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

At issue is a tiering exception request for Gemtesa 75-milligram tablet to treat overactive bladder, urge incontinence. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.Gemtesa 75-milligram tablet is a brand drug on Tier 4 of the plans formulary. The prescriber has stated that all lower tiered drugs to treat the diagnosis have been tried and failed or provided reasons why they would likely not be as effective as the requested drug. Therefore, this drug is eligible for an exception.A physician reviewer determined that tiering exception criteria are met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Testosterone cypionate 200 milligram per milliliter solution. 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 a covered diagnosis and that the enrollee has satisfied the plans prior authorization coverage criteria. However, we did not receive the requested information.The submitted documentation does not include medical records or evidence of a prescribed diagnosis. Therefore, it cannot be determined if the drug was prescribed for a medically accepted indication.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Favorable

At issue is Morphine Sulfate 15 milligram tablet prescribed for unspecified diagnosis. 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 enrollee purchased the requested drug from a retail pharmacy. The plans 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. The submitted documentation includes a receipt for the requested drug and reimbursement request form. We researched Medicare resources and found that National Drug Code, 58160-823-11 is a valid code for the requested drug. In addition, information regarding the prescriber, San Wong, APRN with National Provider Identifier (NPI) number, 1972003499, Taxonomy number 364S00000X was verified with https://npiregistry.cms.hhs.gov. Therefore, we determined the plan is required to provide reimbursement for the requested drug based on the enrollee's cost share stage, as the reimbursement criteria are met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Favorable

At issue is Gabapentin 300 milligram capsule prescribed for unspecified diagnosis. 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 enrollee purchased the requested drug from a retail pharmacy. The plans 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. The submitted documentation includes a receipt for the requested drug and reimbursement request form. We researched Medicare resources and found that National Drug Code, 58160-823-11 is a valid code for the requested drug. In addition, information regarding the prescriber, San Wong, APRN with National Provider Identifier (NPI) number, 1972003499, Taxonomy number 364S00000X was verified with https://npiregistry.cms.hhs.gov. Therefore, we determined the plan is required to provide reimbursement for the requested drug based on the enrollee's cost share stage, as the reimbursement criteria are met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Methylprednisolone 4 milligram tablet prescribed for unspecified diagnosis. 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 plan submitted documentation that shows the claim for the requested drug was approved and copayment was charged correctly to the enrollee at the point of sale. The plans Evidence of Coverage indicates reimbursement is calculated based on the total cost of the drug, minus the required copayment amount, and minus the difference between what the plan approves for the drug and what the pharmacy charges. We determined this drug was paid correctly and no further reimbursement is required by the plan.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Mycophenolate Mofetil 500 milligram tablets to treat hypersensitivity pneumonitis. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The use of the requested drug to treat the provided diagnosis is an off-label use. The Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug, as prescribed, for the treatment of this diagnosis. Therefore, the requested drug is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Dulera 200-5-microgram actuation aerosol to treat asthma. 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 Potassium cl 10 milliequivalent extended-release tablets to treat the enrollee's condition. 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.Potassium cl is a generic drug on Tier 2 of the plans formulary. There are no generic drugs of the same type on the lower tiers of the plans formulary to treat the same diagnosis. Therefore, this drug is not eligible for a tiering exception.A physician reviewer determined that the tiering exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Repatha Sureclick 140 milligram per milliliter pen injector to treat mixed hyperlipidemia. 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 the enrollee has satisfied the plans prior authorization coverage criteria. However, we did not receive the requested information.The plan has prior authorization requirements for this biologic. 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 biologic is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Albuterol Hydrofluoroalkane 90 micrograms per actuation to treat pneumonia. 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. However, we did not receive the requested information.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: Favorable

At issue is Xolair 150-milligram solution to treat severe persistent asthma, allergic asthma. 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. Presciber records indicate a diagnosis of allergic asthma, a baseline IgE greater than 30 IU/ml, positive skin test for aeroallergens, and inadequate control with exacerbations and hospitalization despite using an inhaled bate agonist and corticosteroid. 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 Vitamin D2 1.2 milligram 50,000 unit capsule to treat vitamin D deficiency. 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 a tiering exception request for Ziprasidone hydrochloride 60 milligram capsule to treat bipolar disorder. 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.Ziprasidone hydrochloride 60 milligram capsule 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 a tiering exception request for Clorazepate 7.5 milligram tablets to treat anxiety. 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.Clorazepate 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: Favorable

At issue is Ibrance 100 milligram tablet prescribed to treat breast 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.Medicare rules state that Pharmaceutical Assistance Programs (PAPs) operate outside of Medicare Part D. However, the prescriber provided information indicating the enrollees PAP with the manufacturer, Pfizer ended in 2021. The documentation submitted shows the enrollee is receiving Medicare Part D copay assistance through Cancer Care for the purchases of the requested drug from January 6, 2022 through January 6, 2023. Therefore, we determined the drug is eligible for coverage under the Part D benefit based on the enrollees cost share stage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Favorable

At issue is coverage for Naloxone Hydrochloride 4 milligram per 0.1 milliliter (40 milligram per 1 milliliter) nasal spray prescribed for emergency opioid reversal of respiratory depression due to therapeutic opioid use. The Part D plan denied the request because the drug was not on the formulary and the documentation did not support a formulary exception.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 stated that the generic drug, Naloxone Hydrochloride spray, was not on the formulary but the brand drug, Narcan, was on the formulary. However, both Naloxone Hydrochloride nasal spray and Narcan are included on the formulary. They are listed separately on the formulary and are both on Tier 3 of the formulary. The provided diagnosis is a medically accepted indication for Naloxone Hydrochloride nasal spray, as outlined in the Medicare approved compendia. The plan has no prior authorization or quantity limit requirements for the drug. Since the drug is on the formulary and is being prescribed for a medically accepted indication, the submitted documentation supports coverage for the requested drug, Naloxone Hydrochloride nasal spray. 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 Procrit 10000 unit per milliliter solution to treat Anemia, Chronic kidney disease stage 4. 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 Horizant extended-release 300 milligram tablets to treat peripheral neuropathy, lumbar spondylosis, and chronic pain syndrome. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The use of the requested drug to treat the provided diagnosis is an off-label use. The Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug, as prescribed, for the treatment of this diagnosis. Therefore, the requested drug is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a non-formulary coverage request and a tiering exception request for Armour Thyroid 30 milligram tablet. The Part D plan denied both requests.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 Part D plan denied the coverage request for Armour Thyroid as it was not on the plans formulary and the provided documentation did not support a formulary exception. However, Armour Thyroid has not been found by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to be safe and effective, and the drug product labeling has not been approved by the FDA. Drugs not approved by the FDA do not meet the definition of a Part D drug and are excluded from Part D coverage. Therefore, the Armour Thyroid is not eligible for Part D coverage. As such, a formulary exception and a tiering exception are not relevant to this case.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 tiering exception request for Flovent HFA 110 microgram per actuation inhaler to treat Acute Bronchospasm. 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.Flovent HFA 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 Ablysinol solution. 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 Part B under 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 Dextroamphetamine-Amphetamine 10 milligram tablets to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. 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 Dextroamphetamine-Amphetamine 20 milligram tablets to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. 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 coverage for OxyContin 30 milligram extended-release tablet to treat chronic pain. 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.The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. In order to grant an exception for a drug not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried and failed, or deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not addressed all formulary alternatives required by the plan to treat the enrollees condition and provided patient specific clinical/medical 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 is coverage for Solifenacin 10 milligram tablet to treat symptomatic neurogenic bladder with recurrent urinary tract infections. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. In order to grant an exception for a drug not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried and failed, or deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not addressed all formulary alternatives required by the plan to treat the enrollees condition and provided patient specific clinical/medical 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.