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

At issue is coverage for Ozempic 4 milligram per 3 milliliter (1 milligram per dose) solution pen-injector, 3 milliliters per 21 days, to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus. The Part D 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 documentation submitted.During this review, we requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support that the quantity prescribed was medically necessary for the enrollee. However, we did not receive the requested information.The requested amount of 3 milliliters per 21 days exceeds the plans quantity limit for the drug, which is 3 milliliters per 28 days. The submitted documentation does not support the medical necessity for an exception to the plans quantity limit for the drug. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug at the requested amount is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Nuedexta 20-10 milligram (mg) capsule to treat pseudobulbar affect. 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.Nuedexta 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 a tiering exception request for Jardiance 10 milligram tablet to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus without complications. 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. Jardiance 10 milligram tablet 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 Aprepitant 80 milligram capsule to treat chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. 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 Dulera 200/5 micrograms prescribed for chronic cough. 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. This decision does not speak to the medical necessity of this drug; it speaks to whether the Part D drug plan is responsible for payment under the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) rules. 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 Rybelsus 3 milligram tablet to treat uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus with hyperglycemia. 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. To grant an exception for a drug that is not on the plans formulary, alternative formulary drugs must have been tried and failed, or deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not provided valid patient-specific clinical rationale as to why all of the formulary alternative drugs listed by the plan would likely not be as effective as the requested drug and/or would likely cause adverse reactions or other harm. It should be noted that three of the formulary alternative drugs listed by the Part D plan, Farxiga, Qtern, and Pioglitazone, are all oral medications. 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 a tiering exception request for Eliquis 5 milligram tablet for prophylaxis of thromboembolism in an enrollee 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 5 milligram tablet 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 conditions. 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 Rinvoq extended release (ER) 24 hour 15 milligram tablets to treat atopic dermatitis, unspecified, psoriasis vulgaris, and plaque psoriasis. 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 Estriol powder prescribed to treat mastocytosis. 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.Drugs that fall into the category of bulk powders do not meet the definition of a Part D drug. The requested drug is considered a bulk powder and is excluded from coverage under Part D. This decision does not address the medical necessity or appropriateness of the requested drug. It only establishes if payment can be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Naltrexone Hydrochloride powder prescribed to treat mastocytosis. 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.Drugs that fall into the category of bulk powders do not meet the definition of a Part D drug. The requested drug is considered a bulk powder and is excluded from coverage under Part D. This decision does not address the medical necessity or appropriateness of the requested drug. It only establishes if payment can be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Thyroid powder prescribed to treat mastocytosis. 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.Drugs that fall into the category of bulk powders do not meet the definition of a Part D drug. The requested drug is considered a bulk powder and is excluded from coverage under Part D. This decision does not address the medical necessity or appropriateness of the requested drug. It only establishes if payment can be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Versa Base cream prescribed to treat mastocytosis. 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.Drugs that fall into the category of bulk ingredients do not meet the definition of a Part D drug. The requested drug is considered a bulk ingredient and is excluded from coverage under Part D. This decision does not address the medical necessity or appropriateness of the requested drug. It only establishes if payment can be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Cabergoline 0.5 milligram tablet to treat benign neoplasm of pituitary gland, pituitary macroadenoma. 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. Cabergoline 0.5 milligram tablet is a generic drug on Tier 3 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 Hizentra 4 gram per 20 milliliter vial via subcutaneous pump. 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 record shows Hizentra is being administered to the enrollee subcutaneously through an external infusion pump used in the home. According to Medicare rules, Medicare Part B pays for the rental and purchase of durable medical equipment, if the equipment used in the patients home. Payment may be made for supplies necessary for the effective use of DME, including drugs and biologicals, which must be put directly into the equipment to achieve the therapeutic benefit of the durable medical equipment. The Medicare policy supports the enrollees diagnosis is eligible for coverage under Medicare Part B. We determined that the Medicare Part D plan is not required to cover Hizentra. This decision does not address the medical necessity or appropriateness of the requested drug. It only establishes if payment can be made under the Medicare Part D benefit. Please note, this reconsideration decision was based on the plans 2022 coverage criteria.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Hizentra 4 gram per 20 milliliter vial via subcutaneous pump. 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 record shows Hizentra is being administered to the enrollee subcutaneously through an external infusion pump used in the home. According to Medicare rules, Medicare Part B pays for the rental and purchase of durable medical equipment, if the equipment used in the patients home. Payment may be made for supplies necessary for the effective use of DME, including drugs and biologicals, which must be put directly into the equipment to achieve the therapeutic benefit of the durable medical equipment. The Medicare policy supports the enrollees diagnosis is eligible for coverage under Medicare Part B. We determined that the Medicare Part D plan is not required to cover Hizentra. This decision does not address the medical necessity or appropriateness of the requested drug. It only establishes if payment can be made under the Medicare Part D benefit. Please note, this reconsideration decision was based on the plans 2023 coverage criteria.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Hydroxyzine Hydrochloride 10 milligram tablet to treat generalized anxiety disorder. 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 documentation submitted.The Part D plan has prior authorization requirements that have to be met before coverage of this drug is approved. The available documentation does not confirm that all of the plans coverage requirements have been met. During this review, a request was submitted to the prescriber to address the plans coverage requirements for the requested drug. The prescriber did not respond to the request. As such, there is insufficient documentation to support that the plans prior authorization criteria have been satisfied. 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 Arikayce 590 milligram per 8.4 milliliter vial to treat pulmonary Mycobacterium Avium complex. 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. In the reconsideration appeal the prescriber provided medical records and an appeal letter dated December 21, 2022. The medical records support the diagnosis of pulmonary Mycobacterium Avium complex. The enrollee has already tried and failed: Rifamycin, Ethembutol, Risabutin, Azithromycin, and Clarithromycin. 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 Zolpidem Tartrate 10 milligram tablets to treat insomnia, 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 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 Botox 100 unit vial prescribed for the treatment of chronic migraine without aura, intractable without status migrainosus. 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 plan submitted documentation showing coverage for the requested drug was allowed by Medicare Part B. The plans Evidence of Coverage states, that drugs are excluded from Part D coverage, for which payment would be available under Parts A or B. Therefore, the requested drug is excluded from coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Repatha Sureclick 140 milligram per milliliter solution auto-injector to treat mixed hyperlipidemia in an enrollee with coronary artery 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 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 Dabigatran 150 milligram capsule as prophylaxis to reduce risk of stroke and systemic embolism associated with paroxysmal 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.Dabigatran is a generic drug on Tier 4 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: Favorable

At issue is Rizatriptan 10 milligram tablet, 10 per 30 days, to treat intractable chronic migraine. 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 plan limits the amount of Rizatriptan 10 milligram tablet to 12 per 30 days. The requested quantity is within the plans allowed quantity limit. 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 Azathioprine 50 milligram tablet to treat arthropathy, 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 Diclofenac Epolamine 1.3 percent patch to treat myofascial pain and non-Hodgkins lymphoma, 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 coverage for Ztlido 1.8 percent patch to treat chronic back 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, including the case file from the plan and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.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 deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not provided patient-specific clinical rationale as to why the formulary alternative drug listed by the plan, Lidocaine patch (generic Ztlido), 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 a tiering exception request for Methadone Hydrochloride 10 milligram tablet to provide pain relief from radiculopathy, lumbar region. 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.Methadone Hydrochloride 10 milligram tablet 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.