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

At issue is coverage for Dronabinol 5 milligram capsule to treat nausea and vomiting associated with anti-epileptic drug therapy. 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 Budesonide DR (delayed release) 3 milligram capsule to treat segmental colitis associated with diverticulosis. 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 Nurtec ODT (orally disintegrating tablet) 75 milligram tablet to treat migraine. 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 Taltz 80 milligram per milliliter pen auto injector to treat moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. 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 Nuedexta 20/10 milligram capsule to treat pseudobulbar affect. 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 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 Ozempic 2 milligram per 1.5 milliliter to treat prediabetes. 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 a tiering exception request for Eliquis 5 milligram tablet for anticoagulation therapy in a person 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 available documentation.Eliquis is a brand drug on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no brand drugs of the same type to treat the same condition on the lower tiers of the plans formulary. If there are no drugs of the same type on a lower tier, the drug is not eligible for a tiering exception. 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 a tiering exception request for Rybelsus 7 milligram tablet to treat Type 2 diabetes mellitus without complication. 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.Rybelsus is a brand drug on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no brand drugs of the same type to treat the same condition on the lower tiers of the plans formulary. If there are no drugs of the same type on a lower tier, the drug is not eligible for a tiering exception. 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 coverage for Zolpidem tartrate 5 milligram tablet to treat moderate sleep disturbance associated with bipolar disorder. 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 Modafinil 200 milligram tablet to treat idiopathic hypersomnia and circadian rhythm disorder in an enrollee with Down Syndrome. 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 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 Fasenra 30 milligram/milliliter pen to treat severe persistent 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. 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 a tiering exception request for Multaq 400 milligram tablet to treat 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 available documentation.Multaq 400 milligram table is a brand drug on Tier 4 of the plans formulary. There are no brand drugs of the same type to treat the same condition on the lower tiers of the plans formulary. If there are no drugs of the same type on a lower tier, the drug is not eligible for a tiering exception. 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 coverage for Fasenra 30 milligram per milliliter solution auto-injector to treat eosinophilic asthma. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage. OWe 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 Meclizine 25 milligram tablet to treat vertigo. 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.DRUG 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 coverage for Movantik 25 milligram tablet to treat chronic constipation. 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.Movantik is a brand drug on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. There are no brand drugs of the same type to treat the same condition on the lower tiers of the plans formulary. If there are no drugs of the same type on a lower tier, the drug is not eligible for a tiering exception. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is not eligible for a tiering exception.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Favorable

At issue is coverage for Voriconazole 200 milligram tablet to treat fungal pneumonia, mycosis, serious infections due to Scedosporium apiospermum and Fusarium species, allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis. 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.During this review, we requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support a diagnosis and the enrollee has satisfied the plans prior authorization coverage criteria. We received additional documentation and included it in the review.The plan has prior authorization requirements for this drug that must be met before coverage will be provided. The submitted documentation supports that all of the plans requirements for coverage have been satisfied. Specifically, at appeal, the prescriber submitted records which documented the enrollee was transitioning from inpatient to outpatient treatment for an organism susceptible to invasive aspergillosis with fungal pneumonia. The prescriber submits the treatment of fungal pneumonia, Mycosis, Serious infections due to Scedosporium apiospermum and Fusarium species, allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis. Therefore, the plans prior authorization requirements have been met and coverage for the drug is supported.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the requested drug is eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

You requested Linzess 72 microgram capsule prescribed to treat the enrollees condition. 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 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 plans Evidence of Coverage indicates reimbursement is calculated based on the total cost of the drug, minus your required copayment amount, and minus the difference between what the plan normally pays for the drug and what the pharmacy charged you. Your share of the cost when you get a one-month supply of a covered Part D prescription drug: Cost-Sharing Tier 3 (Brand) Standard retail cost sharing (in-network) $4.30 copay. The record shows the plan paid its share of the cost for the Linzess 72 microgram capsule and the remaining amount was your copay for a tier 3 drug filled at a preferred pharmacy. 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 coverage for Modafinil 200 milligram tablet to treat major depressive disorder. 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.Modafinil is a generic drug on Tier 4 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 a compound containing Benzalkonium Chloride. 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 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) indicates the National Drug Code provided for Benzalkonium Chloride is not an FDA approved NDC. Therefore, it is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D. The decision does not address medical necessity of the drug. It only indicates that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a compound containing Sterile Water. 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 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) indicates the National Drug Code provided for Sterile Water is not an FDA approved NDC. Therefore, it is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D. The decision does not address medical necessity of the drug. It only indicates that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is reimbursement for Breo Ellipta aerosol powder 200/2f5tmicrogram per actuation to treat the enrollees 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The submitted documentation shows the enrollee is requesting reimbursement for the for Breo Ellipta aerosol powder 200/2f5tmicrogram per actuation. 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, proof of payment in the form of a receipt showing the amount that was paid by the enrollee, and a physician's statement including the prescriber's National Provider Identifier (NPI) number and National Drug Code (NDC) of the requested vaccine was not provided. Therefore, the reimbursement criteria have not been met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is reimbursement for Eliquis 5 milligram tablet to treat the enrollees 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The submitted documentation shows the enrollee is requesting reimbursement for the for Eliquis 5 milligram tablet. 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, proof of payment in the form of a receipt showing the amount that was paid by the enrollee, and a physician's statement including the prescriber's National Provider Identifier (NPI) number and National Drug Code (NDC) of the requested vaccine was not provided. Therefore, the reimbursement criteria have not been met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is reimbursement for Hydralazine Hydrochloride 25 milligram tablet to treat the enrollees 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The submitted documentation shows the enrollee is requesting reimbursement for the for Hydralazine Hydrochloride 25 milligram tablet. 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, proof of payment in the form of a receipt showing the amount that was paid by the enrollee, and a physician's statement including the prescriber's National Provider Identifier (NPI) number and National Drug Code (NDC) of the requested vaccine was not provided. Therefore, the reimbursement criteria have not been met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is reimbursement for Hydralazine Hydrochloride 50 milligram tablet to treat the enrollees 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The submitted documentation shows the enrollee is requesting reimbursement for the for Hydralazine Hydrochloride 50 milligram tablet. 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, proof of payment in the form of a receipt showing the amount that was paid by the enrollee, and a physician's statement including the prescriber's National Provider Identifier (NPI) number and National Drug Code (NDC) of the requested vaccine was not provided. Therefore, the reimbursement criteria have not been met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is reimbursement for Isosorbide Mononitrate 30 milligram ER f(extended release) 24 hour tablet to treat the enrollees 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. This includes the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The submitted documentation shows the enrollee is requesting reimbursement for the for Isosorbide Mononitrate 30 milligram ER f(extended release) 24 hour tablet. 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, proof of payment in the form of a receipt showing the amount that was paid by the enrollee, and a physician's statement including the prescriber's National Provider Identifier (NPI) number and National Drug Code (NDC) of the requested vaccine was not provided. Therefore, the reimbursement criteria have not been met.