Modern therapies for r/r DLBCL have significantly improved survival rates, but their high costs necessitate careful cost-effectiveness assessments to ensure they are integrated optimally into clinical practice. Additionally, our findings indicate that calendar-based comparisons can be misleading, since novel treatments do not simply "start" and "stop" at approval dates-a crucial methodological insight that is highly generalizable to real-world evidence studies. Grouping patients by actual therapy exposure offers a more accurate evaluation of clinical benefits and economic impact when new treatments become routine. Achieving equitable access to treatment while maintaining healthcare sustainability will require coordinated efforts among clinicians, researchers, and policymakers.
Singer et al. (Sun,) studied this question.