Savani, Bipin N.

Abstract Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is the only curative therapy for myelofibrosis (MF). In this large multicenter retrospective study, overall survival (OS) in MF patients treated with allogeneic HCT (551 patients) and without HCT (non-HCT) (1377 patients) was analyzed with Cox proportional hazards model. Survival analysis stratified by the Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS) revealed that the first year of treatment arm assignment, due to upfront risk of transplant-related mortality (TRM), HCT was associated with inferior OS compared with non-HCT (non-HCT vs HCT: DIPSS intermediate 1 [Int-1]: hazard ratio [HR] = 0.26, P < .0001; DIPSS-Int-2 and higher: HR, 0.39, P < .0001). Similarly, in the DIPSS low-risk MF group, due to upfront TRM risk, OS was superior with non-HCT therapies compared with HCT in the first-year post treatment arm assignment (HR, 0.16, P = .006). However, after 1 year, OS was not significantly different (HR, 1.38, P = .451). Beyond 1 year of treatment arm assignment, an OS advantage with HCT therapy in Int-1 and higher DIPSS score patients was observed (non-HCT vs HCT: DIPSS-Int-1: HR, 2.64, P < .0001; DIPSS-Int-2 and higher: HR, 2.55, P < .0001). In conclusion, long-term OS advantage with HCT was observed for patients with Int-1 or higher risk MF, but at the cost of early TRM. The magnitude of OS benefit with HCT increased as DIPSS risk score increased and became apparent with longer follow-up.

PURPOSE There is no consensus on the best choice of an alternative donor (umbilical cord blood [UCB], haploidentical, one-antigen mismatched [7/8]–bone marrow [BM], or 7/8-peripheral blood [PB]) for hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for patients lacking an HLA-matched related or unrelated donor. METHODS We report composite end points of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD)–free relapse-free survival (GRFS) and chronic GVHD (cGVHD)–free relapse-free survival (CRFS) in 2,198 patients who underwent UCB (n = 838), haploidentical (n = 159), 7/8-BM (n = 241), or 7/8-PB (n = 960) HCT. All groups were divided by myeloablative conditioning (MAC) intensity or reduced intensity conditioning (RIC), except haploidentical group in which most received RIC. To account for multiple testing, P < .0071 in multivariable analysis and P < .00025 in direct pairwise comparisons were considered statistically significant. RESULTS In multivariable analysis, haploidentical group had the best GRFS, CRFS, and overall survival (OS). In the direct pairwise comparison of other groups, among those who received MAC, there was no difference in GRFS or CRFS among UCB, 7/8-BM, and 7/8-PB with serotherapy (alemtuzumab or antithymocyte globulin) groups. In contrast, the 7/8-PB without serotherapy group had significantly inferior GRFS, higher cGVHD, and a trend toward worse CRFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.38; 95% CI, 1.13 to 1.69; P = .002) than the 7/8-BM group and higher cGVHD and trend toward inferior CRFS (HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.14 to 1.63; P = .0006) than the UCB group. Among patients with RIC, all groups had significantly inferior GRFS and CRFS compared with the haploidentical group. CONCLUSION Recognizing the limitations of a registry retrospective analysis and the possibility of center selection bias in choosing donors, our data support the use of UCB, 7/8-BM, or 7/8-PB (with serotherapy) grafts for patients undergoing MAC HCT and haploidentical grafts for patients undergoing RIC HCT. The haploidentical group had the best GRFS, CRFS, and OS of all groups.

Background Although rituximab‐based high‐dose therapy is frequently used in diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients undergoing autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto‐HCT), data supporting the benefits are not available. Herein, we report the impact of rituximab‐based conditioning on auto‐HCT outcomes in patients who have DLBCL. Methods Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) registry, 862 adult DLBCL patients undergoing auto‐HCT between 2003 and 2017 using BEAM (BCNU, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan) conditioning regimen were included. All patients received frontline rituximab‐containing chemoimmunotherapy and had chemosensitive disease pre‐HCT. Early chemoimmunotherapy failure was defined as not achieving complete remission (CR) after frontline chemoimmunotherapy or relapse within 1 year of initial diagnosis. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Results The study cohort was divided into 2 groups: BEAM (n = 667) and R‐BEAM (n = 195). On multivariate analysis, no significant difference was seen in OS ( P = .83) or progression‐free survival (PFS) ( P = .61) across the 2 cohorts. No significant association between the use of rituximab and risk of relapse ( P = .15) or nonrelapse mortality ( P = .12) was observed. Variables independently associated with lower OS included older age at auto‐HCT ( P < .001), absence of CR at auto‐HCT ( P < .001) and early chemoimmunotherapy failure ( P < .001). Older age ( P < .0002) and non‐CR pre‐HCT ( P < .0001) were also associated with inferior PFS. There was no significant difference in early infectious complications between the 2 cohorts. Conclusion In this large registry analysis of DLBCL patients undergoing auto‐HCT, the addition of rituximab to the BEAM conditioning regimen had no impact on transplantation outcomes. Older age, absence of CR pre auto‐HCT, and early chemoimmunotherapy failure were associated with inferior survival.

Introduction Renal dysfunction is a recognized risk factor for mortality after HCT, as it is included in the comorbidity index (HCT CI). Yet, further understanding on outcomes in patients with different level of renal dysfunction or undergoing hemodialysis (HD) at time of transplant remains scant. This study explores the impact of different levels renal dysfunction on major HCT outcomes in a large population using data reported to the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR). Methods The study population included 8,102 patients age 40 years and older who received HCT for treatment of malignancies from 2008 to 2016, with available pre-transplant creatinine measurement. eGFR, calculated using CKD-EPI (CKD-epidemiology collaboration) method, was used to assigned patients in four categories: eGFR ≥ 90ml/min (eGFR≥ 90, N=4,237, reference), eGFR 60-90ml/min (eGFR 60-90, N=3,158), eGFR 45-59ml/min (eGFR 45-59, N=538) and eGFR <45ml/min(eGFR<45, N=169). A separate cohort of patients on HD at time of HCT (N=46) was analyzed independently. Multivariate analysis models were built for assessment of overall mortality, transplant-related mortality (TRM), disease relapse or progression, graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), hepatic sinusoidal obstructive syndrome (SOS), thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA), idiopathic pneumonia syndrome (IPS) and need of HD post-transplant. Common patient-, disease- and transplant-related covariates were tested on all models and HCT CI was computed without reported renal dysfunction comorbidity to avoid collinearity. Results Patient characteristics are shown in table 1. The groups were comparable on disease risk index, graft and donor source, but patients with eGFR>90 were younger and received myeloablative conditioning more frequently. The cohort of eGFR <45 had a higher proportion of patients with HCT CI ≥3. TRM and overall survival according to eGFR groups are shown in Figure. In the multivariate analysis models eGFR as the main effect was associated with TRM (p<0.0001), overall mortality (p<0.0001), and requirement of HD post HCT (p<0.0001), but not for relapse/progression (p=0.98), GVHD (grades II-IV, p=0.34; III-IV, p=0.70; and chronic, p=0.20), TMA (p=0.46), SOS (p=0.02) or IPS (p=0.06). Compared to eGFR ≥90, the hazard ratio (HR) for TRM for eGFR 60-89 was 1.12 (p=0.07), for eGFR 45-59 was 1.46 (p<0.001) and for eGFR<45 was 1.74 (p=0.004). Corresponding HRs for overall mortality were 1.0 (p=0.9), 1.17 (p=0.03) and 1.63 (p<0.0001), respectively. Similarly, for the need of HD post HCT, HR for eGFR60-89 was 1.29 (p=0.03), eGFR45-59 was 2.45 (p<0.001) and for eGFR<45 was 3.09 (p<0.0001). Only eGFR<45 was associated with higher risk of SOS (HR2.66, p=0.03). Among 46 patients on HD prior to HCT, one-year probability of overall survival was 20% (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 10-32%) and cumulative incidence of TRM at one year was 67% (95% CI, 50-81%). Conclusion These findings indicate that degree of renal dysfunction is an independent predictor of OS, TRM, probability of receiving HD and SOS when adjusted for other risk factors. The impact of eGFR on the need of HD, a complication that increases morbidity post HCT is an important finding. Additionally, the outcomes of a subset of patients on HD at time of transplants are dismal. These results can further assist the prognostic assessment of candidates for an allogeneic HCT. Disclosures Stadtmauer: Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Tmunity: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding. Wingard:Ansun: Consultancy; Pluristem: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Shire: Consultancy. Ganguly:Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board. Pasquini:Pfizer: Other: Advisory Board; Amgen: Consultancy; Medigene: Consultancy; BMS: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Kit Pharma: Research Funding.

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.

BackgroundThe outcomes for patients with diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL) with adverse clinical prognostic factors such as a high age‐adjusted International Prognostic Index (aaIPI) are not optimal. In the current study, the authors performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis to assess the totality of evidence pertaining to the efficacy of autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto‐HCT) consolidation for patients with DLBCL in first remission.MethodsThe authors searched the Cochrane and MEDLINE/PubMed databases through December 1, 2018, for studies comparing conventional chemotherapy with rituximab (R‐chemo) versus R‐chemo and auto‐HCT. Two authors independently reviewed all references for study inclusion and extracted data related to benefits (overall survival, progression‐free survival, and response rates) and harms (treatment‐related mortality and adverse events).ResultsFour studies (1173 patients) met the inclusion criteria and were included in the current analysis. The median duration of follow‐up ranged from 42 to 76 months. There was no difference noted with regard to the overall survival (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.74‐1.37), progression‐free survival (hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.58‐1.04), or response rates (risk ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.92‐1.04) between patients who received R‐chemo and auto‐HCT and those who received R‐chemo alone. The risk of mortality and therapy failure was not found to be different when the analysis was limited to high aaIPI between the 2 groups. Although there was no difference noted with regard to the risk of treatment‐related mortality, there was a significantly higher incidence of CTCAE grade 3 or 4 adverse events in patients who received R‐chemo and auto‐HCT compared with patients treated with R‐chemo alone.ConclusionsThe findings from what to the authors' knowledge is the first meta‐analysis performed in the rituximab era demonstrated no beneficial effect of upfront auto‐HCT consolidation in patients with aggressive B‐cell non‐Hodgkin lymphoma, including high‐risk clinical groups (high aaIPI).

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 Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) is a potentially curative treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Optimal conditioning intensity for allo-HCT for CML in the era of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) is unknown. Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research database, we sought to determine whether reduced-intensity/nonmyeloablative conditioning (RIC) allo-HCT and myeloablative conditioning (MAC) result in similar outcomes in CML patients. We evaluated 1395 CML allo-HCT recipients between the ages of 18 and 60 years. The disease status at transplant was divided into the following categories: chronic phase 1, chronic phase 2 or greater, and accelerated phase. Patients in blast phase at transplant and alternative donor transplants were excluded. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) after allo-HCT. MAC (n = 1204) and RIC allo-HCT recipients (n = 191) from 2007 to 2014 were included. Patient, disease, and transplantation characteristics were similar, with a few exceptions. Multivariable analysis showed no significant difference in OS between MAC and RIC groups. In addition, leukemia-free survival and nonrelapse mortality did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. Compared with MAC, the RIC group had a higher risk of early relapse after allo-HCT (hazard ratio [HR], 1.85; P = .001). The cumulative incidence of chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) was lower with RIC than with MAC (HR, 0.77; P = .02). RIC provides similar survival and lower cGVHD compared with MAC and therefore may be a reasonable alternative to MAC for CML patients in the TKI era.