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

At issue is Cyclobenzaprine Hydrochloride 10 milligram tablets prescribed for lumbar disc degeneration. 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 lumbar disc degeneration. 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 Corlanor 5-milligram tablet to treat inappropriate sinus tachycardia. 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 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 condition. 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 Sildenafil 25 milligram tablets prescribed for pulmonary 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 records submitted at the reconsideration level. The documentation shows your doctor prescribed Sildenafil 25 milligram tablets to treat your pulmonary hypertension. However, Medicare approved compendia do not support the use of this drug for this condition.  A physician reviewed your appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover Sildenafil.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Diclofenac 3% Gel.  At initial determination and redetermination the diagnosis of chronic migraine was given. The Part D plan denied the request. We received a reconsideration request. 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.At reconsideration a diagnosis of myofascial pain of the neck was given. The use of the requested drug to treat the provided diagnoses are off-label uses. 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 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 Sirolimus 1 milligram tablets prescribed for liver transplant rejection. 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 Sirolimus for liver transplant rejection. 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 a request for coverage of Gammplex 10% solution for intravenous infusion. 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 Gammplex 10% solution has been prescribed for the treatment of autoimmune encephalitis. 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 Mycophenolate Mofetil 500 milligram tablets. 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 Mycophenolate Mofetil has been prescribed for the treatment of cicatricial pemphigoid. 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. This opinion does not address the medical necessity of this drug. This opinion addresses whether your plan is required to cover the cost of this medication. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover the requested drug.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

The enrollee requested Baclofen powder prescribed for unknown diagnosis. The Part D plan denied the enrollees 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 record shows the Baclofen powder is an ingredient within a compounded drug that is reviewed individually. According to Medicare rules, drugs that fall into the category of bulk powders are excluded from coverage under Part D. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to cover the Baclofen powder. 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

The enrollee requested Cyclobenzaprine powder prescribed for unknown diagnosis. The Part D plan denied the enrollees 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 record shows the Cyclobenzaprine powder is an ingredient within a compounded drug that is reviewed individually. According to Medicare rules, drugs that fall into the category of bulk powders are excluded from coverage under Part D. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to cover the Cyclobenzaprine powder. 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

The enrollee requested Diclofenac powder prescribed for unknown diagnosis. The Part D plan denied the enrollees 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 record shows the Diclofenac powder is an ingredient within a compounded drug that is reviewed individually. According to Medicare rules, drugs that fall into the category of bulk powders are excluded from coverage under Part D. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to cover the Diclofenac powder. 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

The enrollee requested Gabapentin powder prescribed for unknown diagnosis. The Part D plan denied the enrollees 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 record shows the Gabapentin powder is an ingredient within a compounded drug that is reviewed individually. According to Medicare rules, drugs that fall into the category of bulk powders are excluded from coverage under Part D. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to cover the Gabapentin powder. 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

The enrollee requested Lidocaine powder prescribed for unknown diagnosis. The Part D plan denied the enrollees 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 record shows the Lidocaine powder is an ingredient within a compounded drug that is reviewed individually. According to Medicare rules, drugs that fall into the category of bulk powders are excluded from coverage under Part D. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to cover the Lidocaine powder. 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

The enrollee requested Salt Stable cream prescribed for unknown diagnosis. The Part D plan denied the enrollees 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 record shows the Salt Stable cream is an ingredient within a compounded drug that is reviewed individually. The active ingredient within the compounded drug is not eligible for Part D coverage because it does not have New Drug Application (NDA), or Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA), as indicated by the Food and Drug Administration. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to cover the Salt Stable cream or provide reimbursement. 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 Lidocaine 5% patch prescribed for cervicalgia and right shoulder 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. The documentation shows Lidocaine 5% patch was prescribed to treat cervicalgia and right shoulder 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 Shingrix 50 microgram/0.5 milliliter vaccination. 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.Shingrix is a biologic on Tier 4 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 Diclofenac Sodium 3% gel prescribed for bilateral post-traumatic osteoarthritis of first carpometacarpal joints. 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.The submitted documentation indicates the prescriber ordered Diclofenac Sodium 3% gel for bilateral post-traumatic osteoarthritis of first carpometacarpal joints and rotator cuff tendonitis. The Medicare approved compendia do not support the use of the drug at issue for the enrollees conditions.  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 Colesevelam 625-milligram tablet to treat chronic diarrhea. 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 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 condition. 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 Linzess 145-microgram capsule. 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.Linzess 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 condition. Therefore, this drug is not eligible for a tiering exception.Our physician reviewer's opinion is that tiering exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Dextroamphetamine-Amphetamine 10-milligram Extended Release tablet to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. The Part D plan denied the request. The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. 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 prescriber has not provided patient specific clinical rationale, supported by medical records, as to why all formulary alternatives required by the plan would likely not be as effective as the requested drug for this condition, and/or would likely cause adverse reaction(s) or other harm. Therefore, an exception to the plans formulary coverage criteria is not medically necessary. 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 Rubraca 300 milligram tablets prescribed for metastatic malignant pleural mesothelioma. 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.The submitted documentation indicates the prescriber ordered Rubraca for metastatic malignant pleural mesothelioma. The Medicare approved compendia do not support the use of the drug at issue for the enrollees condition. There are no Medicare approved journal articles to support the use of the drug 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 Cabometyx 60 milligram tablets prescribed for metastatic adrenal cortical carcinoma. 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 Cabometyx for metastatic adrenal cortical carcinoma. The Medicare approved compendia do not support the use of the drug at issue for the enrollees condition. There are no Medicare approved journal articles to support the use of the drug 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 Bystolic 10 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.Bystolic is a brand drug on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no brand drugs of the same type on the lower cost sharing tiers. Therefore, this drug 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

The enrollee requested Armour Thyroid 60 milligram tablet prescribed daily for hyperthyroidism. The Part D plan denied the enrollees 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 Armour Thyroid. According to Microdex, Armour Thyroid has not been found by the Food and Drug Administration to be safe and effective; and the drug product label has not been approved. Therefore, the drug is excluded from coverage under Medicare Part D. This decision does not concern 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 Calcipotriene ointment 0.005% prescribed for psoriasiform spongiotic dermatitis. 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 Calcipotriene was prescribed to treat psoriasiform spongiotic dermatitis. However, the Medicare approved compendia do not support the use of this drug for the enrollees conditions. A physician reviewed your appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover Calcipotriene.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a prior authorization request for Otezla 30 milligram tablets prescribed for psoriasis. The Part D plan denied coverage.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 records submitted at the reconsideration level. The documentation on hand includes a physician supporting statement. The supporting statement does not indicate that the enrollee satisfies the plan's prior authorization 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 Anoro Ellipta 62.5-25-microgram Inhaler to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The Part D plan denied the request. The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. 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 prescriber has not provided patient specific clinical rationale, supported by medical records, as to why all formulary alternatives required by the plan would likely not be as effective as the requested drug for this condition, and/or would likely cause adverse reaction(s) or other harm. Therefore, an exception to the plans formulary coverage criteria is not medically necessary. 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 Tacrolimus 0.1% ointment prescribed for Hailey-Hailey 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.The submitted documentation indicates the prescriber ordered Tacrolimus ointment for Hailey-Hailey 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.