Oncologists and Patients to Actually Discuss Costs
A surprising statement was just released from the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) after their annual meeting in Orlando. The guidance statement urges oncologists to discuss the potential financial costs of care with their patients. These clinician/patient discussions about cost, the guidance statement declares are “a key component of high-quality care.”
This unprecedented and sudden concern for transparency in cost of treatment comes as reports on health care spending show cancer treatment rising at 15% annually. The new guidance statement, published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, is said to also be for consideration by insurers and other stakeholders in the cancer treatment industry. The life-or-death nature of cancer has previously kept the conversation of cost out of the doctor/patient relationship. One doctor participant in the ASCO meeting added that providers need to minimize costs by ensuring that they focus only on evidence-based practice and avoid treatments of questionable value. I read that as attempting to justify exclusive reliance on conventional therapies with little or no consideration of complementary therapies.
As costs increase, most traditional oncologists will likely circle the wagons around chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery and further reject natural enhancements as adding to the cost unnecessarily. They will tell their patients that avoiding complementary therapies will reduce their cost. The minority of integrative oncologists will argue that such a position actually increases costs. Complementary therapies that boost the immune system, selectively target the cancer, provide psychological support, etc., enhance the conventional therapies and reduce their duration. That results in cost reduction and has been proven effective. Less expensive complementary therapies that reduce the need for more expensive conventional therapies would obviously shrink overall costs. Concerns about the high cost of cancer treatment should translate to greater interest in integrative oncology. Unfortunately, we are already witnessing moves toward generating the opposite effect.