Chronomodulated chemotherapy: clinical value and possibilities for dissemination in the United States

Abstract

Modern medicine has been relatively slow to apply chronotherapeutic principles to standard oncologic practice. Despite the impressive body of evidence supporting the use of chronochemotherapy, with only a rare exception most oncology clinics in the United States lack the expertise and capability to implement it. At the same time, American medicine has increasingly come to recognize the importance of toxicity mitigation, cytoprotection, and quality of life for patients undergoing cancer treatment. However, toxicity mitigation strategies such as chronomodulated infusional chemotherapy and novel cytoprotective agents are not widely embraced by U.S. physicians. This article explores some reasons why this situation exists, including the influence of non-medical biases that may affect management decisions on the application of chemotherapy. The author conducted a survey of U.S. companies representing the three private insurance payers available (HMO, PPO, Indemnity) as well as representatives of Medicare and Medicaid. Responses to the survey confirmed that U.S. insurers do not at present officially reimburse for chronotherapy; however, changes will come about through educational efforts aimed at increasing awareness among insurers as to the clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness of this mode of treatment. At this juncture, the outlook for cancer chronotherapy as a first-line approach to the treatment of metastatic cancer in the United States remains uncertain. Under the current method of insurance reimbursement, the advancement of chronotherapy in the United States is threatened despite evidence that such treatment is both therapeutically sound and cost-effective.

• Cancer chemotherapy
• Cancer chronotherapy
• Cancer survival
• Circadian rhythm
• Clinical outcome
• Continuous infusion
• Cytoprotection
• Quality of life
• Insurance reimbursement
• Medical chronobiology
• Toxicity mitigation