- Center on Health Equity & Access
- Clinical
- Health Care Cost
- Health Care Delivery
- Insurance
- Policy
- Technology
- Value-Based Care
Single Bispecific Strategy Shows Operational Efficiencies, Cost Savings in DLBCL and FL
Consolidating treatment to a single bispecific antibody for DLBCL and follicular lymphoma can improve operational efficiency and generate cost savings for oncology practices without affecting efficacy or safety.
An abstract published at ASH 2025 highlighted the operational efficiencies and cost savings associated with using a single bispecific antibody approved for both diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and follicular lymphoma (FL). Tara M. Graff, DO, director of clinical research at Mission Cancer + Blood at the University of Iowa Health Care, emphasized that while cost considerations do not alter a therapy’s intrinsic efficacy or safety, they play a meaningful role in real-world implementation, particularly for oncology practices navigating resource constraints.
The findings underscore how consolidating treatment to one bispecific agent can streamline care delivery. Familiarity with a single drug allows clinical teams to better anticipate adverse events, standardize monitoring protocols, and improve workflow efficiency. Even when safety profiles across agents are comparable, experience with one therapy enhances operational confidence and patient management, indirectly supporting safer and more efficient care.
Using a model of 100 patients across DLBCL and FL, the study revealed substantial time-related cost savings. By reducing staff hours spent on training, administration, and coordination associated with multiple therapies, practices realized an estimated $715,000 in time savings alone. When additional factors such as drug acquisition efficiencies and bulk pricing were incorporated, the analysis identified another $192,000 in savings. Together, these elements translated to nearly $963,000 in direct financial savings during the first year of adopting a single bispecific agent.
An unexpected driver of savings was the reduction in drug waste. Consolidation to one therapy prevented excess inventory and partial vial waste commonly associated with maintaining multiple agents, resulting in an additional $55,000 saved in the first year. This finding highlighted how operational inefficiencies, often overlooked in cost discussions, can significantly affect a practice’s financial health.
The analysis illustrates that beyond clinical outcomes, treatment simplification can deliver meaningful economic and operational benefits. These insights are particularly relevant for community oncology practices, where cost containment and workflow efficiency are critical to expanding access to innovative therapies.
