased the requested drug from a compounding pharmacy. The enrollee provided receipts for the requested drug. However, the compounding pharmacy claim form including the ingredients and National Drug Codes is not provided. Therefore, the reimbursement criteria have not been met. This decision does not address the medical necessity or appropriateness of the requested drug. It only establishes if payment can be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Fosfomycin Tromethamine 3-gram packet for prevention of urinary tract infections. 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 Temazepam 30-milligram 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 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 Cyclobenzaprine Hydrochloride 10-milligram tablets to treat fistula shoulder, fracture unspecified carpal bone, unspecified wrist initial enclosed fracture and effusion of joint. 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 Lidocaine 5-percent Patch to treat other spondylosis lumbar region. 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 a tiering exception request for Hydrocodone/Acetaminophen 10-325 milligram. 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. Hydrocodone/Acetaminophen is a generic drug on Tier 3 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 a tiering exception request for Otezla 30 milligram tablet to treat psoriasis. 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 being provided by the plan at the cost sharing level of the Specialty tier. Specialty tier drugs are not available for a tiering exception per Medicare rules. A physician reviewer determined that tiering exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Favorable

At issue is Entresto 24-26 milligram tablet to treat chronic congestive heart failure. The Part D plan denied the request.  We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. The documentation satisfies the plans coverage criteria. The prescriber provided medical records with the request for reconsideration.  The medical records support that the enrollee has NYHA class 2 chronic systolic congestive heart failure. The enrollee's echocardiogram report also documents an ejection fraction of 35-40%.    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 Entresto 24-26-milligram tablet to treat cardiomyopathy and atrial fibrillation with a history of stroke. 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. Entresto 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.