1. For each anti-rituximab sample taken, drug-concentration analysis was added as a requirement at each scheduled time point. 2. The 30-minute postdose anti-rHuPH20 samples were removed from every cycle. 3. Additional anti-rituximab and anti-rHuPH20 samples were required during the follow up period (i.e., at 6 and 12 months). 4. The screening/baseline anti-rituximab sample was removed (because the Cycle 1 predose sample could also act as the baseline sample). 5. The Schedule of Assessments and applicable footnotes were revised to reflect the above changes and to correct some inconsistencies. Immunogenicity sampling schedules for Treatment Arms A and B were included for ease of reference during the study. 6. The prephase corticosteroid example was increased from 3 days to 5 days in subjects with aggressive NHL. 7. The reporting requirements for SAEs and AEs of special interest after the end of study were revised in alignment with recent global requirements. 8. The needle gauge was revised to include both 25- and 27-gauge needles. 9. The word “MabThera” (trade name) was replaced with the word “rituximab” (generic name) in the PPQ for consistency within the protocol.

1. It was originally anticipated that the proportion of subjects preferring rituximab SC would be approximately 60%. In order to have a sample size of 720 subjects for analysis of the primary endpoint, the enrollment target was originally 900. However, a preplanned interim analysis revealed that approximately 80% of subjects preferred rituximab SC. After a discussion with the IDMC, the sample size was recalculated, decreasing the required number of subjects from 720 to 560 subjects and the enrollment target to 700 subjects. 2. Although subjects with active hepatitis B or hepatitis C virus were excluded from the study, some hepatitis-related conditions were permitted. 3. As the blastic variant of mantle cell lymphoma is neither DLBCL nor NHL, this was removed as an exclusion criterion from the study. 4. Subjects receiving prior intrathecal methotrexate for central nervous system prophylaxis in DLBCL were not excluded. 5. For study entry, subjects must have had histologically confirmed, previously untreated CD20+ DLBCL or CD20+ follicular NHL Grade 1, 2, or 3a, according to the World Health Organization (WHO) classification system. The patient’s diagnosis was to be histologically confirmed prior to randomization. It was clarified that fine-needle aspiration samples were not be used as the sole material for pathological diagnosis. Lymph node excision or adequate core biopsy was required for the diagnosis of diffuse large B cell lymphoma or follicular NHL. 6. For assessment of hematologic function for study eligibility criteria, it was clarified that transfusions were not permitted within 2 weeks prior to the start of study drug administration. 7. The acceptable length of a cycle delay was increased from 10 days to 3 weeks, making it consistent with the 3-week window allowed for the treatment of toxicities and/or AEs.

8. To allow investigators to decide how best to manage specific hematologic and non-hematologic AEs associated with rituximab-CHOP treatment, the protocol “guidelines” were changed to be considered as “recommendations.” Patient management decisions that did not adhere to these recommendations were no longer to be considered as major protocol violations. 9. To comply with doxorubicin’s prescribing information, subjects receiving rituximab-CHOP treatment who had a bilirubin value in the range of 20–50 micro mol per liter had their dose of doxorubicin reduced by 50%. 10. Corticosteroids could now be given as part of premedication to reduce the incidence and severity of injection-related reactions. 11. It was clarified that long-term treatment (>1 month) with intermittent corticosteroids for prophylaxis (e.g., contrast dye allergy) or for treatment of autoimmune conditions was permitted. 12. To comply with the guidance given in the current rituximab SC Investigator’s Brochure, subjects were now to be observed for at least 15 minutes following rituximab SC administration. A longer period may have been appropriate in subjects with an increased risk of hypersensitivity reactions. 13. To conform to standards of clinical practice, subjects with a high risk of central nervous system involvement could now receive prophylactic intrathecal methotrexate. Intrathecal methotrexate was to be administered according to local standards. 14. To better follow clinical practice, subjects were weighed prior to each treatment so that BSA could be recalculated if necessary. Cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin, and bendamustine doses were to be recalculated only if the patient’s weight changed by more than ± 10% from baseline. 15. It was clarified that non-investigational medicinal products given as part of the subject’s chemotherapy must have been approved for this indication.

16. Additional chemotherapy regimens of CHOP every 14 days × 8 cycles, CHOP every 28 days × 8 cycles, CVP every 21 days × 6 cycles, and CVP every 28 days × 6 cycles were now permitted. 17. The wording about stability and storage of rituximab SC was updated according to the latest Investigator’s Brochure. 18. It was clarified that the end-of-treatment response assessment, including radiology and imaging report, must have been obtained 28 (± 3) days after Day 1 of the last dose of induction treatment. The protocol previously stated that this must have been obtained between 4 and 8 weeks after Day 1 of the last treatment cycle, which was inconsistent with other parts of the protocol describing the final staging assessment. 19. As some study sites were only able to perform an international normalized ratio test, coagulation tests now included at least one of the following tests: international normalized ratio, prothrombin time, and activated partial thromboplastin time. 20. Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) was previously only required to be tested at screening. However, as normalization of LDH was part of the response assessment according to the International Working Group (Cheson et al. 1999), subjects with an abnormal LDH at screening also had LDH included as part of their interim and final staging assessments. In addition, subjects with abnormal alkaline phosphatase, albumin, blood urea nitrogen, or C reactive protein at screening had these tests repeated as part of their interim and final staging assessments. 21. Neutrophil and lymphocyte counts were added to hematology tests to better monitor safety and to be consistent with other rituximab clinical trial protocols. 22. It was clarified that it was acceptable for subjects to have an MRI if they had a contraindication to CT scans (e.g., subjects with contrast allergy or impaired renal clearance).

23. It was clarified that CT scans of the pelvis need only be done if clinically indicated. CT scans of the neck, chest, and abdomen continued to be required for all study subjects. 24. To minimize discrepancy between the calculation of follow-up visit dates and CT scan intervals, the wording was modified to allow sites to follow the CT frequency according to local standard of care. 25. The follow-up of subjects after induction treatment occurred every 3 months (± 2 weeks). It was clarified that the visit schedule would be calculated based on Visit 9. 26. The wording around the timing of Visit 5 (interim staging) was clarified. All interim staging and Visit 5 must have occurred prior to Visit 6 (initiation of Cycle 5), regardless of whether the CHOP regimen was given every 14 or 21 days. 27. To reduce redundant sampling, if Visit 5 (interim staging) was within 7 days of Visit 6 (initiation of Cycle 5), there was no need to collect the samples for Visit 6, i.e., only Visit 5 samples were to be collected and labeled as Visit 5. 28. During the post-treatment follow-up (observation) period, laboratory assessments and physical examinations were performed only if clinically indicated. 29. In the definition of disease-free and PFS, it was clarified that in terms of the event (relapse, progression, or death as relevant), these outcomes were to be assessed based on the event that occurred first. 30. The protocol wording was updated to reflect the latest Roche protocol template regarding the following: a) If an adverse event worsened in severity and became serious b) If the electronic data capture system was not available and a pregnancy reporting form needed to be submitted c) Investigators were to document and explain any protocol deviations 31. If new anti-lymphoma treatment had been started, any response to therapy was documented in electronic Case Report Form; however, it was clarified that response assessments were not specifically mandated by this study.

32. It was clarified that CT scans of the pelvis need only be done if clinically indicated. CT scans of the neck, chest, and abdomen continued to be required for all study subjects. 33. To minimize discrepancy between the calculation of follow-up visit dates and CT scan intervals, the wording was modified to allow sites to follow the CT frequency according to local standard of care. 34. The follow-up of subjects after induction treatment occurred every 3 months (± 2 weeks). It was clarified that the visit schedule would be calculated based on Visit 9. 35. The wording around the timing of Visit 5 (interim staging) was clarified. All interim staging and Visit 5 must have occurred prior to Visit 6 (initiation of Cycle 5), regardless of whether the CHOP regimen was given every 14 or 21 days. 36. To reduce redundant sampling, if Visit 5 (interim staging) was within 7 days of Visit 6 (initiation of Cycle 5), there was no need to collect the samples for Visit 6, i.e., only Visit 5 samples were to be collected and labeled as Visit 5. 37. During the post-treatment follow-up (observation) period, laboratory assessments and physical examinations were performed only if clinically indicated. 38. In the definition of disease-free and PFS, it was clarified that in terms of the event (relapse, progression, or death as relevant), these outcomes were to be assessed based on the event that occurred first. 39. The protocol wording was updated to reflect the latest Roche protocol template regarding the following: a) If an adverse event worsened in severity and became serious b) If the electronic data capture system was not available and a pregnancy reporting form needed to be submitted c) Investigators were to document and explain any protocol deviations 40. If new anti-lymphoma treatment had been started, any response to therapy was documented in electronic Case Report Form; however, it was clarified that response assessments were not specifically mandated by this study.

41. After study closure initiation, unrelated AEs/SAEs occurring in an off-study patient who had started a new anti-cancer treatment did not need to be reported. 42. Based on current recruitment rates, the study recruitment period was increased from 12 to 18 months, and the study duration was correspondingly adjusted from 3.5 to 4 years. 43. Additional minor changes were made to improve clarity and consistency.