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

At issue is reimbursement for Hydromorphone Hydrochloride 4 milligram tablet prescribed to treat an unspecified 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The submitted documentation shows the enrollee is requesting additional reimbursement for the requested drug purchased at an out of network hospital pharmacy. 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. In this case, documentation was provided showing the Medicare contracted price for the prescription was more than the plan allowed. The plan will only reimburse up to the contracted price of the drug, minus any deductible, copay or coinsurance. Therefore, we determined that the plan calculated reimbursement correctly and is not required to offer additional reimbursement.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is reimbursement for Jardiance 10 milligram tablet prescribed to treat an unspecified 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The submitted documentation shows the enrollee is requesting additional reimbursement for the requested drug purchased at an out of network hospital pharmacy. 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. In this case, documentation was provided showing the Medicare contracted price for the prescription was more than the plan allowed. The plan will only reimburse up to the contracted price of the drug, minus any deductible, copay or coinsurance. Therefore, we determined that the plan calculated reimbursement correctly and is not required to offer additional reimbursement.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is reimbursement for Lantus 100 unit/milliliter solution prescribed to treat an unspecified 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The submitted documentation shows the enrollee is requesting additional reimbursement for the requested drug purchased at an out of network hospital pharmacy. 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. In this case, documentation was provided showing the Medicare contracted price for the prescription was more than the plan allowed. The plan will only reimburse up to the contracted price of the drug, minus any deductible, copay or coinsurance. Therefore, we determined that the plan calculated reimbursement correctly and is not required to offer additional reimbursement.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is reimbursement for Losartan Potassium 50 milligram tablet prescribed to treat an unspecified 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The submitted documentation shows the enrollee is requesting additional reimbursement for the requested drug purchased at an out of network hospital pharmacy. 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. In this case, documentation was provided showing the Medicare contracted price for the prescription was more than the plan allowed. The plan will only reimburse up to the contracted price of the drug, minus any deductible, copay or coinsurance. Therefore, we determined that the plan calculated reimbursement correctly and is not required to offer additional reimbursement.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is reimbursement for Meloxicam 7.5 milligram tablet prescribed to treat an unspecified 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The submitted documentation shows the enrollee is requesting additional reimbursement for the requested drug purchased at an out of network hospital pharmacy. 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. In this case, documentation was provided showing the Medicare contracted price for the prescription was more than the plan allowed. The plan will only reimburse up to the contracted price of the drug, minus any deductible, copay or coinsurance. Therefore, we determined that the plan calculated reimbursement correctly and is not required to offer additional reimbursement.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is reimbursement for Metformin Hydrochloride 500 milligram tablet prescribed to treat an unspecified 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The submitted documentation shows the enrollee is requesting additional reimbursement for the requested drug purchased at an out of network hospital pharmacy. 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. In this case, documentation was provided showing the Medicare contracted price for the prescription was more than the plan allowed. The plan will only reimburse up to the contracted price of the drug, minus any deductible, copay or coinsurance. Therefore, we determined that the plan calculated reimbursement correctly and is not required to offer additional reimbursement.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is reimbursement for Oxycodone Hydrochloride 5 milligram tablet prescribed to treat an unspecified 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The submitted documentation shows the enrollee is requesting additional reimbursement for the requested drug purchased at an out of network hospital pharmacy. 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. In this case, documentation was provided showing the Medicare contracted price for the prescription was more than the plan allowed. The plan will only reimburse up to the contracted price of the drug, minus any deductible, copay or coinsurance. Therefore, we determined that the plan calculated reimbursement correctly and is not required to offer additional reimbursement.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is reimbursement for Pregabalin 75 milligram capsule prescribed to treat an unspecified 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The submitted documentation shows the enrollee is requesting additional reimbursement for the requested drug purchased at an out of network hospital pharmacy. 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. In this case, documentation was provided showing the Medicare contracted price for the prescription was more than the plan allowed. The plan will only reimburse up to the contracted price of the drug, minus any deductible, copay or coinsurance. Therefore, we determined that the plan calculated reimbursement correctly and is not required to offer additional reimbursement.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Senna Laxative 8.6 milligram tablet. 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 available Over the Counter are excluded from coverage under Medicare Part D. Therefore, the requested drug is excluded from coverage and not eligible for reimbursement.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is reimbursement for Tranexamic Acid 650 milligram tablet prescribed to treat an unspecified 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The submitted documentation shows the enrollee is requesting additional reimbursement for the requested drug purchased at an out of network hospital pharmacy. 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. In this case, documentation was provided showing the Medicare contracted price for the prescription was more than the plan allowed. The plan will only reimburse up to the contracted price of the drug, minus any deductible, copay or coinsurance. Therefore, we determined that the plan calculated reimbursement correctly and is not required to offer additional reimbursement.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Rapaflo 4 milligram capsule to treat high tone pelvic floor 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 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 plan noted that Rapaflo is non-formulary. Formulary exceptions cannot be considered for a drug which 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 Morphine Sulfate 30 milligram extended release tablet to treat chronic 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 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 Megestrol acetate 40 milligrams per milliliter suspension to treat anorexia and dysphagia associated with weight loss in an enrollee with chronic kidney 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 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 Glimepiride 2 milligram tablet to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus. 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 information to address the prior authorization criteria. 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 Cyproheptadine Hydrochloride (HCL) 4 milligram tablet. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the submitted documentation to perform an independent and de novo review.The submitted documentation does not include medical records or evidence of a covered 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: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Lisinopril 20 milligram tablet. The Part D plan denied the request and then auto-forwarded the case to us for review. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted.Lisinopril 20 milligram tablet is a generic drug on Tier 1 of the plans formulary, which is the lowest cost-sharing tier of the formulary. There are no lower cost-sharing tiers. Since it is already on the lowest cost-sharing tier, the requested drug is not eligible for a tiering exception.A physician reviewer determined that the tiering exception criteria have not been met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Rhopressa 0.02 percent drops to treat other specified glaucoma. 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. Rhopressa 0.02 percent drops 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 diagnosis. Therefore, this drug is not eligible for a tiering exception. A physician reviewer determined that the tiering exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Xarelto 2.5 milligram tablet 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.Xarelto 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 Viberzi 75 milligram tablet to treat diarrhea. 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 HyQvia 2.5 gram per 25 milliliter kit to treat nonfamilial hypogammaglobulinemia. 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 Tadalafil 20 milligram tablet to treat male erectile dysfunction and pulmonary hypertension, unspecified. The Part D plan denied the request.  We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. The use of the requested drug to treat the provided diagnosis is an off-label use. The Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug, as prescribed, for the treatment of this diagnosis. Therefore, the requested drug(s) is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Cequa 0.09 percent solution to treat dry eye 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.Cequa 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 Icosapent Ethyl 1 gram capsule to treat hypertriglyceridemia. 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.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. In addition, a tiering exception cannot be approved for a drug that is not on the plans formulary.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 Toujeo Solostar 300 unit per milliliter solution pen-injector to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus with microalbuminemia and nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. 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.Toujeo Solostar is a biologic drug on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no biologics of the same type to treat the noted condition on the lower tiers of the plans formulary. If there are no biologics of the same type on a lower tier, the biologic drug is not eligible for a tiering exception. A physician reviewer determined that tiering exception criteria have not been met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Nurtec 75 milligram oral disintegrating tablets, 15 tablets per 30 days, to treat acute migraine headache. 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 Entresto 24 milligram/26 milligram tablet to treat unspecified diastolic (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.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.