Invasive Ductal Carcinoma denials in California external review

In the California DMHC record, independent physician reviewers decided 23 published external-review cases involving invasive ductal carcinomaand overturned the plan’s denial in 56.5%. That is a historical result among cases that reached this program, not a forecast for an individual appeal.

California DMHC decisions
23
2004–2024
Overturned
56.5%
13 denials reversed

Most-fought treatments for invasive ductal carcinoma

What insurers denied — and how those fights ended.
CategoryDecisionsOverturned
Intra-operative Radiation Therapy3
66.7%
Oncotype Dx Assay3
100%

What the insurer actually argued

Denials fall into different categories, and they don’t succeed equally — so the reason on your letter changes how you should answer it.
Reason givenDecisionsOverturned
Experimental/Investigational
The plan called the treatment unproven. These turn on published evidence, so the appeal is a literature argument.
18
61.1%
Medical Necessity
The plan said the care wasn’t medically necessary. The most common fight, and the most winnable.
5
40%
Typical time to a decision
11 days
Most land between 7 and 20 days
Handled as urgent
52.2%
Expedited when a delay would cause harm

What the reviewers wrote

Excerpts from the independent reviewers’ published findings — the actual reasoning, quoted, not summarised.

Where the denial was overturned

Physician 1: The patient is a 53-year-old woman diagnosed with infiltrating lobular carcinoma in July 2000 and subsequently diagnosed with ipsilateral invasive ductal cancer in January 2005. She was found to have a 1.4cm tumor with positive estrogen receptors and negative axillary nodes. The patient underwent an Oncotype DX assay and had a recurrence score of 17 which predicts an 11% chance of recurrence if the patient is not treated with chemotherapy. On that basis, the decision was made to forgo adjuvant chemotherapy.
Experimental/Investigational · 2006 · IMR EI06-5933
Physician 1: The patient is a 43-year-old woman who recently was diagnosed with stage I breast cancer. She underwent a diagnostic breast biopsy in October 2004, which revealed a 6 mm intermediate grade (grade II) invasive ductal carcinoma (DCIS). The tumor is ER positive, PR positive, and Her2/neu 2+ (but FISH negative). She underwent a second excision for a positive DCIS margin as well as a sentinel lymph node biopsy in November 2004. This revealed additional DCIS, but with a narrowly negative margin. Two sentinel lymph nodes were excised, both are negative by routine histopathology as well as immunohistochemistry. A post-op MRI did not reveal any additional disease. The patient’s family history is important in that she is of Ashkenazi Jewish heritage.
Experimental/Investigational · 2005 · IMR EI05-4448

Where the denial was upheld

Worth reading too — these show what an appeal has to overcome.
Physician 1: The patient is a 45-year-old woman diagnosed with breast cancer in March 2005. At that time she was found to have a 7.1 cm invasive ductal carcinoma, and she was begun on aggressive chemotherapy with TAC. This ended in June 2005, at which time she had a mastectomy. At that surgery, it was determined that she had had an excellent response to the chemotherapy, with minimal cancer in the breast. Six nodes, however, were found to be positive. The patient had two further cycles of chemotherapy since the surgery, and it is now proposed that she be treated with high dose chemotherapy (HDC) with autologous stem cell transplant. Authorization and coverage for the proposed treatment has been denied by the Health Plan as investigational.The use of HDC in the various stages of breast cancer has been a very controversial topic for many years.
Experimental/Investigational · 2005 · IMR EI05-4697
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: An enrollee has requested authorization and coverage for proton beam radiation therapy for treatment of the enrollee’s Stage IIA invasive ductal carcinoma. Findings: All three physician reviewers found that the request for proton beam therapy is not likely to be more beneficial for treatment of the patient’s medical condition than any available standard therapy. There is a lack of peer-reviewed literature demonstrating that proton therapy affords a benefit over other standard available therapies such as photon therapy for breast cancer. While proton therapy will almost always appear superior to photon therapy dosimetrically due to its Bragg peak, this does not necessarily translate into a clinical benefit.
Experimental/Investigational · 2017 · IMR EI17-26497

Figures and quotations on this page come from 42,749 published decisions in the California DMHC Independent Medical Review dataset. These are California external-review outcomes. Other state and federal programs have different eligibility rules, processes, and current availability; the rates here do not transfer to those programs or predict an individual result. Excerpts are quoted verbatim from the public record and describe this condition generally, not any individual case.

How to use this in your appeal

These outcomes describe eligible cases completed through California DMHC’s Independent Medical Review program. They do not estimate the chance that an internal appeal, an external review in another jurisdiction, or your individual case will succeed. Use the record to identify evidence patterns involving invasive ductal carcinoma, then check the rights and deadlines that apply to your plan.

SOURCE: CALIFORNIA DMHC INDEPENDENT MEDICAL REVIEW OUTCOMES (CHHS OPEN DATA) · AGGREGATES + DEIDENTIFIED DECISION EXCERPTS/REFERENCE IDS · METHODOLOGY

Not legal or medical advice. Coverage Rights is a self-help tool that helps you prepare your own appeal. For advice about your specific situation, talk to a licensed attorney or your doctor.

Fighting a denial for invasive ductal carcinoma? Use the California record to prepare.

Explain my denial — freeStart my appeal · $9