Assesses economic and organizational advantages of outpatient CAR-T in follicular lymphoma, suggesting effective resource management.
Introduction: Follicular Lymphoma (FL) is the second most common lymphoid malignancy, with 20% of patients progressing within 24 months of first-line therapy. Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies have improved outcomes in relapsed or refractory FL, yet their use requires significant resources and complex care pathways. Although outpatient CAR-T programs have shown promising safety and feasibility, limited evidence exists on their organizational, economic, and ethical implications in the Italian healthcare setting. This study compares the current CAR-T pathway for FL patients with a virtual optimized scenario incorporating outpatient management in selected phases. Methods: A multidimensional framework was applied to assess differences between standard in-hospital care (Standard Pathway) across three Italian public hospitals (Genoa, Rome, Perugia) and a partially outpatient model (Efficient Pathway). Literature review and expert consultations validated existing practices and informed optimization criteria. Structured surveys provided quantitative and qualitative inputs. Economic modelling estimated three-year full costs using patient-level data, while organizational and ethical aspects were evaluated through Likert scales. Results: Efficient Pathway shifted bridging therapy, post-infusion monitoring, and follow-up to outpatient settings, reducing total costs from € 611,070 (As-Is) to € 497,421 (To-Be). Organizational benefits included increased bed capacity (average score: 4.9/6) and consumable utilization (average score: 4.3/6), while ethical gains were observed in treatment accessibility (average score: 4.3/6). Conclusions: Introducing outpatient management into CAR-T phases may provide economic, organizational, and ethical advantages when supported by clear eligibility criteria and structured monitoring. As CAR-T indications expand, pathway redesign will be essential to ensure equitable access and sustain healthcare system resources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vitagliano et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: