화학요법 유발성 말초신경병증 치료 시장 : 치료 유형별, 투여 경로별, 환자 연령층별, 치료 기간별, 최종사용자별 - 세계 예측(2025-2032년)

The Chemotherapy Induced Peripheral Neuropathy Treatment Market is projected to grow by USD 1,883.62 million at a CAGR of 8.42% by 2032.

An authoritative synopsis of the evolving clinical priorities, care pathways, and stakeholder pressures shaping CIPN management across oncology settings

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) remains a persistent clinical challenge that affects patient quality of life and can complicate oncology care pathways. As oncology regimens diversify and survivorship grows, clinicians increasingly prioritize interventions that reduce neuropathic symptoms while preserving anticancer efficacy. This evolving clinical imperative has elevated interest in multimodal management approaches that balance pharmacological therapy with non-pharmacological interventions and supportive care strategies.

Consequently, payers, health systems, and specialty clinics are aligning protocols to emphasize symptom relief, functional preservation, and continuity of cancer therapy. These stakeholders are also contending with constrained resources and competing priorities, which makes evidence-backed, cost-effective interventions especially attractive. In parallel, research communities are broadening the investigative lens to include preventive strategies, mechanistic biomarkers, and patient-reported outcome measures that better capture the lived experience of CIPN.

Taken together, the current landscape demands integrated thinking across clinical development, service delivery, and commercial strategy. By focusing on multidisciplinary solutions that are adaptable across care settings, stakeholders can better address unmet needs while managing complexity across regulatory, reimbursement, and supply chain dimensions.

Key transformative shifts reshaping clinical practice, innovation trajectories, and payer expectations in CIPN care

Over recent years the CIPN landscape has been reshaped by several converging shifts that alter how therapies are evaluated, adopted, and reimbursed. First, there is stronger emphasis on patient-centered endpoints and functional outcomes, which has expanded acceptance of non-pharmacological modalities alongside traditional drug therapies. Second, advances in neurobiology and biomarker discovery are informing more targeted approaches to prevention and symptomatic relief, enabling trials that stratify participants by risk and mechanism. Third, payer frameworks are increasingly demanding demonstrable real-world benefit and care pathway integration, prompting developers to design evidence packages that extend beyond randomized controlled trials.

Moreover, digital health tools and remote monitoring technologies have accelerated integration of home-based assessments, facilitating continuous symptom tracking and adaptive management. Meanwhile, growing scrutiny of opioid-based strategies has encouraged diversification toward anticonvulsants, antidepressant agents used for neuropathic pain, topical formulations, and device-based therapies. These combined forces are incentivizing cross-disciplinary partnerships among drug developers, device manufacturers, clinical networks, and health technology vendors, driving a more collaborative innovation model that emphasizes pragmatic, scalable solutions.

Analysis of the projected cumulative effects of prospective United States tariff measures on supply chains, access, and clinical operations in 2025

Potential tariff changes in the United States can reverberate through the CIPN therapy ecosystem by altering supply chain costs, procurement strategies, and manufacturing footprints. An increase in import duties on active pharmaceutical ingredients, medical devices, or component materials would likely prompt manufacturers and distributors to reassess sourcing, inventory strategies, and supplier diversification. In turn, providers and specialty clinics may experience changes in procurement timelines and unit costs that influence formulary decisions and device deployment plans. Consequently, there is a heightened need for supply chain resilience planning that includes geographic diversification of key inputs and greater visibility into upstream manufacturing risks.

At the clinical level, administrative burdens associated with altered customs processes and longer lead times could affect timely availability of topical agents, patches, and device consumables used in outpatient and home care settings. In addition, tariff-driven cost pressures may accelerate shifts toward generics, local manufacturing partnerships, or vertically integrated supply arrangements. From a strategic perspective, stakeholders should evaluate the interplay between trade policy, regulatory approvals, and domestic manufacturing incentives to preserve continuity of care and to mitigate unintended barriers to patient access.

Segmentation-driven insights that illuminate treatment choices, administration preferences, demographic priorities, duration considerations, and care delivery settings

Treatment selection for CIPN is shaped by a spectrum of therapeutic modalities and the clinical contexts in which they are deployed. Based on treatment type, stakeholders weigh pharmacological options such as anticonvulsants, antidepressants, and opioids against non-pharmacological alternatives that include acupuncture, physical therapy, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation; this balancing act reflects efficacy evidence, tolerability, and the need to minimize interference with cancer therapy. Route of administration considerations also influence clinical decision-making, with oral agents frequently used for chronic symptom management, parenteral options employed when systemic control is required including intramuscular and intravenous approaches, and topical formulations offering localized relief with favorable safety profiles.

Patient age group is a critical filter for therapy design and delivery, as adults, geriatric patients, and pediatric populations present distinct risk-benefit profiles, comorbidity burdens, and adherence challenges. Therapy duration further influences care plans, where short-term interventions target acute or transient neuropathic episodes and long-term therapy prioritizes sustained symptomatic control and functional preservation. End-user environments shape implementation feasibility and resource allocation; home care settings favor user-friendly, low-burden interventions that support self-management, hospitals must integrate CIPN protocols into complex oncology workflows, and specialty clinics often deliver multimodal, multidisciplinary care with access to device-based therapies and procedural options.

Understanding these intersecting segmentation dimensions enables more precise pathway design, targeted evidence generation, and tailored commercialization strategies that resonate with clinicians, caregivers, and patients across diverse clinical contexts.

Regional perspectives that highlight differing healthcare infrastructures, policy drivers, and innovation adoption patterns relevant to CIPN management

Geographic context matters deeply for CIPN management, as regions demonstrate distinct regulatory environments, reimbursement mechanisms, and care delivery infrastructures. In the Americas, established oncology networks, robust clinical research activity, and payer emphasis on outcomes have supported integration of guideline-based therapies alongside device and digital health solutions. Elsewhere, evolving reimbursement models and varied access to specialty services shape adoption patterns and demand pragmatic, cost-conscious interventions that can be delivered across diverse care settings.

Within Europe, Middle East & Africa, regulatory harmonization in some markets contrasts with fragmented procurement and variable specialist availability in others, making regionally tailored evidence and pricing strategies essential. In the Asia-Pacific region, rapid capacity expansion in oncology services, growing clinical trial activity, and increasing investment in domestic manufacturing create both opportunities and operational complexities for companies seeking regional scale. Across all regions, differences in clinician training, patient expectations, and health system priorities require adaptive commercialization and partnership approaches to ensure therapies reach appropriate patient populations while aligning with local standards of care.

Strategic company-level insights highlighting competitive positioning, partnership trends, and innovation focus areas shaping CIPN solutions

Companies active in the CIPN domain are pursuing multiple pathways to strengthen their market positions, including portfolio diversification, clinical collaboration, and technology-enabled service models. Established pharmaceutical manufacturers often focus on expanding label indications, optimizing delivery formulations, or supporting comparative effectiveness research to differentiate familiar agents within neuropathic pain guidelines. Specialized device developers and digital health firms emphasize usability, remote monitoring, and evidence generation that demonstrates functional benefits in real-world settings. Contract manufacturers and supply partners are increasingly important as firms seek cost-efficient production and faster time-to-provider for topical formulations and device consumables.

Across the ecosystem, strategic alliances and clinical partnerships are common as stakeholders combine therapeutic expertise with procedural skills and digital capabilities. Intellectual property strategies lean toward formulation patents, device innovations, and data-driven approaches to outcome measurement. Meanwhile, competitive pressures from generics and off-label prescribing drive a focus on value demonstration, patient stratification, and niche positioning that highlights safety, tolerability, and integration into multidisciplinary care pathways.

Actionable recommendations for clinical leaders, developers, and commercial strategists to accelerate adoption and improve patient outcomes in CIPN care

Prioritize evidence that aligns with real-world clinical needs by designing studies that incorporate patient-reported outcomes, functional measures, and pragmatic endpoints that payers and clinicians find compelling. Simultaneously, invest in integrated care models that combine pharmacological therapies with non-pharmacological modalities and digital symptom monitoring to support continuity of care in outpatient and home environments. To mitigate supply chain and policy risk, develop diversified sourcing strategies for critical inputs and engage with regional manufacturing partners to reduce lead times and exposure to trade disruptions.

Engage proactively with payer bodies and clinical guideline committees to ensure that dossiers reflect the full spectrum of clinical value, including safety, quality-of-life impact, and health system efficiencies. Forge interdisciplinary partnerships across oncology, neurology, rehabilitation, and palliative care to accelerate adoption of multimodal protocols and to foster clinician champions. Finally, tailor commercialization strategies to the nuances of regional markets and care settings, emphasizing scalable training programs, implementation support, and outcomes tracking that demonstrate sustained patient benefit.

Transparent research methodology summary describing how evidence was integrated, validated, and synthesized to support actionable insights

The research approach combined systematic review of peer-reviewed clinical literature, regulatory guidance, and publicly available clinical trial registries with structured interviews of clinical experts, supply chain specialists, and health policy stakeholders. Evidence synthesis prioritized high-quality randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and guideline recommendations while supplementing gaps with real-world evidence and observational studies that illuminate implementation challenges. Expert consultations provided contextual interpretation of clinical practice realities, adoption barriers, and unmet needs across different care settings.

Data validation included cross-referencing therapeutic mechanisms, administration routes, and standard-of-care practices against clinical guidelines and specialist input to ensure consistency. Where policy or trade scenarios were analyzed, publicly available regulatory notices and trade documentation were reviewed to ground implications in verifiable developments. Finally, insights were iteratively reviewed by multidisciplinary advisors to refine recommendations and to ensure the final narrative supports pragmatic decision-making for clinicians, developers, and commercial teams.

Concluding synthesis that underscores the urgency of integrated approaches to improving patient outcomes while navigating commercial and policy headwinds

CIPN presents a multifaceted challenge that spans biology, symptom management, and health system design. Effective responses require integrated strategies that combine robust clinical evidence, adaptable care models, and resilient supply chains. As clinical priorities shift toward patient-centered outcomes and functional preservation, stakeholders must align development, reimbursement, and implementation plans to demonstrate meaningful benefit in routine practice. Equally important is the sustained collaboration among drug developers, device innovators, clinicians, and payers to translate mechanistic advances into pragmatic interventions that are accessible across care settings.

In summary, the path forward is characterized by opportunity for stakeholders who can generate relevant evidence, design for real-world implementation, and build operational resilience in the face of policy and supply uncertainties. By embracing multidisciplinary approaches and regionally tailored strategies, organizations can make measurable improvements in symptom control, patient quality of life, and continuity of cancer care.

Table of Contents

1. Preface

• 1.1. Objectives of the Study
• 1.2. Market Segmentation & Coverage
• 1.3. Years Considered for the Study
• 1.4. Currency & Pricing
• 1.5. Language
• 1.6. Stakeholders

2. Research Methodology

3. Executive Summary

4. Market Overview

5. Market Insights

• 5.1. Increasing integration of nutraceutical combinations with standard care for CIPN symptom relief
• 5.2. Expansion of wearable neurostimulation devices for at-home management of chemotherapy induced peripheral neuropathy
• 5.3. Advancements in biomarkers enabling early detection and personalized CIPN treatment regimens
• 5.4. Growing investment in novel small molecule inhibitors targeting inflammatory mediators of CIPN
• 5.5. Clinical progression of mesenchymal stem cell therapies aimed at repairing chemotherapy induced nerve damage
• 5.6. Collaboration between pharmaceutical and digital therapeutics companies to enhance CIPN patient adherence
• 5.7. Adoption of AI driven patient stratification models to improve CIPN intervention outcomes

6. Cumulative Impact of United States Tariffs 2025

7. Cumulative Impact of Artificial Intelligence 2025

8. Chemotherapy Induced Peripheral Neuropathy Treatment Market, by Treatment Type

• 8.1. Non-Pharmacological Treatments
  • 8.1.1. Acupuncture
  • 8.1.2. Physical Therapy
  • 8.1.3. Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation
• 8.2. Pharmacological Treatments
  • 8.2.1. Anticonvulsants
  • 8.2.2. Antidepressants
  • 8.2.3. Opioids

9. Chemotherapy Induced Peripheral Neuropathy Treatment Market, by Route of Administration

• 9.1. Oral
• 9.2. Parenteral
  • 9.2.1. Intramuscular
  • 9.2.2. Intravenous
• 9.3. Topical

10. Chemotherapy Induced Peripheral Neuropathy Treatment Market, by Patient Age Group

• 10.1. Adults
• 10.2. Geriatrics
• 10.3. Pediatrics

11. Chemotherapy Induced Peripheral Neuropathy Treatment Market, by Therapy Duration

• 11.1. Long-Term Therapy
• 11.2. Short-Term Therapy

12. Chemotherapy Induced Peripheral Neuropathy Treatment Market, by End-User

• 12.1. Home Care Settings
• 12.2. Hospitals
• 12.3. Specialty Clinics

13. Chemotherapy Induced Peripheral Neuropathy Treatment Market, by Region

• 13.1. Americas
  • 13.1.1. North America
  • 13.1.2. Latin America
• 13.2. Europe, Middle East & Africa
  • 13.2.1. Europe
  • 13.2.2. Middle East
  • 13.2.3. Africa
• 13.3. Asia-Pacific

14. Chemotherapy Induced Peripheral Neuropathy Treatment Market, by Group

• 14.1. ASEAN
• 14.2. GCC
• 14.3. European Union
• 14.4. BRICS
• 14.5. G7
• 14.6. NATO

15. Chemotherapy Induced Peripheral Neuropathy Treatment Market, by Country

• 15.1. United States
• 15.2. Canada
• 15.3. Mexico
• 15.4. Brazil
• 15.5. United Kingdom
• 15.6. Germany
• 15.7. France
• 15.8. Russia
• 15.9. Italy
• 15.10. Spain
• 15.11. China
• 15.12. India
• 15.13. Japan
• 15.14. Australia
• 15.15. South Korea

16. Competitive Landscape

• 16.1. Market Share Analysis, 2024
• 16.2. FPNV Positioning Matrix, 2024
• 16.3. Competitive Analysis
  • 16.3.1. AbbVie Inc.
  • 16.3.2. AlgoTherapeutix
  • 16.3.3. Amgen Inc.
  • 16.3.4. Array BioPharma Inc. by Pfizer Inc.
  • 16.3.5. Artelo Biosciences, Inc.
  • 16.3.6. Asahi Kasei Corporation
  • 16.3.7. Astellas Pharma Inc.
  • 16.3.8. Bexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
  • 16.3.9. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company
  • 16.3.10. Eisai Inc.
  • 16.3.11. F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd
  • 16.3.12. GlaxoSmithKline PLC
  • 16.3.13. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd.
  • 16.3.14. Grunenthal GmbH
  • 16.3.15. Heron Therapeutics, Inc.
  • 16.3.16. Ipsen Pharma
  • 16.3.17. Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd.
  • 16.3.18. Merck & Co., Inc.
  • 16.3.19. Neuralace Medical
  • 16.3.20. Novartis AG
  • 16.3.21. Regenacy Pharmaceuticals LLC
  • 16.3.22. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
  • 16.3.23. Sanofi S.A.
  • 16.3.24. Serpin Pharma, LLC
  • 16.3.25. Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited
  • 16.3.26. Veloxis Pharmaceuticals, Inc.