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

At issue is a tiering exception request for Ozempic 0.25 or 0.5 milligram pen injector to treat the enrollee's condition. 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.Ozempic 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 Clobetasol Propionate 0.05 percent foam to treat seborrheic dermatitis. 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: Favorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Nurtec Oral Disintegrating Tablet 75 milligram to treat chronic migraine without aura without status migrainosus, not intractable. 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.Nurtec Oral Disintegrating Tablet 75 milligram is a brand drug on Tier 3 of the plans formulary. The prescriber has stated that all lower tiered drugs to treat the diagnosis have been tried and failed or provided reasons why they would likely not be as effective as the requested drug. On appeal prescriber sent records to indicate that there are drugs on the lower tier which are also contraindicated due to enrollee's comorbidities. Therefore, this drug is eligible for an exception. A physician reviewer determined that tiering exception criteria are met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is a tiering exception request for Alprazolam 0.5 milligram tablet to treat the enrollee's condition. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. Alprazolam 0.5 milligram tablet is a generic drug on Tier 2 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 a tiering exception request for Latanoprost 0.005 percent eye drops to treat the enrollee's condition. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.Latanoprost 0.005 percent eye drops are a generic drug on Tier 1 of the plans formulary. There are no generic drugs 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 Budesonide 0.5 milligram per 2 milliliter ampule for nebulization to be used for nasal irrigation to treat nasal obstruction and septal deviation. 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 Ozempic 1 milligram per dose (4 milligram per 3 milliliter) injection to treat the enrollee's condition. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. Ozempic 1 milligram per dose (4 milligram per 3 milliliter) injection 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 coverage for Kapspargo Sprinkle 100 milligram capsule for an enrollee with cardiomyopathy, chronic atrial fibrillation, and congestive heart failure. 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.During this review, we requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support that all formulary alternatives were tried and failed or were deemed contraindicated. However, the prescriber did not respond to our request.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 a tiering exception request for Victoza 2-pak 0.6 milligram per 0.1 milliliter pen injector to treat the enrollee's condition. 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.Victoza 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 Cayston 75 milligram per 84 milliliter solution to treat bronchiectasis with acute exacerbation. 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 Lamotrigine ER (extended release) 200 milligram tablet to treat mood disorder. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The 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 Aubagio 14 milligram tablet to treat multiple sclerosis, unspecified type. 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: Favorable

At issue is Xolair 150 milligram for solution to treat severe persistent asthma, uncomplicated, stated by the prescriber to be IgE-mediated and diagnosed as allergic asthma more than 10 years ago. 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 documentation satisfies the plans coverage criteria. The diagnosis of IgE mediated asthma is supported by a history of anaphylaxis to Marijuana/Marinol as well as a description of 'turning blue' (probable anaphylaxis) as a child when exposed to penicillin as well as significant allergic reactions to eggs, latex and milk-protein extract with numerous other allergic reactions not specifically stated. She is prescribed Epipens for anaphylaxis even at the current time. Additionally, multiple steroids are used orally, inhaled and nasally without adequate control of allergic symptoms. This information plus the prescriber statement of IgE mediated asthma will be considered adequate for a prior authorization exception. Therefore, an exception to the plan's 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 Byetta 10 microgram per 0.04 milliliter solution to treat your condition. The Part D plan denied the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.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 Insulin Glargine Solostar 100 units per milliliter to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus with peripheral artery disease. The Part D plan auto-forwarded the request.We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.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: At-Risk Determination
Decision: Unfavorable

A reconsideration request was auto-forwarded from the plan to review the at-risk determination. The plan has imposed a restriction on opioids for the enrollee. The enrollee does not have access to any opioid medication.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 records show the plan imposed a restriction on the enrollee. The enrollee is ineligible to receive any opioid medication. The plan reached out to the enrollee's prescriber to ascertain whether it was safe for the enrollee to receive opioid medications. However, the prescriber did not return any documentation or attestation to the plan. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined the plans restriction is appropriate.In conclusion, the decision of the QIC is unfavorable.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Tobradex 0.3/0.1 percent ointment to treat blepharoconjunctivitis. 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 Butalbital/Acetaminophen/Caffeine/Codeine 50/325/40/30 milligram capsule to treat migraine without aura, intractable with status migrainosus. It is not clear if this drug is being requested as a treatment for acute migraine or as routinely given preventative therapy. 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 of migraine without aura, intractable with status migrainosus has support in Medicare approved compendia. The use of this drug for the prevention of migraines; however, is an off-label use and the Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the prevention of migraines. 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. Therefore, the requested drug(s) is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D. Additionally, 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 Cyclobenzaprine Hydrochloride 10 milligram tablets to treat temporomandibular joint disorder. The Part D plan denied the request. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.The use of the requested drug to treat the provided diagnosis is an off-label use. The Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug, as prescribed, for the treatment of this diagnosis. Therefore, the requested drug(s) is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D.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 Cimzia 200 milligram per milliliter solution (x3) starter kit to treat 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 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 Otezla 10/20/30 milligram tablets to treat 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: Favorable

At issue is Kerendia 10 milligram tablets to treat chronic kidney disease (CKD) associated with type 2 diabetes. 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 documentation satisfies the plans coverage criteria. The submitted documentation supports the drug at issue was prescribed for the noted diagnosis. This is initial therapy in an enrollee that is currently receiving a maximally tolerated dosage of an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker. The prescriber now attests the enrollee will not be taking the drug at issue in combination with a strong cytochrome P450 3A4 inhibitor. The enrollee has had an inadequate response to sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor. At baseline, the enrollee's estimated glomerular filtration rate is greater than or equal to 25 milliliter per minute per 1.73 square meter. At baseline, the enrollee's urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) is greater than or equal to 30 milligram per gram. At baseline, the enrollee's serum potassium level is less than or equal to 5.0 milliequivalents per liter. Finally, the prescriber attests the enrollee's serum potassium level is being monitored while on therapy.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 coverage for Dexcom G7 Sensor. 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.Medicare classifies continuous glucose monitoring systems as durable medical equipment. Medicare rules state that Medicare Part B pays for the rental and purchase of durable medical equipment. Additionally, payment will be made under Medicare Part B for the supplies necessary for the effective use of durable medical equipment, including supplies for a continuous glucose monitoring system. Any drug/item available for coverage under Medicare Part B cannot be covered under Part D, per Medicare rules. Therefore, the requested item is not eligible for Medicare Part D coverage.This decision does not address the medical necessity of the item. It only establishes that payment cannot be made under the Medicare Part D benefit. Please submit the request for coverage through Medicare Part B.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Mounjaro 2.5 milligram per 0.5 milliliter solution to treat type II diabetes mellitus. 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.