Aljurf, Mahmoud

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.

Abstract Background: The association of clinical trial participation with outcomes in cancer patients is controversial, with some studies reporting better outcomes for trial participants while others do not. It is possible that the difference in outcomes is due to differences in baseline characteristics of participants and non-participants. The Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network (BMT CTN) 0201 trial was a large randomized, multi-center study comparing peripheral blood (PB) with bone marrow (BM) for hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) from HLA-matched or 1 allele mismatched unrelated donors (URD) in patients with acute leukemia, chronic myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndromes. The trial reported no significant survival differences between PB and BM; there was decreased risk of graft failure but increased risk of chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) with PB grafts (Anasetti et al NEJM 2012). Methods: We compared characteristics of BMT CTN 0201 study participants (n=494) with HCT recipients who did not participate on the trial (n=1384) but were potentially eligible by virtue of known characteristics. These patients received similar conditioning and GVHD prophylaxis as trial participants at 38 United States trial centers during the study time-period. Centers that had no eligible non-trial participants were excluded. Outcomes between patients on and off trial were compared using Cox proportional hazards regression models. Data were obtained from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) that collects patient data on all trial and non-trial allogeneic HCT recipients through its registry function. Results: Approximately 29% [494/1878] of apparently eligible patients were randomized and analyzed as part of the trial. There were no significant differences between study participants and non-participants in age or sex distribution, disease types, HLA or sex matching, comorbidities, or interval from diagnosis to HCT. Higher proportions of non-participants were Hispanic, had a lower performance status and lower disease risk, and received myeloablative conditioning and antithymocyte globulin (ATG) or Campath than the study participants. PB was used more commonly as the graft source in the non-participants as compared to the study participants (65% vs. 50%, p<0.001). In multivariate models, overall mortality (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.95-1.25, p=0.22), transplant-related mortality (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.89-1.32, p=0.42) and risks of acute grade II-IV (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.82-1.12, p=0.57) and chronic GVHD (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.92-1.23, p=0.41) were comparable between study non-participants and participants. Non-participants were at higher risk for relapse than participants (HR 1.24, 95%CI 1.04-1.49, p=0.02) in the multivariate analysis adjusted for disease risk and other clinical variables. Center effect was examined and was not found to be significant (p=0.10). There was no significant interaction between graft source and trial participation (P=0.22) and the risk of mortality was comparable for BM (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.80-1.22, p=0.90) and PB recipients (HR 1.17, 95% CI 0.97-1.41, p=0.09) whether on trial or off trial. (Figure) Conclusion: Approximately 29% of patients who appeared eligible and were treated with conditioning and GVHD prophylaxis regimens allowed on the trial were enrolled. Despite some differences in clinical characteristics, most of the outcomes of non-trial participants were comparable to trial participants, suggesting that there is no definitive evidence that the outcomes of patients in a clinical trial are superior to those of the non-participants treated in a similar fashion. The comparable outcomes also indicate that the results of this trial were not seriously affected by selection bias and are therefore representative of the larger population. Figure 1: Adjusted overall survival in BMT CTN 0201 trial participants and non-participants Figure 1:. Adjusted overall survival in BMT CTN 0201 trial participants and non-participants Figure 2 Figure 2. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Purpose: To develop a prognostic model and cytogenetic risk classification for previously treated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) undergoing reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Experimental Design: We performed a retrospective analysis of outcomes of 606 patients with CLL who underwent RIC allogeneic HCT between 2008 and 2014 reported to the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. Results: On the basis of multivariable models, disease status, comorbidity index, lymphocyte count, and white blood cell count at HCT were selected for the development of prognostic model. Using the prognostic score, we stratified patients into low-, intermediate-, high-, and very-high-risk [4-year progression-free survival (PFS) 58%, 42%, 33%, and 25%, respectively, P &lt; 0.0001; 4-year overall survival (OS) 70%, 57%, 54%, and 38%, respectively, P &lt; 0.0001]. We also evaluated karyotypic abnormalities together with del(17p) and found that del(17p) or ≥5 abnormalities showed inferior PFS. Using a multivariable model, we classified cytogenetic risk into low, intermediate, and high (P &lt; 0.0001). When the prognostic score and cytogenetic risk were combined, patients with low prognostic score and low cytogenetic risk had prolonged PFS (61% at 4 years) and OS (75% at 4 years). Conclusions: In this large cohort of patients with previously treated CLL who underwent RIC HCT, we developed a robust prognostic scoring system of HCT outcomes and a novel cytogenetic-based risk stratification system. These prognostic models can be used for counseling patients, comparing data across studies, and providing a benchmark for future interventions. For future study, we will further validate these models for patients receiving targeted therapies prior to HCT.

Abstract HLA-haploidentical hematopoietic cell transplantation (Haplo-HCT) using posttransplantation cyclophosphamide (PT-Cy) has improved donor availability. However, a matched sibling donor (MSD) is still considered the optimal donor. Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research database, we compared outcomes after Haplo-HCT vs MSD in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in first complete remission (CR1). Data from 1205 adult CR1 AML patients (2008-2015) were analyzed. A total of 336 patients underwent PT-Cy–based Haplo-HCT and 869 underwent MSD using calcineurin inhibitor–based graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis. The Haplo-HCT group included more reduced-intensity conditioning (65% vs 30%) and bone marrow grafts (62% vs 7%), consistent with current practice. In multivariable analysis, Haplo-HCT and MSD groups were not different with regard to overall survival (P = .15), leukemia-free survival (P = .50), nonrelapse mortality (P = .16), relapse (P = .90), or grade II-IV acute GVHD (P = .98). However, the Haplo-HCT group had a significantly lower rate of chronic GVHD (hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.30-0.48; P &lt; .001). Results of subgroup analyses by conditioning intensity and graft source suggested that the reduced incidence of chronic GVHD in Haplo-HCT is not limited to a specific graft source or conditioning intensity. Center effect and minimal residual disease–donor type interaction were not predictors of outcome. Our results indicate a lower rate of chronic GVHD after PT-Cy–based Haplo-HCT vs MSD using calcineurin inhibitor–based GVHD prophylaxis, but similar other outcomes, in patients with AML in CR1. Haplo-HCT is a viable alternative to MSD in these patients.

AbstractIntroductionThe field of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo‐HCT) began in the 1950s, and despite a seven decade history of remarkable clinical advances, graft‐versus‐host‐disease (GVHD) remains the greatest obstacle in its success due to considerable morbidity and mortality. Graft‐versus‐host disease is the second leading cause of transplantation‐related mortality (TRM) after relapse of primary disease. There are two main types of GVHD—acute and chronic—differing in the pathogenesis, time of onset, and clinical presentation.ObjectiveThis review provides a comprehensive overview of chronic GVHD pathophysiology and current management paradigms, as well as consideration of promising novel therapies.ConclusionChronic GVHD is a serious disease which may be active for years, or even decades, requiring potentially years of immunosuppressive therapies and placing patients at risk for a number of late complications. While the oral cavity has long been recognized to be a prominent target of GVHD, and in particular, chronic GVHD, it must be recognized and appreciated that it is a complex systemic disease with a wide spectrum of clinical manifestations.

Key Points Compared with parous female sibling donors, male URDs confer more aGVHD in all patients and more cGVHD in females. There was no difference in survival, relapse, or transplant mortality between recipients of parous female sibling or male URD grafts.

BACKGROUNDEarly treatment failure (ETF) in follicular lymphoma (FL), defined as relapse or progression within 2 years of frontline chemoimmunotherapy, is a newly recognized marker of poor survival and identifies a high‐risk group of patients with an expected 5‐year overall survival (OS) rate of approximately 50%. Transplantation is an established option for relapsed FL, but its efficacy in this specific ETF FL population has not been previously evaluated.METHODSThis study compared autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto‐HCT) with either matched sibling donor (MSD) or matched unrelated donor (MUD) allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo‐HCT) as the first transplantation approach for patients with ETF FL (age ≥ 18 years) undergoing auto‐HCT or allo‐HCT between 2002 and 2014. The primary endpoint was OS. The secondary endpoints were progression‐free survival, relapse, and nonrelapse mortality (NRM).RESULTSFour hundred forty FL patients had ETF (auto‐HCT, 240; MSD hematopoietic stem cell transplantation [HCT], 105; and MUD HCT, 95). With a median follow‐up of 69 to 73 months, the adjusted probability of 5‐year OS was significantly higher after auto‐HCT (70%) or MSD HCT (73%) versus MUD HCT (49%; P = .0008). The 5‐year adjusted probability of NRM was significantly lower for auto‐HCT (5%) versus MSD (17%) or MUD HCT (33%; P < .0001). The 5‐year adjusted probability of disease relapse was lower with MSD (31%) or MUD HCT (23%) versus auto‐HCT (58%; P < .0001).CONCLUSIONSPatients with high‐risk FL, as defined by ETF, undergoing auto‐HCT for FL have low NRM and a promising 5‐year OS rate (70%). MSD HCT has lower relapse rates than auto‐HCT but similar OS. Cancer 2018;124:2541‐51. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Key Points Over the last decade, allogeneic HCT has been increasingly administered in the United States to adults aged 70 and older with hematologic malignancies. Allogeneic transplant outcomes were reasonable; high comorbidity and ablative conditioning regimens were associated with inferior outcomes.

BACKGROUNDTo evaluate the impact of depression before autologous and allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) on clinical outcomes post‐transplantation.METHODSWe analyzed data from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research to compare outcomes after autologous (n = 3786) or allogeneic (n = 7433) HCT for adult patients with hematologic malignancies with an existing diagnosis of pre‐HCT depression requiring treatment versus those without pre‐HCT depression. Using Cox regression models, we compared overall survival (OS) between patients with or without depression. We compared the number of days alive and out of the hospital in the first 100 days post‐HCT using Poisson models. We also compared the incidence of grade 2‐4 acute and chronic graft‐versus‐host disease (GVHD) in allogeneic HCT.RESULTSThe study included 1116 (15%) patients with pre‐transplant depression and 6317 (85%) without depression who underwent allogeneic HCT between 2008 and 2012. Pre‐transplant depression was associated with lower OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04‐1.23; P = 0.004) and a higher incidence of grade 2‐4 acute GVHD (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.14‐1.37; P < 0.0001), but similar incidence of chronic GVHD. Pre‐transplant depression was associated with fewer days‐alive‐and‐out‐of‐the hospital (means ratio [MR] = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95‐0.99; P = 0.004). There were 512 (13.5%) patients with Pre‐transplant depression and 3274 (86.5%) without depression who underwent autologous HCT. Pre‐transplant depression in autologous HCT was not associated with OS (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.98‐1.34; P = 0.096) but was associated with fewer days alive and out of the hospital (MR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97‐0.99; P = 0.002).CONCLUSIONPre‐transplant depression was associated with lower OS and higher risk of acute GVHD among allogeneic HCT recipients and fewer days alive and out of the hospital during the first 100 days after autologous and allogeneic HCT. Patients with pre‐transplant depression represent a population that is at risk for post‐transplant complications. Cancer 2017;123:1828–1838. © 2017 American Cancer Society.