PET CT Scan denials in California external review

In the California DMHC record, independent physician reviewers decided 59 published external-review cases involving PET CT Scanand overturned the plan’s denial in 71.2%. That is a historical result among cases that reached this program, not a forecast for an individual appeal.

California DMHC decisions
59
2006–2025
Overturned
71.2%
42 denials reversed

Conditions behind PET CT Scan denials

What insurers denied — and how those fights ended.
CategoryDecisionsOverturned
Breast Cancer4
50%
Pancreatic Cancer3
66.7%
Multiple Myeloma3
66.7%
Endometrial Cancer3
66.7%

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.
35
71.4%
Medical Necessity
The plan said the care wasn’t medically necessary. The most common fight, and the most winnable.
24
70.8%
Typical time to a decision
8 days
Most land between 5 and 21 days
Handled as urgent
62.7%
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

Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: An enrollee has requested authorization and coverage for positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) scan for evaluation of the enrollee’s pelvic tumor. Findings: 2/3 of the physician reviewers found that this is a complex medical case involving a solitary fibrous tumor, which is an exceedingly rare tumor. Considering the rarity of her diagnosis, there is little literature regarding the best means to perform follow-up imaging. However, PET/CT has several benefits over other standard modalities for the evaluation of patient’s tumor. One advantage to PET/CT is that, not only are masses demonstrated, but there is information garnered by the fludeoxyglucose PET/CT avidity in those masses. As has been shown in patients with Hodgkin’s disease, on occasion, one will see a residual mass that is no longer FDG avid.
Experimental/Investigational · 2017 · IMR EI17-26020
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient has requested authorization and coverage for positron emission tomography (PET) scan with computed tomography (CT) for attenuation, skull base to mid-thigh, and/or PET with CT for attenuation, skull base to mid-thigh. According to the American College of Radiology (ACR) criteria for monitoring response to neoadjuvant systemic therapy for breast cancer in a patient with known breast cancer and clinical suspicion for metastatic disease, PET/CT scan is considered usually appropriate. As noted by the ACR, for the purposes of staging and monitoring treatment response, PET/CT detects 50-100% of distant metastasis, with a specificity of 50-97%. In addition, multiple studies have demonstrated that PET/CT is particularly useful in the ongoing assessment of patients with triple negative breast cancer.
Medical Necessity · 2022 · IMR MN22-38072

Where the denial was upheld

Worth reading too — these show what an appeal has to overcome.
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: An enrollee has requested authorization and coverage for positron emission tomography scan with concurrently acquired computed tomography for attenuation (PET/CT) from skull base to midthigh (CPT 78815). Findings: The physician reviewer found that PET/CT is a nuclear medicine study that has been demonstrated to be effective in the accurate staging of patients with certain malignancies. However, there is a paucity of data demonstrating the efficacy of PET/CT in the evaluation of this patient’s pancreatic cancer. As noted by the American College of Radiology (ACR), CT is considered “usually appropriate” for assessing primary pancreatic malignancy and metastatic disease, while PET/CT “may be appropriate” to serve as a supplemental imaging modality.
Experimental/Investigational · 2022 · IMR EI22-37231
A 53-year-old female enrollee has requested a positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) scan for evaluation of her medical condition. Findings: The physician reviewer found that it is well established in the peer-reviewed literature that CA-125 testing is not effective as a screening test for ovarian cancer. WebMD states that, “The CA-125 test is not recommended as a screening test for ovarian cancer at this time because it often has false-positive results”. Further, researchers for UpToDate report that, “Ovarian cancer cannot be diagnosed based upon the results of a CA-125 test. Many women with early ovarian cancer will have a normal CA-125 level”. For this reason, the authors concluded that, “CA-125 is not recommended as a standalone screening test for ovarian cancer”. It has also been shown that elevated CA-125 can be secondary to non-malignant conditions.
Medical Necessity · 2011 · IMR MN11-12065

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 treatment 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 PET CT Scan, 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.

Denied PET CT Scan? Use the California record to prepare.

Explain my denial — freeStart my appeal · $39