Consensus-driven pathways improve diagnostic and therapeutic approaches in lymphoma care, highlighting multidisciplinary collaboration.
Introduction Lymphomas encompass a heterogeneous group of B- and T-cell malignancies necessitating a complex and precise management. With the aim to define standardized diagnostic and therapeutic pathways across multiple hematology centers in Italy, the “Right Path 4 Lymphomas” project was designed as a multidisciplinary expert platform designed to establish consensus-driven diagnostic and therapeutic pathways. Methods Using a two-phase methodology – the Nominal Group Technique followed by a Delphi process – experts systematically evaluated and prioritized key diagnostic and therapeutic topics for five major lymphoma subtypes: classical Hodgkin lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, follicular lymphoma, mantle cell lymphoma, and peripheral T-cell lymphomas. Results The Delphi process achieved a high level of consensus on 264 of 270 statements (97.8%), reinforcing the importance of multidisciplinary collaboration in shaping evidence-based recommendations. Key areas of agreement included histopathologic and molecular diagnostic standards, risk-adapted treatment approaches integrating novel immunotherapies, and structured follow-up strategies. However, areas of debate remained over the clinical utility of minimal residual disease monitoring, optimal sequencing of immunotherapies, and the potential of CAR-T therapy versus bispecific antibodies. Discussion This project highlights the need for a structured, consensus-driven approach to lymphoma care that aligns with evolving international guidelines while addressing the distinct regulatory and healthcare landscape in Italy. The findings provide a valuable framework for clinicians and policymakers to optimize lymphoma management, balancing innovation with the allocation of resources and clinical feasibility.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Guarini et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:
More from Frontiers in Oncology