All content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals only. By acknowledging this message and accessing the information on this website you are confirming that you are a Healthcare Professional. If you are a patient or carer, please visit the Lymphoma Coalition.

The Lymphoma Hub uses cookies on this website. They help us give you the best online experience. By continuing to use our website without changing your cookie settings, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our updated Cookie Policy

Introducing

Now you can personalise
your Lymphoma Hub experience!

Bookmark content to read later

Select your specific areas of interest

View content recommended for you

Find out more
  TRANSLATE

The Lymphoma Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the Lymphoma Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The Lymphoma Hub and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.

Steering CommitteeAbout UsNewsletterContact
LOADING
You're logged in! Click here any time to manage your account or log out.
LOADING
You're logged in! Click here any time to manage your account or log out.
2019-06-20T10:56:52.000Z

EHA 2019 | MABCUTE study: Extended maintenance with subcutaneous rituximab vs observation in iNHL

Featured
Jun 20, 2019
Share:

Bookmark this article

At the 24th Congress of the European Hematology Association (EHA), Simon Rule, Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Plymouth, UK, talks about MABCUTE phase III study with the Lymphoma Hub. The MABCUTE study compared the use of subcutaneous (SC) rituximab and intravenous (IV) rituximab, and also extended maintenance with SC rituximab compared to observation, in indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (iNHL).

Following two years of rituximab treatment, patients who remained responsive were randomized to either extended maintenance with SC rituximab, or cessation of treatment and observation.

The study found no additional toxicity associated with SC rituximab compared to IV, including in the extended maintenance vs observation portion. There was also no difference in the primary endpoint of progression-free survival (PFS) between arms and near superimposable overall survival curves.

Statistically, it may be stated that longer follow-up is needed, but based on this study of over 300 patients, it can be concluded that extending maintenance does not improve outcomes and so patients can stop treatment after 2 years, as is currently the standard-of-care.

MABCUTE study: Extended maintenance with subcutaneous rituximab vs observation in iNHL

Understanding your specialty helps us to deliver the most relevant and engaging content.

Please spare a moment to share yours.

Please select or type your specialty

  Thank you

Newsletter

Subscribe to get the best content related to lymphoma & CLL delivered to your inbox