Klumpp, Thomas R.

Abstract Abstract 3094 The HLA class II DRB1 antigen DR15 is an important immunobiologic marker in immune mediated marrow failure states. DR15 has also been reported in small studies to be associated with favorable outcomes (reduction in acute GVHD and reduced relapse resulting in improved overall survival) after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant. To elucidate the impact of DR15 on major transplant outcomes, we conducted a retrospective study of 2, 891 recipients of first marrow or mobilized peripheral blood stem cell transplantation for the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (n=1038), acute lymphoblastic leukemia (n=700), chronic myeloid leukemia (n=948), or myelodysplastic syndrome (n=205) between 1990–2008 and reported to the CIBMTR registry. Selection was confined to HLA-identical sibling transplantation to avoid HLA-disparity as a driving force for observed differences. All patients received conventional myeloablative conditioning, T-replete grafts and cyclosporine plus methotrexate- based GVHD prophylaxis. DNA-based HLA typing allowed categorization of 732 (25.3%) patients as positive and 2159 (74.7%) patients as negative for DRB1*15 :01 or *15 :02 (DR15). There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the HLA DR15-positive and -negative groups. In univariate analysis, HLA-DR15 status had no impact on neutrophil engraftment, acute graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) II-IV or III-IV, chronic GVHD, treatment related mortality, relapse, disease-free survival or overall survival. Confining the univariate analysis to myeloid malignancies did not alter these findings. Multivariate analysis models were constructed with DR15 status forced into the models in all steps of model building and the final model regardless of its statistical significance. Other variables tested included: donor/recipient age, CMV status, disease, disease stage, graft source, Karnofsky score, race and year of transplant. Variables that attained a p-value ≤0.05 were held in the final multivariate models. In multivariate analysis, DR15 status showed no significant difference in the primary outcomes of acute GVHD II-IV or III-IV, chronic GVHD, overall survival, or relapse. In conclusion, DR15 status had no impact on major HLA-matched sibling donor hematopoietic cell transplantation outcomes in this large and homogenous cohort of leukemia and MDS patients. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 680 Cytogenetics play an essential role in determining the prognosis of patients with AML. However, there is still no validated cytogenetics grouping scheme that specifically applies to patients undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation, which hampers accurate prognostication and risk stratification. We studied 821 adult patients (median age 41, range 18–74) who underwent SCT between 1999 and 2004 for AML (excluding APL) in CR1 or CR2 and who were reported to the CIBMTR from centers with >20 patients meeting study criteria. 75% of patients received a myeloablative conditioning. 496 patients had a normal karyotype. The primary cytogenetics reports were manually reviewed for 92% of the patients with an abnormal karyotype. We compared the ability of the 6 existing grouping schemes (MRC, CALGB, EORTC/GIMEMA, SWOG/ECOG, DFCI, and Monosomal Karyotype (MK) classifications) to stratify patients, using both the Akaike Information Criterion in multivariable models and the C-statistic. Among all existing schemes, the DFCI system provided a marginally superior stratification for overall and leukemia-free survival. We also built a new classification using individual cytogenetic abnormalities in a Cox model that included other significant covariates (performance status, therapy-related disease, conditioning intensity, graft source, donor match, duration of CR1, and gender match). This CIBMTR scheme (see Table), which is similar to the DFCI scheme except for the inclusion of patients with t(8;21) in the intermediate group, could stratify patients into 3 groups with similar treatment-related mortality but significantly different overall survival, leukemia-free survival, and incidence of relapse. This scheme appeared to apply to both patients in CR1 and in CR2 (see FiguresF2). This transplant-specific scheme could be adopted for prognostication purposes and to stratify patients with karyotypic abnormalities entering transplantation clinical trials. Future studies may clarify the relative outcome of patients with t(8;21) and refine this scheme with the inclusion of molecular abnormalities. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.