Background: A multicenter phase I study (Budde et al. ASH 2012, final results ASCO 2015) confirmed the safety and efficacy of supplanting ifosfamide with bendamustine within the regimen RICE for relapsed/refractory lymphoma (TREC). TREC is administered in the outpatient setting compared with other salvage strategies which require hospitalization. We hypothesized that TREC would confer cost savings and yield a lower cost per response vs. RICE/R-DHAP. Methods: Medication and non-medication costs (facility, labor, laboratory, etc.) were collected on patients treated with at least one cycle of TREC or RICE/R-DHAP between 7/2010-7/2012. A cost-consequence analysis comparing regimen costs to efficacy results was conducted using a standardized RR of 70%, based on results from the phase I trial and those reported in the literature for RICE/R-DHAP. Results: Baseline demographics were similar between TREC and RICE/R-DHAP groups. The average cost of one cycle of TREC was similar to RICE and R-DHAP. Medication costs were higher with TREC, representing the majority of total regimen cost. Non-medication costs were higher with RICE/R-DHAP, reflecting higher costs associated with facility, labor, and inpatient admissions. The total cost per response was similar between groups; removing drug-related costs, the cost per response of TREC is significantly lower. Conclusions: Although total costs were similar for outpatient TREC compared to inpatient salvage regimens, most of the costs were attributable to the high-cost of bendamustine. Lower medication-related costs and outpatient administration could yield considerable cost savings and lower cost-per-response.