Maintenance therapy for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is useless, only relapses later, and patient survival is not improved. Rituximab and lenalidomide can improve disease progression-free survival (FFS) in DLBCL, but not overall survival. Simply put, maintenance delays relapse, but survival remains the same. And considering the cost and side effects of the drug, maintenance therapy for DLBCL is not recommended. The conclusions are based on the following 2 clinical trials A multicenter trial randomly assigned rituximab maintenance versus observation therapy to 415 adults aged 60 years or older who achieved complete remission after R-CHOP or CHOP [1]. After three years, patients receiving rituximab maintenance therapy had improved disease-free survival (53% vs. 46%), but not overall survival; the disease-free survival benefit of rituximab maintenance therapy was limited to patients who had previously received CHOP but not R-CHOP. Long-term follow-up reported in abstract form also did not demonstrate an overall survival benefit of maintenance rituximab [2]. One trial randomly assigned lenalidomide maintenance therapy versus placebo to 650 elderly patients (60 to 80 years of age) who achieved CR or partial remission on R-CHOP therapy [3]. Lenalidomide achieved superior disease-progression-free survival (HR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.93) after three years of follow-up, but did not improve overall survival after 52 months. Lenalidomide was associated with more grade 3/4 neutropenia (56% and 22%, respectively) and skin reactions (5% versus 1%) compared with placebo. This literature was published in Clinical Oncology in 2017, probably on the premise that there are so many watered down articles that many people can’t read or don’t see this article, and there are entire provinces where specialists are still giving patients lenalidomide maintenance, and even top-rated blood centers in the country that give patients lenalidomide maintenance after autologous transplantation, which can be rested.