Abstract:

Introduction: The World Health Organisation (WHO) recently released the Global Traditional Medicine Strategy 2025–2034, calling for strengthened evidence, governance, and integration of safe, effective traditional and complementary practices into national health systems. In oncology, integrative oncology (IO) combines evidence informed complementary and traditional modalities with standard cancer care to improve symptom control, quality of life, and patient-centred outcomes.
Although clinical benefits are increasingly recognised, comprehensive economic evidence remains limited, constraining reimbursement and policy implementation.
Methods: This systematic review synthesised cost-effectiveness analyses of (IO) interventions and evaluated their implications for sustainable cancer care within the WHO Traditional, Complementary and Integrative Medicine (TCIM) framework.
Searches of PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, EconLit, and CINAHL identified peer-reviewed CEAs, cost-utility, or cost–benefit studies comparing IO with conventional oncology care.
Results: Ten studies met inclusion criteria, comprising six randomised controlled trials, three real-world data analyses, and one model-based evaluation from Europe, Australia, Asia, and the United States. Interventions included psychological, phytotherapeutic, rehabilitative, and mind–body programmes. Across all modalities, IO interventions were either dominant or cost-effective within national willingness-to-pay thresholds. Methodological quality was high (mean CHEERS score 93%), although few studies addressed longterm outcomes, structural uncertainty, or equity impacts.

A questo link è possibile scaricare l’articolo.