OBJECTIVES There is new RCT phase 3 clinical evidence that bendamustin-rituximab (B-R) is more effective in terms of progression free survival compared to the standard of care CHOP-rituximab (CHOP-R) in indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (iNHL). Based on this RCT, we performed a cost-utility analysis of B-R compared to CHOP-R in the treatment of follicular iNHL (stage III and IV) in the Czech Republic.  METHODS We developed a life-time Markov cohort model with 28-day cycle length and 5 health states, i.e. on treatment, rituximab maintenance (R-M), stable disease, progression and death. Additionally, we modeled adverse effects of treatment and four sub-states during progression (observation, imunochemotherapy, R-M, post R-M). Transition probabilities and utilities were derived from published literature. Resource use (costs) was calculated from healthcare payer’s perspective in cooperation with major Czech hemato-oncologic experts. Costs and outcomes were discounted by 3.5%. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) with 1000 iterations using a willingness to pay (WTP) threshold equal to 3 times GDP per capita (40 100 EUR) in the Czech Republic was performed. RESULTS Over a life-time horizon, B-R compared to CHOP-R brings additional 1.21 QALY (7.47 vs. 6.26) and 1.31 LYG (9.74 vs. 8.43). The incremental total costs were 1,368 EUR (total life time costs for B-R and CHOP-R were 43,080 EUR and 41,712 EUR, respectively). ICERs thus equal to 1,133 EUR/QALY and 1,044 EUR/LYG. The results of the PSA show that B-R is cost-effective in 100% iterations under the WTP threshold; and simultaneously in 99.3% iterations is cost-effective while using threshold equal to 7,300 EUR. CONCLUSIONS B-R proved that it is a highly cost-effective therapy in patients with follicular iNHL. The higher costs of initial bendamustin treatment are in the long-term horizon offset by substantial savings of progression costs. There is 100% probability of B-R being cost-effective at the selected WTP threshold.