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

At issue is Insulin Lispro 100-units/milliliter vial. 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.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested a medically accepted indication, medical records and a prescriber statement to support that all formulary alternatives were tried and failed or were contraindicated. However, we did not receive the requested information.No documentation was provided by the prescriber. We requested information from the prescriber but no information was received. We are not able to determine whether the requested drug was prescribed for a medically accepted indication. Therefore, the drug 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 Esomeprazole 40-milligram capsules to treat gastroesophageal reflux disease with esophagitis. 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.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support all formulary alternatives were tried and failed or were contraindicated. We received additional documentation and included it in the review.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 Bystolic 5-milligram tablets to treat abnormal heart valve. 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.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 reimbursement request for Latuda 80-milligram tablets. The Part D plan denied the request.We received a 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 dubmitted documentation does not include a valid proof of purchase for the drug at issue. Therefore, the request for reimbursement cannot be granted.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is coverage for Farxiga 10-milligram tablet to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage. We received the case to perform an independent and de novo review. To make our decision, we reviewed all 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 and failed, or deemed contraindicated. In this case, the prescriber has not addressed the formulary alternatives required by the plan to treat the enrollees condition and provided patient specific clinical rationale as to why each formulary alternative 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 coverage for Balversa 4-milligram tablet to treat recurrent glioblastoma multiforme with FGFR 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 documentation submitted, including the case file from the plan and any information submitted at the reconsideration level. 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 prescriber did not submit any clinically relevant, peer-reviewed medical literature from a Medicare approved journal to support this appeal. As such, 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: Favorable

At issue is Promacta 50-milligram tablet to treat immune thrombocytopenic purpura. 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 includes a diagnosis of Immune thrombocytopenic purpura. For continuation of the requested drug, there must be confirmation of the enrollee's risk for bleeding complication. In the reconsideration appeal, the prescriber stated that the enrollee remained at risk for bleeding complications. Laboratory results were provided.  The documentation satisfies the plans coverage criteria. 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 Evista 60-milligram tablets. 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, and any information submitted at the reconsideration level.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support the enrollee has satisfied the plans prior authorization coverage criteria. However, we did not receive the requested information.In the reconsideration appeal dated 3/9/2022, the diagnosis of osteopenia was given. The prescriber sent another statement dated 3/17/2022 stating the diagnosis was ductal hyperplasia.  However, no documentation was provided by the prescriber to support these diagnoses. We requested information from the prescriber to clarify the medical history and to provide relevant medical records, but no information was received. We are not able to determine whether the requested drug(s) was prescribed for a medically accepted indication. Therefore, the drug 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 Colesevelam Hydrochloride 625-milligram tablet to treat bile salt diarrhea and chronic diarrhea. 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.Additionally, because the requested drug is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D, a tiering exception cannot be considered at this time.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 Nexium 40-milligram delayed release capsule to treat gastritis, unspecified, without bleeding. 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 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 Diclofenac Sodium 1-percent gel to treat minor strains, sprains, and/or contusions. 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.At reconsideration a diagnosis of osteoarthritis of knees and shoulders was given. However, no documentation was provided by the prescriber to support these diagnoses. We requested information from the prescriber but no information was received. We are not able to determine whether the requested drug was prescribed for a medically accepted indication. Therefore, the drug 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 Ipratropium-Albuterol 0.5-3-milligram/3-milliliters ampule for nebulization. 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. Based on the information provided, we determined the drug may be eligible for coverage under Part B under Medicare rules.The plan does not offer supplemental (additional) coverage for this drug. If the enrollee purchased drugs that are excluded, the enrollee must pay for them. This decision does not address the medical necessity or appropriateness 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 a tiering exception request for Novolog 100-unit per milliliter pen injector. 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.This drug is being provided by the plan under a formulary exception. It is not on the plans formulary but they have agreed to provide it at a cost sharing level assigned to all formulary exceptions. Per Medicare rules, non-formulary drugs are not eligible for a tiering exception.A physician reviewer determined that tiering exception criteria are not met.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Bystolic 5-milligram tablet to treat essential hypertension . 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 Xeljanz 5-milligram tablet prescribed for dermatomyositis. 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. 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 Wegovy 0.25-milligram/0.5-milliliter to treat morbid obesity. 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.Drugs prescribed for the treatment of weight loss are excluded from coverage. Therefore, this drug is excluded from coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Favorable

At issue is Calquence 100-milligram capsules to treat chronic lymphocytic leukemia. 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.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support the enrollee has satisfied the plans prior authorization coverage criteria. We received additional documentation and included it in the review.The documentation indicates the prescriber ordered the drug at issue for the enrollees diagnosis. The Medicare approved compendia contain a citation to support the use of the drug for the noted diagnosis. As such, the submitted documentation supports the drug was prescribed for a medically accepted indication. The plan has prior authorization coverage criteria that must be met prior to approval. The enrollee satisfies the Plans coverage criteria. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network has a category 1 recommendation for the use of the drug at issue as first-line therapy as a single agent for the enrollee's noted diagnosis. The submitted documentation supports the enrollee is unable to receive Imbruvica. 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 Lidocaine 5-percent ointment to treat otalgia, right ear. 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.Additionally, because Medicare does not cover the drug, a tiering exception cannot be considered at this time.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 HCL 10 milligram tablet to treat muscle spasms associated with Parkinson's 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 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 Dupixent 300 milligram per 2 milliliter injection solution to treat atopic 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.We requested additional information from the prescriber. Specifically, we requested medical records and a prescriber statement to support the enrollee has satisfied the plans prior authorization coverage criteria. However, we did not receive the requested information.The plan has prior authorization requirements for this biologic. 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 biologic is not eligible for Part D coverage.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Cyclobenzaprine 5 milligram tablet to treat muscle spasms due to chronic back pain. 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.  In the appeal to the plan the prescriber stated on 3/18/2022 that the requested drug was being used to treat muscle spasms due to chronic back pain.  Then in the reconsideration appeal dated 3/22/2022 the prescriber stated that the requested drug was being used to treat acute muscle spasms and flare ups.  The prescriber was asked to provide relevant medical records.  No medical records were provided. 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 Dutasteride 0.5-milligram capsule 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. Dutasteride is a generic drug on Tier 1 of the plans formulary. There are no lower tiers on the plans formulary. 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 Lidocaine-Prilocaine 2.5-2.5 percent topical cream, 450 grams (15 tubes) per 90-day supply. The Part D plan denied the request for coverage because the drug was not prescribed for a medically accepted indication. Additionally, the amount requested exceeded the plans quantity limit for the drug of 30 grams (1 tube) per 30 days. 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 diagnoses provided to the plan by the prescriber/prescribers office for the requested drug are unspecified neuralgia and neuritis and unspecified pain in leg. The enrollee has clarified that the neuralgia and neuritis pain involves multiple areas of the body and is due to nerve damage caused by chemotherapy treatment. However, the use of the requested drug to treat the noted condition is an off-label use. The Medicare approved compendia do not contain any citations to support the use of Lidocaine-Prilocaine topical cream for the treatment of neuralgia and neuritis, regardless of the cause. Therefore, the requested drug is being prescribed for a non-medically accepted indication and is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D. Since the drug is not eligible for coverage under Medicare Part D, the plans quantity limit for the drug is not relevant. A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that the plan is not required to cover the requested drug.
Appeal type: Prescription Drug
Decision: Unfavorable

At issue is Repatha Sureclick solution auto injector 140-milligram per milliliter to treat hyperlipidemia. 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.The request for a lower cost share can not be reviewed for the requested drug. Per Medicare rules, non-formulary drugs are not eligible for a tiering exception.A physician reviewed the appeal and determined that neither formulary or tiering exception criteria are not met.