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

At issue is Estradiol 0.5 milligram tablet. The Part D plan auto forwarded the request.We received the submitted documentation to perform an independent and de novo review.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support a diagnosis, all formulary alternatives were tried and failed or were contraindicated, and 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: Unfavorable

At issue is Diclofenac Epolamine 1.3 percent patch to treat sprain of unspecified ligament of unspecified ankle. 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 all formulary alternatives were tried and failed or were contraindicated. However, we did not receive the requested information.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 Testosterone 1.62 percent gel, 180 grams per 31 days, to treat testicular hypofunction. 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 read the case file carefully. We reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support the quantity prescribed was medically necessary for the enrollee. We received additional documentation and included it in the review.The plan limits the amount of Testosterone 1.62 percent gel to 30 packets or 37.5 grams per 30 days. The prescriber has not indicated that the number of doses of the requested drug allowed by the plan would likely be ineffective in treating the diagnosis or would be likely to cause harm. Therefore, an exception to the plans coverage criteria is not supported. 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 Vyvanse 30 milligram capsule 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.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 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 Prolensa 0.07 percent eye drop prescribed for cataract surgery. 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 plan submitted documentation that shows the enrollee was still in the deductible stage of the Part D benefit when the requested drug was purchased. The plans Evidence of Coverage states that the enrollee is responsible for the full cost of covered drugs until the deductible amount is satisfied. We determined this drug was paid correctly and no reimbursement is required by the plan.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Heplisav-B 20/0.5 milliliter injection. The Part D plan denied the request.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 Shingrix 50/0.5 milliliter injection prescribed for vaccination. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the request.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. Medicare rules state that drug claims must include a valid National Drug Code (NDC) that is listed with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The submitted documentation does not include the drugs NDC. Therefore, the reimbursement criteria have not been met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Prednisolone Sodium Phosphate 1 percent, Moxifloxacin Hydrochloride 0.5 percent, Bromfenac Sodium 0.075 percent ophthalmic solution prescribed for an unspecified diagnosis. 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. The submitted documentation shows the National Drug Codes (NDCs) provided for the compounded drug are not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Therefore, the drug is excluded from coverage under Medicare Part D and not eligible for reimbursement. 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 Trulicity 0.75 milligram per 0.5 milliliter pen prescribed for an unspecified diagnosis. 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. The submitted documentation shows the plan reprocessed the enrollees claim for the requested drug and adjusted the amount owed due to a change in the enrollees low income subsidy copayment level. Medicare records indicate the enrollee did not qualify for low income subsidy copay level for this date of fill. In this case, there is evidence to support that the plan issued a recovery notice within 45 days of the plans receipt of complete information regarding the claims adjustment. Therefore, we determined the enrollee is responsible for the required deductible and additional copay.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Coricidin maximum strength cold and flu 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 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.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Halobetasol 0.05 percent ointment purchased on 1/10/23. 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 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 claim for date 1/10/23 was processed at the point of sale and was processed for an amount that is less than or equal to the required copayment amount. Therefore, the plan paid its share of the cost for the covered drug and the enrollee was responsible for the copay. 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 Tacrolimus 0.03 percent ointment. 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 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 claim for date 1/10/23 was processed at the point of sale and was processed for an amount that is less than or equal to the required copayment amount. Therefore, the plan paid its share of the cost for the covered drug and the enrollee was responsible for the copay. 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 Rybelsus 3 milligram tablet, 30 tablets per 30 days, 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 read the case file carefully. We reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.We 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. We received additional documentation and included it in the review.The plan limits the amount of Rybelsus 3 milligram tablet to 60 tablets per 365 days. The prescriber has not indicated that the number of doses of the requested drug allowed by the plan would likely be ineffective in treating the diagnosis or would be likely to cause harm. Therefore, an exception to the plans coverage criteria is not supported. 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 Humira 40 milligram pen to treat Crohns 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.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. We received additional documentation and included it in the review.The documentation satisfies the plans coverage criteria. The information provided shows this is for continuation of care. The continuation of therapy prior authorization criteria is met as the medical records submitted state no diarrhea, no abdominal pain, and includes a statement that the enrollee has been on Humira for some time and has had good results.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 Propranolol Hydrochloride ER (extended release) 60 milligram capsule to treat 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 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 Rinvoq ER (extended release) 15 milligram tablet to treat severe 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. 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 Repatha Pushtronex 420 milligram (mg)/3.5 wear ininjection to treat pure hypercholesterolemia. 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.Repatha Pushtronex is a biologic on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no biologics of the same type on the lower tiers of the plans formulary to treat the same diagnosis. Therefore, this biologic 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 Albuterol Sulfate 2.5 milligram per 3 milliliter vial for nebulization to treat wheezing. The Part D plan denied the request.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 requested drug is being administered through a nebulizer in the home setting. Therefore, we determined the drug may be eligible for coverage under Part B under Medicare rules.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Everolimus 0.75 milligram tablet for treatment after a kidney transplant. 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 also researched Medicare systems and reviewed the enrollment data available. We determined that the plan is not required to cover the drug. Medicare records indicate the enrollee received a kidney transplant performed at a Medicare approved facility while entitled to Medicare Part A benefits at the time of the transplant. Therefore, the transplant is considered a Medicare covered transplant and the requested drug is eligible under Medicare Part B. Medicare rules state that a drug covered under Part B cannot be covered under Part D. This decision does not address the medical necessity or appropriateness of the drug. It only establishes that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Caplyta 42 milligram capsule. 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 your plans evidence of coverage rules.  A physician reviewer determined that tiering exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Wegovy 0.25 milligram per 0.5 milliliter pen injector to treat body mass index (BMI) 39.0-39.9, adult, and abnormal weight gain. 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 to treat weight gain (promote weight loss) 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 Ipratropium Albuterol 0.2 milligram per milliliter solution prescribed for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The Part D plan denied the request.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 requested drug is being administered through a nebulizer in the home setting. Therefore, we determined the drug may be eligible for coverage under Part B under Medicare rules.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Favorable

At issue is Eplerenone 25 milligram tablet to treat heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. 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 drug at issue is not on the plans formulary. The prescriber provided patient specific clinical rationale supported by documentation, indicating why the formulary alternatives, required by the plan, would likely not be as effective as the requested drug for this diagnosis, and/or would likely cause adverse reaction(s) or other harm. Therefore, an exception to the plans formulary coverage criteria is medically necessary. 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 Lidocaine 4 percent solution to treat bilateral foot 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 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 Eliquis 50 milligram tablet to reduce the risk of stroke and systemic embolism associated with atrial fibrillation. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.Eliquis is a brand drug on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no brand drugs of the same type 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 Acthar 80 units per milliliter gel to treat focal global glomerulosclerosis and membranous nephropathy due to nephrotic range proteinuria. 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 Wegovy 0.25 milligram per 0.5 milliliter to treat 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.Drugs prescribed to treat weight gain (promote weight loss) are excluded from coverage under Medicare Part D. Therefore, the requested drug is excluded from coverage.