Melanoma denials at external review

• among the lowest

  At 16.3%, this is the 2nd-lowest overturn rate of the 72 conditiones carrying one — one of the few where reviewers more often agreed with the plan than not.

• most-cited standard

  Reviewers named NCCN more than any other standard here — 33 decisions, which came out at 9.1%. Citing a standard and the outcome share a cause; this is not the effect of naming it.

California requires each published decision to carry “a detailed case summary that includes the specific standards, criteria, and medical and scientific evidence, if any, that led to the case decision” (Health & Safety Code § 1374.33(h)(1)(K)). These are the elements our extraction found in this class, split by how the decision came out.

Read as description, not instruction. These are patterns in what reviewers wrote, not steps to follow, and no combination of them predicts an outcome. Only codes that cleared the validation gate appear — thirteen did not.

• NCCN9.1%33
• American Academy of Dermatology—9
• FDA—5

A rate here is the outcome of decisions that named the authority, not the effect of naming it. Reviewers cite the standard they applied; the citation and the outcome share a cause.

• Diagnostic imaging & screening10.8%37
• Cancer Care—5
• Acute inpatient medical—1

Browse all treatment classes · Pick your own pair

• Genetic/Genomic Test5.9%34
• Cancer Rx—4
• Admission—1
• Clinical Trial—1
• Lab Work—1
• Other—1
• PET Scan—1

• Experimental/Investigational10.8%37
• Medical Necessity—6

Medical-necessity review asks whether the care is needed. Experimental/investigational review asks whether it is likely to be more beneficial than standard therapy — a harder statutory test, and the rates show it.