Repatha denials in California external review

In the California DMHC record, independent physician reviewers decided 61 published external-review cases involving Repathaand overturned the plan’s denial in 39.3%. That is a historical result among cases that reached this program, not a forecast for an individual appeal.

California DMHC decisions
61
2016–2025
Overturned
39.3%
24 denials reversed

By condition

Published outcomes when Repatha was denied for these conditions.
ConditionDecisionsOverturned
Hyperlipidemia23
43.5%
Hypercholesterolemia17
35.3%
Coronary Artery Disease12
58.3%
Typical time to a decision
15 days
Most land between 5 and 21 days
Handled as urgent
32.8%
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

Findings: The physician reviewer found that Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient has requested authorization and coverage of Repatha. Repatha (evolocumab) is a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor studied in and approved by a government regulatore for the treatment of patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia or for patients with documented atherosclerotic heart disease who require additional lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). In this case, the patient does not fit either of these criteria.
Medical Necessity · 2024 · IMR MN24-42405
Findings: The physician reviewer found that Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient requested authorization and coverage for Repatha for the treatment of his atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).With elevated triglyceride as a risk enhancer, treatment guidelines published by the American Heart Association (AHA) and American College of Cardiology (ACC) support lipid-lowering therapy aiming for a 30- 49% reduction in low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C). A randomized controlled trial demonstrated the efficacy of PCSK9 inhibitors such as Repatha that resulted in significant reductions in LDL-C and cardiovascular events in patients with existing ASCVD. However, the study showed superior LDL-C lowering with the PCSK9 inhibitor alirocumab over ezetimibe specifically in statin-intolerant, moderate to high cardiovascular-risk patients.
Medical Necessity · 2023 · IMR MN23-39412

Where the denial was upheld

Worth reading too — these show what an appeal has to overcome.
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient is requesting authorization and coverage for Repatha pen injectors. She has been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus and hyperlipidemia. The patient reported chest pain. The patient’s medical record states she failed multiple statins. Per the provider, treatment with ezetimibe was suboptimal. The patient had reportedly declined to restart statin therapy due to intolerance. The Health Plan denied the request and reported the requested medication is not medically necessary for the treatment of this patient. The American College of Cardiology reports that proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 inhibitors should be used for patients with a very high risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) or established ASCVD.
Medical Necessity · 2019 · IMR MN19-31280
Findings: The physician reviewer found that Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient has requested authorization and coverage for Repatha. Repatha (evolocumab) is a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor studied in and approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia or for patients with documented atherosclerotic heart disease who require additional lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). In this case, the patient does not fit either of these criteria.
Medical Necessity · 2024 · IMR MN24-41870

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 Repatha, 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 Repatha? Use the California record to prepare.

Explain my denial — freeStart my appeal · $39