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

At issue is coverage for Quviviq 25 milligram tablet to treat insomnia. 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 available documentation. The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. To grant an exception for a drug that is not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried and failed or must be deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not provided patient-specific clinical rationale as to why the alternative drugs on the plans formulary to treat the enrollees condition would likely not be as effective as the requested drug and/or would likely cause adverse reactions or other harm. Additionally, the submitted documentation does not support that the enrollee has tried and failed all of the formulary alternative drugs. Therefore, the formulary exception requirements 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 Xdemvy 0.25 percent solution to treat dry eye syndrome of bilateral lacrimal glands. 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 available documentation. In order for a drug to be covered by Medicare Part D, it must be prescribed for a medically accepted indication outlined in the Medicare approved compendia. The diagnosis initially provided to the plan for the requested drug was dry eye syndrome of bilateral lacrimal glands. However, the use of the requested drug to treat the noted condition 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.  At reconsideration, a new diagnosis of blepharitis, demodex has been noted. However, this diagnosis was not initially provided to the plan. Furthermore, no medical records have been submitted to validate this additional diagnosis. As such, due to the conflicting information provided and a lack of supporting medical records, it cannot be established that the requested drug has been prescribed for a medically accepted indication. As this drug is not established as being prescribed for a medically accepted indication, it is not eligible for consideration for a formulary exception. 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 Testosterone Cypionate 200 milligram per milliliter solution to treat primary hypogonadotropic hypogonadism. 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 available documentation.The plan has prior authorization requirements for this drug that must be met before coverage will be provided. The submitted documentation does not support that all of the plans requirements for coverage have been satisfied. Furthermore, the documentation does not support the medical necessity for an exception to the plans prior authorization requirements.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 Lantus Solostar 100 unit per milliliter insulin pen to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus. 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 available documentation. The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. To grant an exception for a drug that is not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried and failed or must be deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not provided patient-specific clinical rationale as to why the alternative drugs on the plans formulary to treat the enrollees condition would likely not be as effective as the requested drug and/or would likely cause adverse reactions or other harm. Additionally, the submitted documentation does not support that the enrollee has tried and failed all of the formulary alternative drugs. Therefore, the formulary exception requirements 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 Gocovri 137 milligram capsule extended release to treat Parkinsons disease, dyskinesia, dystonia. 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 available documentation. The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. To grant an exception for a drug that is not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried and failed or must be deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not provided patient-specific clinical rationale as to why the alternative drugs on the plans formulary to treat the enrollees condition would likely not be as effective as the requested drug and/or would likely cause adverse reactions or other harm. Additionally, the submitted documentation does not support that the enrollee has tried and failed all of the formulary alternative drugs. Therefore, the formulary exception requirements 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 Symbicort 80/4.5 microgram per actuation aerosol to treat asthma. 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 available documentation. The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. To grant an exception for a drug that is not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried and failed or must be deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not provided patient-specific clinical rationale as to why the alternative drugs on the plans formulary to treat the enrollees condition would likely not be as effective as the requested drug and/or would likely cause adverse reactions or other harm. Additionally, the submitted documentation does not validate that the enrollee has tried and failed all of the formulary alternative drugs. Therefore, the formulary exception requirements 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 Forteo 600 micrograms per 2.4 milliliter subcutaneous solution to treat osteoporosis. 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 available documentation.  In order for a drug to be covered by Medicare Part D, it must be prescribed for a medically accepted indication outlined in the Medicare approved compendia. The use of the requested drug to treat the noted condition 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 drug is being prescribed for a non-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 coverage for Ojjaara 200 milligram tablet to treat chronic myeloproliferative disease. The Part D plan 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 available documentation. The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. To grant an exception for a drug that is not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried and failed or must be deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not provided patient-specific clinical rationale as to why the alternative drugs on the plans formulary to treat the enrollees condition would likely not be as effective as the requested drug and/or would likely cause adverse reactions or other harm. Additionally, the submitted documentation does not support that the enrollee has tried and failed all of the formulary alternative drugs. Therefore, the formulary exception requirements 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 Insulin Aspart Flexpen 100 units per milliliter insulin pen to treat insulin-dependent diabetes. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage 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 available documentation. The requested drug is not on the plans formulary. To grant an exception for a drug that is not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried and failed or must be deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not provided patient-specific clinical rationale as to why the alternative drugs on the plans formulary to treat the enrollees condition would likely not be as effective as the requested drug and/or would likely cause adverse reactions or other harm. Additionally, the submitted documentation does not support that the enrollee has tried and failed all of the formulary alternative drugs. Therefore, the formulary exception requirements 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 Lidocaine 5 percent ointment to treat lower back pain and joint pain in enrollee with degenerative arthritis. 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 available documentation.During this review, we requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support that the medication is being prescribed for a medical accepted indication and that the enrollee has satisfied the plans prior authorization coverage criteria. However, the prescriber did not respond to our request.In order for a drug to be covered by Medicare Part D, it must be prescribed for a medically accepted indication outlined in the Medicare approved compendia. The noted conditions are off-label uses for the requested drug. The Medicare-approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug, as prescribed, for the treatment of these conditions. Therefore, the drug is being prescribed for non-medically accepted indications.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 Clobetasol 0.05 percent ointment. The Part D plan 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 available documentation.In order for a drug to be covered by Medicare Part D, it must be prescribed for a medically accepted indication outlined in the Medicare approved compendia. The submitted documentation does not include medical records or evidence of a prescribed diagnosis. During this review, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement from the prescriber to support a coverable diagnosis and to address the alternative drugs included in the plans formulary to treat the diagnosis. The prescriber did not respond to the request. Therefore, there is insufficient documentation available to establish that the requested drug has been 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 Gabapentin 600 milligram tablet to treat an unknown 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 available documentation.During this review, we requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support that all lower-tiered drugs to treat the enrollees condition were tried and failed or were deemed contraindicated. However, the prescriber did not respond to our request.Gabapentin is a generic drug on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. The prescriber has not provided patient-specific clinical rationale as to why all of the lower-tiered alternative drugs on the plans formulary to treat the enrollees condition are contraindicated. Therefore, the tiering exception requirements have not been met. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for a tiering exception.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is reimbursement for Metoptolol Succinate extended release 100 milligram tablet prescribed for unknown diagnosis. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted. This includes the case file from the plan and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. The plan provided claim information for the enrollee indicating the drug at issue was dispensed at a pharmacy not in the plans network on the date the prescription was filled. In these instances, the enrollee may be responsible for paying the difference between what he/she pays for the drug at the out of network pharmacy and the cost that the plan would cover at an in network pharmacy. The documentation does not support an extreme emergency that would require the drug be immediately supplied and the drug could have been received from a network pharmacy. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to provide reimbursement for the requested drug.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Oxycontin 20 milligram extended release tablet prescribed for an unknown diagnosis. 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The submitted documentation shows the enrollee filled a prescription for the requested drug. The plans Evidence of Coverage states, if the enrollee pays the full cost of a prescription, then they may submit a request for reimbursement with proof of payment to ask the plan to pay its share of the cost. In this case, the amount owed is supplied but proof of payment in the form of a receipt showing the amount that was paid for the drug was not provided. Therefore, the reimbursement criteria have not been met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is reimbursement for Oxycodone Hydrochloride IR (immediate release) 30 milligram tablet, 140 tablets per 30 days to treat the enrollees condition. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage 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 available documentation. The plan provided claim information for the enrollee indicating the drug at issue was dispensed at a pharmacy not in the plans network on the date the prescription was filled. The plan states that if you go elsewhere without proper authorization you will have to pay in full. The only exceptions are emergencies, urgently needed services when the network is not available (that is, in situations when it is unreasonable or not possible to obtain services in-network). The documentation does not support an extreme emergency that would require the drug be immediately supplied and the drug could have been received from a network pharmacy. We determined that the plan is not required to reimburse you for Oxycodone Hydrochloride IR 30 milligram tablet, 140 tablets per 30 days.This decision does not address the medical necessity 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 coverage for Acetaminophen/Dextromethorphan/Phenylephrine tablet to treat COVID 19 viral infection. 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 available documentation. Acetaminophen/Dextromethorphan/Phenylephrine is available over the counter without a prescription. Drugs available without a prescription, even when a prescription has been written, are excluded from coverage under Medicare Part D. Therefore, the requested drug is excluded from Medicare Part D coverage. This decision does not address the medical necessity 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 Azithromycin 250 milligram capsule prescribed for COVID 19 viral infection. 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 available documentationThe submitted documentation shows the enrollee requested the Part D plan to provide reimbursement for the requested drug. However, there is missing information needed to consider the request. The required information does not includes the National Drug Code (NDC) of the requested drug. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to reimburse the enrollee without the required information.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Ketalorac 30 milligram vial prescribed for COVID 19 viral infection. 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 available documentationThe submitted documentation shows the enrollee requested the Part D plan to provide reimbursement for the requested drug. However, there is missing information needed to consider the request. The required information does not includes the National Drug Code (NDC) of the requested drug. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to reimburse the enrollee without the required information.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is connector intravenous adapter prescribed for COVID 19 viral infection. 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 requested product is considered a device by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The Part D plan does not cover devices. Therefore, the product is excluded from coverage under Medicare Part D.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is intravenous tubing prescribed for COVID 19 viral infection. 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 requested product is considered a device by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The Part D plan does not cover devices. Therefore, the product is excluded from coverage under Medicare Part D.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Lever Lock injection plug prescribed for COVID 19 viral infection. 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 requested product is considered a device by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The Part D plan does not cover devices. Therefore, the product is excluded from coverage under Medicare Part D.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is non latex gloves prescribed for COVID 19 viral infection. 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 requested product is considered a device by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The Part D plan does not cover devices. Therefore, the product is excluded from coverage under Medicare Part D.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is View Guard prescribed for COVID 19 viral infection. 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 requested product is considered a device by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The Part D plan does not cover devices. Therefore, the product is excluded from coverage under Medicare Part D.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Ondansetron 8 milligram ampule prescribed for COVID 19 viral infection. 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 available documentationThe submitted documentation shows the enrollee requested the Part D plan to provide reimbursement for the requested drug. However, there is missing information needed to consider the request. The required information does not includes the National Drug Code (NDC) of the requested drug. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to reimburse the enrollee without the required information.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Pantoprazole 40 milligram vial prescribed for COVID 19 viral infection. 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 available documentationThe submitted documentation shows the enrollee requested the Part D plan to provide reimbursement for the requested drug. However, there is missing information needed to consider the request. The required information does not includes the National Drug Code (NDC) of the requested drug. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to reimburse the enrollee without the required information.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is PLR 500 milliliter solution prescribed for COVID 19 viral infection. 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 available documentationThe submitted documentation shows the enrollee requested the Part D plan to provide reimbursement for the requested drug. However, there is missing information needed to consider the request. The required information does not includes the National Drug Code (NDC) of the requested drug. Therefore, we determined that the plan is not required to reimburse the enrollee without the required information.