Towns, Jessica N

Abstract Abstract 1926 Background: Follicular lymphoma (FL) is the second most common non Hodgkin lymphoma in the United States, comprising up to 30% of all non Hodgkin lymphomas. Typically an indolent disease, relapses are common. High dose therapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant is an option that has shown to produce prolonged progression-free and relapse-free survival in patients who relapse. Adequate bone marrow reserve for peripheral stem cell mobilization has been shown to be adversely effected by prior regimens such as fludarabine and radioimmunotherapy. Concerns regarding stem cell mobilization at the point of relapse have led some to collect stem cells early in the course of disease to allow for potential subsequent transplant after relapse. Recent advances in stem cell mobilization have resulted in a 3% collection failure rate for lymphoma patients at the point of planned transplant at our institution versus a historical rate of up to 30%. We studied the utilization of stem cells collected for potential future use in FL patients in remission or prior to therapy at the point of relapse or progression in order to determine the utility of this approach. Methods: Record review of patients diagnosed with FL through the Mayo Clinic Tumor Registry and the Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Data Base who had cryopreserved stem cells for potential future transplant at relapse. Cost of stem cell storage at our institution was reviewed as was the subsequent use of the collected cells. Results: 73 patients with FL had stem cells collected and stored. 37 (51%) were collected prior to a double dose yttrium-90 (90Y) ibritumomab tiuxetan trial for relapsed lymphoma as required by the study. The median age at collection of this group was 56 years (range 28–70). Stem cells remain in storage for a median of 44 months (range 8–119). The median cost of cryopreservation and storage is $4,094 based on the median storage time of 44 months (range $3,628 to 5,065) with a collection cost of $3,524.20 and an annual storage fee of $155.39. This does not include the cost of filgrastim for mobilization, nor line placement. At 5 years, 60% of the cells were not utilized, and at 10 years, 56% of the cells were not utilized. 36 (49%) of the total number of patients were not part of the double dose 90Y ibritumomab tiuxetan trial, but were collected in remission for possible future use or in the setting of relapsed, progressed or transformed disease for potential future transplant. Five of these patients required the use of plerixafor for adequate mobilization. The median age at collection of this group was 47 years (range 24–76). Stem cells remain in storage for a median of 39 months (range 2–128). The median cost of cryopreservation and storage is $4,029 based on the median storage time of 39 months (range $3,550 to 5,182) with a collection cost of $3,524.20 and an annual storage fee of $155.39. This does not include the cost of filgrastim or plerixafor for mobilization, nor line placement. At 5 years, 89% of these cells were not used, and at 10 years, 71% of cells were not used. Conclusion: The utilization of stem cells collected early in the course of FL patients is low, with the majority of cells not being utilized at 10 years. Given improved mobilization techniques resulting in 97% efficacy of stem cell collection at relapse, routine collection and storage of stem cells early in the course FL is not recommended. Disclosures: Micallef: Genzyme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

64 Background: The goals of our Lymphoma Survivorship Clinic (SC) are to coordinate care, educate patients, and create a survivorship care plan (SCP). The aim of this study was to determine if patient-centered outcomes are improved after a SC visit. Methods: From 11/13-5/15, surveys were mailed to recently-treated lymphoma patients who were within 4 weeks of their last visit and in remission. Quality of life (QOL) was measured with PROMIS and distress was measured with the Impact of Events scale. Responses between those who attended SC and those who were eligible but did not attend were analyzed. Results: There were 96 surveys sent to the SC group; 59 were returned (61% response rate). Of the non-SC group, 140 surveys were sent and 84 were returned (60% response rate). Mean age was 57 years (range 23-77) in the SC group and 59 years (23-88) in the non-SC group. There were more females in the SC group (52% vs 30%) but no differences in race, marital status, education, or health literacy. Those who attended the SC were more likely to recall receiving a summary of cancer treatment and recommendations for follow-up care (90% SC vs. 75% non-SC, p = 0.03). Furthermore, SC attendees were more likely to “definitely” recall discussion on improving health or preventing illness (89% vs. 53%), getting help in making changes in habits/lifestyle (76% vs. 50%), diet (80% vs. 31%), and exercise (82% vs. 51%), all p < 0.001. There were no differences in discussions regarding smoking, follow-up testing, and symptom monitoring. The SC group was less likely to need more information regarding sexuality (6% vs 20%, p = 0.045). There were no differences in need for information regarding anxiety, fitness, familial cancer risk, fertility, complementary therapies, and social issues. The SC group was slightly more confident that they could get information or advice related to cancer (completely confident 76% vs. 61%, p = 0.07). There were no differences in QOL or distress. Conclusions: A Lymphoma SC visit increased receipt of SCP and provided more information on survivorship issues, particularly health behaviors, but did not improve QOL or distress. Further study is needed to determine if this leads to long-term health benefits.