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

At issue is coverage for Venclexta 100 milligram tablet, to be given with Dexamethasone, to treat refractory multiple myeloma that does not have t11;14 translocation. 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 Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug, as prescribed, for treatment of refractory multiple myeloma without the presence of t11;14 translocation. The submitted documentation does not include any clinically relevant, peer-reviewed medical literature from a Medicare approved journal to support this appeal. Therefore, the available documentation supports that the requested drug is not being prescribed for a medically accepted indication, as defined by Medicare.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 Nucynta 50 milligram tablet to treat 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 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. Additionally, the submitted documentation does not support that the enrollee has tried and failed 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 Erlotinib Hydrochloride 150 milligram tablet, to be given with Methotrexate, to treat metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of oral cavity. 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 Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug, as prescribed, for treatment of the noted condition. The submitted documentation does not include any clinically relevant, peer-reviewed medical literature from a Medicare approved journal to support this appeal. Therefore, the available documentation supports that the requested drug is not being prescribed for a medically accepted indication, as defined by Medicare.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 Tibsovo 250 milligram tablet, to be used as first-line therapy, to treat newly-diagnosed metastatic cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation. 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 Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug as first-line therapy for treatment of the noted condition. The submitted documentation does not include any clinically relevant, peer-reviewed medical literature from a Medicare approved journal to support this appeal. Therefore, the available documentation supports that the requested drug is not being prescribed for a medically accepted indication, as defined by Medicare.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 Scemblix 40 milligram tablet to treat Philadelphia chromosome positive B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia. 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 Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug, as prescribed, for treatment of the noted condition. The submitted documentation does not include any clinically relevant, peer-reviewed medical literature from a Medicare approved journal to support this appeal. Therefore, the available documentation supports that the requested drug is not being prescribed for a medically accepted indication, as defined by Medicare.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 Krazati 200 milligram tablet to treat advanced ovarian cancer with KRAS mutation. 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 Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of the requested drug, as prescribed, for treatment of the noted condition. The submitted documentation does not include any clinically relevant, peer-reviewed medical literature from a Medicare approved journal to support this appeal. Therefore, the available documentation supports that the requested drug is not being prescribed for a medically accepted indication, as defined by Medicare.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 Oxycodone Hydrochloride IR (immediate release) 10 milligram tablet to treat chronic pain 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.The plan has prior authorization requirements for this drug that must be met before coverage will be provided. The submitted documentation does not confirm 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 Praluent 150 milligram per milliliter pen to treat hyperlipidemia in the setting of coronary artery disease. 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 a tiering exception request for Breo Ellipta 200/25 microgram per actuation inhalation powder to treat reactive airway 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 available documentation.Breo Ellipta 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 Gocovri 68.5 milligram extended release (ER) capsule to treat Parkinsons disease. 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 available medical records/progress notes do 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 Repatha Sureclick 140 milligram per milliliter solution auto-injector. 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 submitted documentation does not include medical records or evidence of a prescribed diagnosis. The documentation submitted at reconsideration also does not include medical records or evidence of a prescribed diagnosis. As such, there is insufficient documentation available to establish that the requested drug has been prescribed for a medically accepted indication.Additionally, if a medically accepted indication was provided, 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 drug on the plans formulary, Praluent, 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 the formulary alternative drug. 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 Vyvanse 70 milligram capsule to treat attention-deficit hyperactivity 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.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 all of 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 medical records do not confirm 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 Prevymis 480 milligram tablet for the prophylaxis of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in a kidney transplant in a CMV-seropositive enrollee. 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 Tizanidine Hydrochloride 4 milligram tablet to treat the enrollee's condition. 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 a diagnosis. There was a safety concern the plan sent for review regarding duplicate therapy, which posed a safety issue. We requested information from the prescriber regarding the duplicate therapy. However, the prescriber did not respond to our request.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. The documentation submitted at reconsideration also does not include medical records or evidence of a prescribed diagnosis. As such, insufficient documentation is 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 coverage for Lidocaine 5 percent patch to treat fibromyalgia and lumbar spinal stenosis. 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 a prescriber statement and medical records from the prescriber to clarify the condition(s) being treated and to address the plans prior authorization requirements for coverage of this drug. The prescriber did not respond to the 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 Rybelsus 3 milligram tablets to treat the enrollee's condition. 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 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 submitted documentation does not include medical records or evidence of a prescribed diagnosis. This information was requested by the Part D plan with no response from the prescriber/prescribers office. As such, 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 Dofetilide 250 microgram capsule to treat chronic combined systolic and diastolic congestive heart failure with ischemic cardiomyopathy. 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 a prescriber statement and supporting medical records from the prescriber to address the plans lower-tiered drugs to treat the enrollees condition. The prescriber responded and the additional documentation has been included it in the review.Dofetilide 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 drugs on the lower tiers of the plans formulary to treat the enrollees condition are contraindicated. Additionally, the submitted medical records do not confirm that the enrollee has tried and failed all of the lower-tiered alternative drugs. As such, 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 tiering exception request for Xiidra 5 percent droperette to treat dry eye syndrome. 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.Xiidra 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 Potassium Chloride 20 milliequivalent (mEq) controlled release (CR) tablet prescribed for 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 was administered the requested drug on February 3, 2023. 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 or physician's statement showing the amount that was paid by the enrollee was not provided. Therefore, the reimbursement criteria have not been met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Lidocaine 5 percent patch to treat chronic back pain with lumbar radiculopathy. 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 clarify the condition being treated and to address the plans prior authorization requirements for coverage of the drug. We received additional documentation and included it in the review. 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 Mycophenolate 250 milligram capsule prescribed for kidney transplant rejection prophylaxis. 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. Additionally, we researched Medicare systems.Medicare systems show that the enrollee was eligible for Medicare Part A coverage from March 1, 2008, through January 31, 2012. Therefore, the enrollee was eligible for Medicare Part A coverage when undergoing a kidney transplant on January 31, 2009. If the enrollee was eligible for Medicare Part A coverage on the date of the transplant, immunosuppressive drugs prescribed for transplant rejection prophylaxis would be covered under Medicare Part B. Medicare rules state that any drug available for coverage under Medicare Part B cannot be covered under Part D. Therefore, the requested drug is not eligible for 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. Please submit the request for coverage through Medicare Part B.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Tacrolimus IR (immediate release) 1 milligram capsule prescribed for kidney transplant rejection prophylaxis. 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. Additionally, we researched Medicare systems.Medicare systems show that the enrollee was eligible for Medicare Part A coverage from March 1, 2008, through January 31, 2012. Therefore, the enrollee was eligible for Medicare Part A coverage when undergoing a kidney transplant on January 31, 2009. If the enrollee was eligible for Medicare Part A coverage on the date of the transplant, immunosuppressive drugs prescribed for transplant rejection prophylaxis would be covered under Medicare Part B. Medicare rules state that any drug available for coverage under Medicare Part B cannot be covered under Part D. Therefore, the requested drug is not eligible for 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. Please submit the request for coverage through Medicare Part B.