Saber, Wael

Abstract Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) are the two most common childhood leukemias. Novel drug therapies and allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT) have improved ALL and AML treatment outcomes over the past two decades. However, alloHCT may be associated with significant morbidity and mortality that results in increased healthcare utilization. To date, no multi-center comparative effectiveness studies have been performed specifically evaluating alloHCT in children with ALL or AML. This study uses a novel methodology to investigate the hypothesis that matched sibling donor (MSD) alloHCT has significantly lower healthcare utilization compared to unrelated donor (URD) and that among URD, umbilical cord blood transplants (CBT) will have higher initial utilization but lower long-term utilization. Clinical and transplant outcomes data from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) database were merged with inpatient resource utilization and standardized cost data from the Pediatric Health Information System (PHIS) database using a probabilistic merge methodology. This merged dataset contained U.S. patients age 1-21 years who received alloHCT for ALL or AML from 2004-2013 with comprehensive CIBMTR data at a PHIS reporting hospital. The primary outcomes of overall survival (OS), leukemia free survival (LFS), and inpatient resource utilization were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, Cox proportional hazards, and unadjusted Poisson regression analysis. Cost and resource comparisons for all donor types were made through day+100 and focused on URD only comparisons up to 2-year follow-up. Donor procurement costs were not directly included in this analysis. A total of 797 patients (54% of CIBMTR eligible patients and 89% of CIBMTR patients at PHIS centers) were successfully identified in both CIBMTR and PHIS; 433 had ALL and had 364 AML. LFS for ALL at 3 years was 68% for MSD, 53% for MUD, and 53% for CBT. The LFS in ALL was significantly impacted by donor type, age, disease status, and CMV (Table). The associated total costs were significantly higher for well-matched unrelated bone marrow (MUD) vs MSD at 100d ($246,149 vs $147,547, p<0.01), but CBT costs were not significantly higher compared to MUD at 100d ($275,673 vs $246,149, p=0.09). When median total costs per day were compared across donor source, findings were similar with well- MUD was significantly higher than MSD at 100d ($3,388/d vs $2,511/d, p=0.012), and no significant difference between CBT and MUD ($3,881/d vs $3,388/d, p=0.53). The corresponding average length of stay (ALOS) was 35 days for MUD, 34 days MSD, and 53 days CBT. Among URD alloHCT, median CBT costs per day were not significantly higher compared to MUD at 2yrs ($2,472/d vs $2,294/d, p=0.49). AlloHCT for AML had a 3-yr LFS of 56% for MSD, 46% for MUD, and 41% for CBT. LFS were significantly different by disease status and performance status (Table). The associated total costs were significantly higher for MUD at 100d than MSD ($259,293 vs $143,870, p<0.001), but CBT costs were not significantly higher compared to MUD at 100d ($301,160 vs $259,293, p=0.055). Comparisons of median total costs per day were similar, MUD vs MSD at 100d was significantly higher ($3,627/d vs $2,478/d, p<0.01), but CBT costs were not significantly higher compared to MUD at 100d ($3,891/d vs $3,627/d, p=0.95). The corresponding ALOS was 38 days for MUD, 35 days MSD, and 66 days CBT. Among URD alloHCT, median CBT costs per day were not significantly higher compared to MUD at 2yrs ($3,232/d vs $3,102/d, p=0.49). This study recapitulates previously published outcomes of alloHCT for acute leukemia AND adds key findings on the impact of alloHCT on inpatient resource utilization and costs. Specifically, MSD and MUD alloHCT provide similar survival outcomes; however, MSD alloHCT has a significant advantage in cost and resource utilization for both ALL and AML. Among URD transplants, CBT does not show any substantial survival or resource utilization advantage over MUD. Ongoing research will need to be performed to determine if the difference among URD alloHCT becomes significant with a larger sample size and/or beyond the 2 years following alloHCT. Table Table. Disclosures Pulsipher: Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Study Steering Committee; Jazz Pharmaceutical: Consultancy; Medac: Other: Housing support for conference; Chimerix: Consultancy. Hahn:Novartis: Equity Ownership; NIH: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Current advances in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT) may warrant a paradigm shift in managing children with sickle cell disease (SCD). This study characterizes the clinical outcomes and health care utilization (HCU) of alloHCT for pediatric SCD. We hypothesize that early alloHCT will have improved clinical outcomes, and decreased HCU. Methods: The Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research database was used to identify children 21 years or less with alloHCT for SCD in the United States. Patient data included comprehensive research forms (CRF) from 2000-13 and transplant essential data (TED) forms from 2000-11. CRFs provided clinical risk factors associated with overall survival, graft failure, grade III-IV acute GVHD, and GVHD related event free survival (GREFS) - the survival free of graft failure, chronic GVHD, or death. Risk factors included age, gender, performance status, year of alloHCT, prior SCD complications and therapy, CMV status, donor type, conditioning regimen, and GVHD prophylaxis. Due to low event rates and sample size, only univariate analysis of risk factors was performed. TED data was merged with Pediatric Health Information System (PHIS) inpatient data using a probabilistic merging algorithm to determine risk factors and clinical outcomes associated with HCU. Available PHIS adjusted cost data was used to determine the total adjusted cost for all inpatient admissions per patient per hospital day. To standardize these costs, the total adjusted cost per 30 hospital days was calculated for each patient and used as the primary HCU outcome. HCU outcomes were analyzed for the alloHCT year, day 0 to day +365. Results: CRF data for 161 patients showed an overall survival at 2 years of 90% (95% confidence intervals [CI] 85-95%): 96% (95% CI 89-100%) for related and unrelated cord blood transplant (CBT), 94% (95% CI 86-98%) matched siblings (MSD), and 74% (95% CI 54-90%) matched unrelated donors (MUD, p=0.002). All deaths occurred among children with pre-alloHCT complications of SCD, and deaths were due to organ failure (37.5%), infections (25%), GVHD (6.25%). Risk of death was significantly higher for children ≥10 years old (HR 21, p=0.003) and MUD compared to MSD (HR 5.88, p=0.005) but lower with cyclosporine A (CSA) GVHD prophylaxis versus FK506 (HR 0.33, p=0.031). 75% of deaths occurred before day +42. Cumulative acute GVHD incidence at day 100 was 14% (95% CI 9-20%)and was associated with age ≥10yrs (HR 2.63, p=0.035). Chronic GVHD incidence was 31% (95% CI 23-38%) at 2yrs, and factors associated were age ≥10yrs (HR 1.92, p=0.034), MUD vs MSD (HR 2.53, p=0.017), and CSA vs FK506 prophylaxis (HR 0.48, p=0.018). Chronic GVHD risk increased significantly after 2006 (HR 2.81, p=0.018). The 2yr GREFS was 64% (95% CI 56-71%). Age ≥10yrs (HR 2.2, p=0.005), MUD (vs MSD, HR 3.00, p=0.002) and CSA prophylaxis (vs FK506, HR 0.49, p=0.011) were significantly associated with this outcome. Among the 175 patients with combined TED and PHIS data, the median total adjusted cost was $117,393 per 30 hospital days per patient (range: $36,244-$515,640) during the alloHCT year with a median of 53 hospital days per patient (range: 16-304). Age ≥10yrs and HCU were not significantly associated (p=0.775). MSD had the lowest HCU compared to CBT and unrelated transplants (p<0.001). CBT and peripheral blood stem cells were associated with higher HCU compared to bone marrow (p=0.004). Increased HCU was associated with prior stroke (p=0.0004) and pain crises (p=0.0094) but not acute chest syndrome (p=0.2913). Overall SCD complication and severity indices correlated with increased HCU (p=0.052, p=0.0219, respectively). Conclusions: AlloHCT outcomes in children with SCD were linked to age and donor type suggesting that early alloHCT before age 10 years is preferred. Specifically, SCD severity and MUD alloHCT are associated with poorer outcomes and increased HCU. This supports the recommendation of early alloHCT, prior to onset of SCD complications, for children with SCD and an available MSD. Donor source and type had a significant impact on both outcomes and HCU. CBT outcomes were similar to MSD bone marrow; yet CBT had higher HCU suggesting additional analysis is needed to determine if the clinical benefit outweighs the cost. Further analysis is also needed to better understand and mitigate risk factors associated with poor outcomes and increased HCU following MUD alloHCT. Disclosures Arnold: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Harold Amos Medical Faculty Development Program: Other: award. Hahn:NIH/NHLBI: Research Funding; Novartis: Equity Ownership.

Introduction: Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are a heterogenous group of blood disorders defined by peripheral cytopenia(s), bone marrow failure, morphological dysplasia, and risk of progression. To understand the genetic, epigenetic and biological factors associated with the initiation and progression of MDS, NHLBI created the National MDS Study (NCT02775383). This is a prospective cohort study conducted at 92 community hospitals and 29 academic centers enrolling patients undergoing diagnostic work up for suspected MDS or MDS/myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) overlap syndrome. Eligible patients have yet to receive any therapy directed at their cytopenias. Previously untreated cytopenic participants underwent centralized histopathology and data review at the time of enrollment for assignment into distinct subcategories: MDS, MDS/MPN overlap, AML, and Other. Targeted exon sequencing of 96 genes was performed using marrow specimens from the first 300 consecutive individuals in the study. Here we report the genetic mutations for this cohort. Methods: NovaSeq 6000 was used for deep sequencing at a mean coverage of 1,286X and mean breadth (bases covered at ≥100X) of 99.8%. Reads were aligned against build GRCh38 using BWA-MEM, and VarScan2 was used to detect SNVs and INDELS. Variants were filtered for those with an allele base quality of >25 in combination with rule-based and manual review criteria. Subjects in the Other category without an identified malignancy were considered clonal cytopenias of undetermined significance (CCUS) when a mutation or a clonal cytogenetic change was present. Fisher's exact and Wilcoxon rank sum tests in combination with Bonferroni correction were applied to compare groups. Results : A total of 350 putative nonsynonymous pathogenic variants in 36 genes with an allele frequency of >.05 were identified across 150 patients (50%). At least one variant was noted in the following proportion of individuals: 61/72 (85%) with MDS, 13/13 (100%) with MDS/MPN, 15/17 (88%) with AML, and 61/198 (31%) in the Other category, of which 48 were CCUS and 13 were other cancers. Two CCUS patients only had a cytogenetic abnormality. Table 1 shows the distribution of variants in each subcategory of patients for the most commonly mutated genes in our cohort of 300 subjects. Mutations in these genes were enriched in specific groups: SF3B1, STAG2,TP53, and ASXL1 in MDS; TET2 in MDS/MPN; and IDH2 and TP53 in AML (one-sided p<0.0012). None were enriched in the Other group. Within the CCUS subset, 21 genes were mutated, with 37 of 50 (74%) patients having a mutation in TET2, ASXL1, SRSF2, SF3B1, or DNMT3A. The heatmap presented in Figure 1 summarizes variants by subject and allele frequency. Pair-wise comparisons of baseline characteristics of subjects between MDS, MDS/MPN, AML, or CCUS groups revealed no significant differences for age or sex. The CCUS group had significantly higher hemoglobins than the MDS group with median hemoglobin levels of 11.35 and 9.40 g/dL, respectively (p<0.0084). AML had significantly lower platelets compared to all other groups (median of 53 vs. > 110x109/L , respectively, p<0.0084). All groups significantly differed in their median ANC with AML having the lowest (0.8x109/L), followed by MDS (1.5x109/L), CCUS (2.45x109/L), and MDS/MPN overlap (5.95x109/L) (p<0.0084). There was no difference in the median number of variants per patient between groups or correlation with age (rs=0.11, p=0.18). The maximum variant allele frequency (maxVAF) per patient was highest in the MDS/MPN group (median = 0.42, range = 0.38-0.91) and lowest in the CCUS group (median = 0.37, range =0.06-0.98) with the MDS/MPN group having a significantly higher maxVAF compared to the MDS and the CCUS groups (p<0.0084). The proportions of subjects with mutations was similar for those who had abnormal (92% [34/37]) and normal (91% [80/88]) cytogenetics. Conclusions: Incorporation of gene-panel sequencing in the comprehensive evaluation of 300 adult cytopenic patients identified half of the cohort with potentially pathogenic variants. Ultimately, a diagnosis of CCUS was possible in 48 of 183 subjects (26%) not diagnosed with MDS, MDS/MPN overlap syndrome, AML, other cancers or clonal cytogenetics. This study continues to serially bank samples from patients with CCUS, in addition to MDS, MDS/MPN, and ICUS, with the goal to better understand the natural history of these diseases and their progression. Disclosures Lindsley: Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Medlmmune: Research Funding. Bejar:Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; AbbVie/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astex/Otsuka: Consultancy; Modus Outcomes: Consultancy; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy. Al Baghdadi:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Heron: Consultancy, Honoraria; Tracon: Equity Ownership; Epizyme: Equity Ownership; Bristol Myer Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sunesis: Equity Ownership; Portola: Equity Ownership; Heron therapeutics: Equity Ownership; Cardinal health: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Myer Squibb: Equity Ownership; Celgene: Equity Ownership; Spectrum pharmaceutical: Equity Ownership; Astrazeneca: Equity Ownership; Seattle genetics: Equity Ownership; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria. DeZern:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Foran:Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding. Gore:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding. Komrokji:DSI: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; JAZZ: Speakers Bureau; pfizer: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; JAZZ: Consultancy. Maciejewski:Alexion: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Starczynowski:Kurome Therapeutics: Consultancy. Sekeres:Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Patients who develop therapy-related myelodysplastic syndromes (t-MDSs) or acute myeloid leukemia (t-AML) following prior chemotherapy or an autologous hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT), have a poor prognosis. An earlier analysis of allogeneic HCT (n=868, 1990-2004) showed 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease free survival (DFS) were 22% and 21% (reference). Furthermore, older age, graft source other than a HLA-matched sibling or HLA well matched unrelated donor (URD), t-AML not in remission or advanced t-MDS, and poor risk cytogenetics were associated with worse outcomes. Modern supportive care and conditioning regimens including reduced intensity (RIC) regimens may have improved outcomes. Therefore we analyzed 1531 HCT for t-AML (n = 772) or t-MDS (n = 759) performed from 2000 to 2014. The median age at transplant was 52 (18-77) for t-AML and 59 (18-74) for t-MDS. Eleven percent of patient with t-AML and 24% of patient with t-MDS had a prior autologous transplant. A myeloablative regimen was used for conditioning in 61% of patients with t-AML and 49% of patients with t-MDS (Table 1). For t-AML, the 5-year non-relapse mortality (NRM) and relapse rates (RR) were 33% (95% confidence interval [CI], 30-36) and 43% (40-47), respectively. For t-MDS, the 5 year TRM and RR were 32% (29-36) and 46% (43-50), respectively. Five year DFS and OS were 24% (21-27) and 25% (22-28), respectively, for patients with t-AML. Five year DFS and OS were 21% (18-24) and 27% (23-31), respectively, for patients with t-MDS. In multivariate analysis, t-AML OS and DFS was worse for: previous autologous transplant, relapsed disease at HCT, intermediate or adverse cytogenetics, partially matched and cord blood grafts, and RIC. For t-MDS: age greater than 60, previous autologous transplant, very high IPSS score, and use of HLA-partially matched unrelated grafts. A significant minority of patients with t-AML and t-MDS can achieve long-term remission with allogeneic HCT, yet risks of both NRM and relapse are still excessive. Relapse is the major cause of treatment failure. Disclosures Metheny: Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau. Weisdorf:Incyte: Research Funding; Fate Therapeutics: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Kebriaei:Jazz: Consultancy; Amgen: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Kite: Honoraria.

Although some data (Scott, JCO 2017) suggest that myeloablative conditioning (MAC) is preferred for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), these data were not informed by analysis of disease specific risk factors. We analyzed AML and MDS HCT outcomes stratified by the disease risk index (DRI) in order to identify the preferred transplant conditioning intensity (reduced-intensity conditioning [RIC] vs. MAC). In this large CIBMTR registry study we identified 4387 adult patients (age 40-65 years) who received HCT for AML (68%) or MDS (32%) between 2009 and 2015. DRI was stratified as low/ intermediate risk (1539 MAC and 999 RIC) and high/ very high risk (1121 MAC and 728 RIC). Examining the low/ intermediate risk DRI cohort (Table), RIC was associated with lower risk of TRM (HR=0.74, 95% CI 0.62-0.88; p<0.001) but significantly higher risk of relapse (HR=1.54, 95% CI 1.35-1.76; p<0.001). As a result, RFS in this cohort was significantly worse with RIC (HR=1.19, 95% CI 1.07-1.33; p=0.001). In the high/ very high risk DRI cohort, RIC resulted in similar TRM (HR=0.83, 95% CI 0.68-1.00; p=0.051) but again significantly higher risk of relapse (HR=1.23, 95% CI 1.08-1.41; p=0.002). RFS in high/ very high risk DRI cohort was similar between RIC and MAC. Adjusted outcome curves for the 3 endpoints are shown in the Figure. In this large study of HCT for AML or MDS stratified by DRI, RIC was independent predictor of lower TRM, but significantly higher risk of relapse. The MAC was an independent predictor of lower relapse in both low/ intermediate and high/very high DRI groups. However, MAC only resulted in RFS benefit in the low/ intermediate group where the magnitude of impact on relapse was not offset by the higher TRM. In adults with AML or MDS aged 40-65 years, these data support MAC as the preferred conditioning intensity for low/ intermediate risk DRI, whereas MAC does not provide significant benefit in those with high/ very high risk DRI. Safer, yet still potent MAC regimens could benefit this higher risk group. Disclosures Bejanyan: Kiadis Pharma: Other: advisory board. Brunstein:Gamida: Research Funding; Astex: Research Funding; Magenta: Research Funding. Kebriaei:Amgen: Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy; Pfizer: Honoraria; Kite: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Kite: Honoraria. Weisdorf:Fate Therapeutics: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Incyte: Research Funding.

Introduction: AML patients with intermediate or high-risk features often undergo allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) during first complete remission (CR). The 2017 European LeukemiaNet guidelines for AML specify categories of CR: both with and without count recovery (CR vs. CRi) and with and without measurable residual disease (MRD). Previous smaller retrospective studies have suggested poorer survival outcomes after alloHCT for patients with responses less than CR. Methods: Eligible cases were determined using the CIBMTR registry. Each had AML in CR1, was ≥ 18 years, and underwent alloHCT between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2015. MRD was defined based on the answers to qualitative questions on standard clinical reporting forms that ask if the patient is in either molecular or cytogenetic remission and if disease is detected in marrow by flow cytometry at time of HCT. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), and secondary outcomes were non-relapse mortality (NRM), relapse and disease-free survival (DFS). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate survival and cumulative incidence function was used to estimate relapse and NRM. Multivariable analysis (MVA) was performed using the Cox proportional hazards model to adjust for patient-, disease-, and transplant-related factors. Adjusted probabilities of DFS and OS, adjusted cumulative incidence curves of NRM and relapse were generated from final Cox regression models stratified on CR vs. CRi and weighted averages of covariate values using pooled sample proportion as weight function. Results: We identified 2492 cases (CR, n=1799; CRi, n=693). The main effect variable (CR vs. CRi) was missing in 262 additional patients; these patients were excluded when univariate analysis confirmed no significant associations, suggesting a random distribution of missing data. Patient characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Compared with patients with CR, patients with CRi were more likely to have a Karnofsky score <90 (38% vs. 31%) and an HCT-CI score 3+ (47% vs. 40%). Other variables were well matched between the groups. MVA demonstrated significantly increased likelihood of mortality in patients with CRi compared to those with CR with hazard ratio (HR) 1.27; 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.13-1.43) (Figure 1A). Other covariates significantly associated with shorter OS included older age, poor-risk cytogenetics, lower Karnofsky score, higher HCT-CI score, and higher white blood cell count at diagnosis. The adjusted OS probabilities at 5 year post-HCT accounted for factors from MVA model are 50% (95%CI 47-52) for patients with CR and 43% (95%CI 39-47) for patients with CRi. CRi was also associated with significantly increased NRM [HR 1.33, 95%CI(1.11-1.59)] with only a trend in increased relapse [HR 1.15, 95% CI(0.99-1.34), p=0.07] resulting in inferior DFS [HR 1.20, 95%CI(1.07-1.35)]. MRD status was available in a subset of 2297 patients, and pairwise comparison demonstrated that presence of MRD was associated with shorter OS, shorter DFS, higher NRM, and increased relapse compared to absence of MRD (Figure 1B). Pairwise interaction between the main effects (CR vs. CRi) and MRD status were tested with no significant findings at a level of 0.01, demonstrating that the effects of incomplete count recovery and MRD are independent of each other. Conclusions: Analysis of this large CIBMTR cohort demonstrates that survival outcomes differ among AML patients nominally in CR at the time of alloHCT. Patients with CRi and/or MRD have significantly shorter OS after alloHCT compared to those in CR, as well as shorter DFS and higher NRM. Further studies should focus on limiting NRM and reducing relapse to optimize post-alloHCT outcomes for patients with responses less than CR. Disclosures Percival: Pfizer Inc.: Research Funding; Nohla Therapeutics: Research Funding; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kebriaei:Jazz: Consultancy; Pfizer: Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding; Kite: Honoraria. Weisdorf:Fate Therapeutics: Consultancy; Incyte: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: The myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), including essential thrombocythemia (ET), polycythemia vera (PV) and myelofibrosis (MF) can be characterized by heterogeneous symptoms, disease features, and prognosis. Timely monitoring of blood counts and if needed, referral for discussion of stem cell transplant (SCT), are critical to optimizing survival and quality of life. In connection with the MPN SCT Transplantation Timing Taskforce's (MS3T's) work in developing the DIPPS-based Stem Cell Spectrum Timing Tool, the survey was deployed to explore factors contributing to delayed entry to SCT. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for MPNs strongly recommend referral to specialized centers with expertise in the management of MPNs (Mesa et. al. 2017). To date, efforts to assess the timing and quality of MPN patient care from the patient's perspective have been minimal. Methods: Patients were recruited from MPN-related Facebook pages, subscribers of MPNforum Magazine and E-mail support groups including the MPN-NET, MPDchat, and the MPN Research Foundation. Hematologists, MPN patients, and advocates constructed the 11-item survey questions and content. The survey was available for patient response between July 4-11th2018. Patients were queried on MPN type, time of diagnosis, and details regarding knowledge of their MPN disease features and care. Data: Demographics.Overall 2382 MPN patients responded to the online survey. Of these, 901 (38%) patients had ET, 865 (36%) had PV, 561 (24%) had MF, 41 (2%) had MPN-unclassifiable or MPN/MDS overlap and 15 (1%) did not respond. Among MF patients, 56% reported having primary MF, 42% secondary MF, 1% prefibrotic MF, and 1% reported having already undergone SCT (1% did not specify type of MF or transplant). The majority of patients were diagnosed with their MPN by a hematology/oncology (77.8%) or family practice (15 %) physician. MPN Care provider and monitoring: Out of all respondents, 35% reported being cared for by an MPN specialist, 36% were not cared for by an MPN specialist and 27% were unsure if their provider was an MPN specialist. Overall less than half (42%) of patients reported having sought a second opinion from an MPN specialist. The majority (87%) of participants knew their mutational status relating to the highly publicized and widely tested JAK2 V617F mutation (73.8%) and CALR (10.2%). However, a statistically insignificant number of patients had any idea of other driving and secondary mutations including MPL, EZH2, SRSF2, IDH1/2 or ASLX-1. Blood counts were reviewed by a hematologist for the majority of patients (93% responded "yes", 4% responded "sometimes", 3% responded "no"). SCT Referral: Among ET and PV, <1% of patients reported being referred to SCT. For MF, 34% of participants reported having been referred for SCT discussion (30% for primary MF and 28% for secondary MF). Conclusions: MPN patients often report receiving care outside of the care of an MPN specialist. Additionally, despite the poor outcomes and higher likelihood of progression to AML, less than a third of patients with secondary MF report being referred for SCT discussion. Independent validation of patient responses, particularly in regards to MPN specialized care and timing of transplant discussion should be investigated further. However, these patient responses suggest many patients may be receiving less than optimal MPN care. These results demonstrate the importance of community hematology/oncology physician and patient education regarding optimal MPN care. Disclosures Mesa: UT Health San Antonio - Mays Cancer Center: Employment; Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding. Palmer:Novartis: Research Funding. Harrison:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; CTI BioPharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Verstovsek:Italfarmaco: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Consultancy; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Scherber:Gilead: Honoraria.

Abstract Background: There is limited data comparing the outcomes of the two most common (FM or FB) RIC regimens in AML. Previous smaller retrospective studies suggest increased non-relapse mortality (NRM) but decreased relapse with FM based RIC with a variable effect on overall survival as compared to FB. Methods: AML patients aged ≥18 years who had their 1st allo HCT using FM or FB (iv Bu only) RIC between 2001-2015 who had data reported to CIBMTR were studied. Patients with cord blood or identical twin donors, TBI as a part of conditioning, GVHD prophylaxis with T cell depletion/CD34 selection or post HCT Cyclophosphamide were excluded. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints included non-relapse mortality (NRM), relapse, leukemia free survival (LFS) and acute and chronic GVHD. Cox proportional hazards multivariable regression was used to compare the two RIC regimens while adjusting for significant patient, disease and transplant related factors. Major subgroup analysis included patients in CR pre-HCT. Results: 622 patients received FB and 791 had FM RIC. Median age of the FM group was 59 years, range (18 to 76) and median age of FB group was 61 years, range (18- 77). Compared to FB RIC regimen, FM group had more patients with active disease (36% vs 18%), with mismatched donors (24% vs 15%), with bone marrow grafts (19% vs 9%), HCT before 2005 (29% vs 12%) and without ATG/alemtuzumab (58 % vs 48%); but fewer patients in CR1 (46% vs 62%) and matched sibling donor grafts (21% vs 30%). There was significantly increased NRM in the FM vs FB within 3 mo post HCT (hazard ratio (HR)=3.85 (95% confidence intervals [CI] 2.46-6.03), but not beyond 3 mo FM vs FB , HR= 1.14 (95% CI 0.88-1.47). There was significantly decreased relapse for FM vs FB, (HR=0.65 (0.55-0.76), p<0.001) and a marginally superior LFS for FM vs FB, (HR=0.89 (95% CI 0.78-1.00), p=0.05). There was a lower OS FM vs FB within 3 mo post HCT (HR=1.82 (95% CI 1.36-2.45), p<0.001) but similar OS for FM vs FB beyond 3 mo post HCT (HR=0.87 (95% CI 0.76-1.00), p=0.05). Analysis restricted to only patients in CR pre-HCT showed similar results: equivalent survival, higher early NRM and lower relapse with FM. Conclusion: The current study of this large CIBMTR AML transplant cohort has showed that in these two most common RIC regimens for allogeneic HCT, long-term survival with FM was similar to FB. While the FM regimen showed higher early NRM, it was associated with lower risks of relapse. Further analysis to evaluate FB and FM regimens in relationship to comorbidities, comprehensive geriatric assessments, and presence of minimal residual disease is warranted to better define the relative efficacy of these two RIC regimens in AML. Disclosures Weisdorf: Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; SL Behring: Consultancy; FATE: Consultancy; Equillium: Consultancy.

Abstract Introduction: Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT) is the only curative therapy for myelofibrosis (MF). Consideration of HCT is recommended by international working groups and national guidelines for MF patients (pts) age <70 with intermediate-1 with adverse indicators, intermediate-2 or high-risk disease by the Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS) for MF- a recommendation made in the absence of clear data indicating the optimal timing of HCT for MF. In this large multicenter retrospective study, we analyze overall survival in MF pts treated with and without HCT. Methods: Disease characteristics, treatments, and outcome data from MF pts receiving non-transplant therapy at 14 US academic medical centers between 2000-2014 were retrospectively collected. MF pts who underwent HCT were identified from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR). The Cox proportional hazards model was used. The reference time point (time zero) was time of referral for the non-transplant (non-HCT) arm and the time of transplant for the HCT arm. The main effect variable (HCT vs. non-HCT) violated the proportionality assumption where comparing to non-HCT, mortality was higher with HCT in early time period from time zero but then was lower in late time period; therefore, the comparison is presented as early time period and late time period. The Cox model identified 14 months from time zero as the ideal cut point to define early and late time periods. The proportionality assumption is satisfied within each of these two periods. Results: A total of 1377 and 551 pts were included in the non-HCT and HCT arms, respectively (Table 1). In the overall cohort, survival was higher with non-HCT vs. HCT in early time period (relative risk [RR]: 0.34, P< .0001, Figure 1D), but in late time period survival was lower with non-HCT vs. HCT (RR: 2.37, P< 0.001) (Table 2). In the DIPSS low-risk MF group, while survival was higher with non-HCT vs. HCT in the early time period (RR: 0.19, P=0.007, Figure 1A), survival was lower with non-HCT in the late time period, but the latter did not reach statistical significance (RR: 1.45, P=0.39). In the DIPSS intermediate-1 risk group, a survival advantage was present with non-HCT treatments vs. HCT in the early time period (RR: 0.27, P < .0001, Figure 1B), however survival was lower with non-HCT in the late time period (RR: 3.13, P < .0001). Similarly, in those with DIPSS intermediate-2 and high-risk MF, survival advantage was observed with non-HCT in the early time period (RR: 0.41, P< .0001, Figure IC), but survival was lower with non-HCT in the late time period (RR: 2.82, P < .0001). Conclusion: A long-term survival advantage with transplant was observed for pts with intermediate-1 or higher risk MF, but at the cost of potential early mortality. The magnitude of benefit increased as DIPSS risk score increased. Although this retrospective study has limitations, the results have an impact on clinical practice by suggesting that transplantation could be considered earlier in the disease course and supports the recommendation for consideration of HCT in the setting of intermediate-1 risk MF. Disclosures Gowin: Incyte: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Board, Speakers Bureau. Verstovsek:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy; Italfarmaco: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ali:Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gupta:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. Gerds:Celgene: Consultancy; Apexx Oncology: Consultancy; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy.

Abstract Introduction Follow-up is an integral part of hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) care which ensures accurate characterization of HCT-related outcomes as well as surveillance and intervention for complications. Despite the importance of follow-up of all HCT recipients at transplant centers, they may be lost to follow-up (LTFU). HCT recipients who are LTFU may be demographically or clinically distinct from HCT recipients who maintain regular center follow-up. Using population-based data from 17,550 adult and 4,279 pediatric HCT recipients from United States centers reported to the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR), we characterize the incidence of, and predictors for, becoming LTFU. Methods The study included 2-year (yr) survivors of first allogeneic (10,367 adults and 3,865 children) or autologous (7,183 adults and 414 children) HCT for malignant and non-malignant disorders in the United States from 2002-2013 reported to the CIBMTR. LTFU was defined as a patient having missed 2 consecutive follow-up reporting periods. CIBMTR follow-up forms are collected annually for the first 6 yrs post-HCT and bi-annually thereafter. The cumulative incidence of LTFU HCT recipients was calculated. Marginal Cox models allowing adjustment for center effect were fit to evaluate risk factors for becoming LTFU among adults and pediatric allogeneic and autologous HCT survivors. Risk factors evaluated included: sociodemographic (age at HCT, sex, performance status, race, distance to center, income, health insurance, marital status) and disease/HCT-related (disease type, yr of HCT) factors. Results Among 2-yr allogeneic HCT survivors, the median age at the time of HCT was 49 yrs (range, 18-81) and 7 yrs (range, <1-18) for adult and pediatric recipients, respectively. Corresponding median follow-up was 75 months (mos) (range, 12-173) and 74 mos (range, 3-173). Health insurance coverage was public (23%) or private (64%) for adult recipients, and public (40%) or private (43%) for pediatric recipients. For 2-yr autologous HCT survivors, the median age at the time of HCT was 58 yrs (range, 18-82) and 4 yrs (range, <1-18) for the adult and pediatric recipients, respectively. Corresponding median follow-up was 76 mos (range, 3-174) and 73 mos (range, 6-173). Health insurance coverage was public (27%) or private (57%) for adult recipients, and public (48%) or private (39%) for pediatric recipients. The 10-year cumulative incidence of becoming LTFU among adult and pediatric allogeneic HCT recipients was 13% (95% CI, 12-14) and 25% (95% CI, 24-27), respectively. Among autologous HCT recipients, the 10-year cumulative incidence of becoming LTFU among adults and children was 15% (95% CI, 14-16) and 23% (95% CI, 19-28), respectively. (Figure 1) Among pediatric allogeneic HCT survivors, older age, non-white race, public or no insurance (referent: private), and earlier yr of HCT were significantly associated with increased LTFU risk. However, in adult allogeneic HCT survivors, younger age, non-malignant disease, public or no insurance (referent: private), living farther from the HCT center, and unmarried were significantly associated with higher risk of LTFU (Table 1). In pediatric autologous HCT survivors, males and Non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL)/Hodgkin lymphoma patients (referent: central nervous system tumors) were significantly associated with higher risk of becoming LTFU (Table 1), whereas for adult autologous HCT survivors, older age and multiple myeloma (referent: NHL) were significantly associated with decreased risk of LTFU. Conclusions The incidence of LTFU is significantly higher in pediatric than adult patients, with no difference between autologous and allogeneic HCT patients, regardless of age. We identified risk factors for LTFU that differed by age and HCT donor type. A national, comprehensive, risk-based approach to long-term follow-up focusing on minimizing the attrition in high-risk groups such as adolescent and young adult-aged HCT survivors and HCT survivors with non-private health insurance is needed. Future studies incorporating patient reported outcomes may help describe reasons for lack of long-term follow-up. Collection of accurate and meaningful epidemiologic and clinical data from all survivors can help develop and refine strategies to improve long-term outcomes of this population. Disclosures Parsons: Seattle Genetics: Research Funding.