Economic Evaluation of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Oncology: Is There a Difference Compared to Conventional Medicine?

Abstract

Objective: To analyze the financial burden of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in cancer treatment. Materials and Methods: Based on a systematic search of the literature (Medline and the Cochrane Library, combining the MeSH terms ‘complementary therapies', ‘neoplasms', ‘costs', ‘cost analysis', and ‘cost-benefit analysis'), an expert panel discussed different types of analyses and their significance for CAM in oncology. Results: Of 755 publications, 43 met our criteria. The types of economic analyses and their parameters discussed for CAM in oncology were cost, cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness, and cost-utility analyses. Only a few articles included arguments in favor of or against these different methods, and only a few arguments were specific for CAM because most CAM methods address a broad range of treatment aim parameters to assess effectiveness and are hard to define. Additionally, the choice of comparative treatments is difficult. To evaluate utility, healthy subjects may not be adequate as patients with a life-threatening disease and may be judged differently, especially with respect to a holistic treatment approach. We did not find any arguments in the literature that were directed at the economic analysis of CAM in oncology. Therefore, a comprehensive approach assessment based on criteria from evidence-based medicine evaluating direct and indirect costs is recommended. Conclusion: The usual approaches to conventional medicine to assess costs, benefits, and effectiveness seem adequate in the field of CAM in oncology. Additionally, a thorough deliberation on the comparator, endpoints, and instruments is mandatory for designing studies.

Exploring the Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Cancer Patients

“…124 The objective benefits of CAM may not be well established in relation to their cost-effectiveness, survival benefits, and quality of life in the cancer setting. 125 Despite an abundance of studies on CAM, a portion of the research funding may have been contributed by the complementary medicine industry (36.6%) as opposed to independent government-funded research councils. 126 For instance, popular herbs such as St John’s wort and products containing kava kava are easily accessible for symptoms related to depression and anxiety.…”

Barriers and Facilitators to Integrative Oncology Services in Australia: A Changed Mind Set Required

“…Like supportive care in general, some have questioned whether integrating TCIM can be expected to directly lower health care costs, as IO services are generally used as an add-on, rather than a substitute for conventional cancer treatment. 43 The additional cost of IO will therefore need to demonstrate financial savings in other ways, for example, by improving adherence to life-saving cancer treatment and reducing the overall burden of disease. [44][45][46] Finally, while a lack of evidence is commonly cited as a reason not to provide or fund IO, 47,48 the findings suggest that building the evidence-base is only one part of the solution.…”

An Electrophilic Deguelin Analogue Inhibits STAT3 Signaling in H-Ras-Transformed Human Mammary Epithelial Cells: The Cysteine 259 Residue as a Potential Target

“…Growing attention has been focused on the identification of natural products with chemopreventive and chemotherapeutic potential [ 1 , 2 ]. Deguelin is a natural rotenoid that is isolated from several medicinal plants, including Derris trifoliata Lour (Leguminosae), Mundulea sericea (Leguminosae), and Tephrosia vogelii Hook.f (Leguminosae) [ 3 ].…”