Search

Despite recent advances in the field of HSCT, viral infections remain a frequent causeof morbidity and mortality among HSCT recipients. Adoptive transfer of viral specific T cells has been successfully used both as prophylaxis and treatment of viral infections in immunocompromised HSCT recipients. Increasingly, precise risk stratification of HSCT recipients with infectious complications should incorporate not only pretransplant clinical criteria, but milestones of immune reconstitution as well. These factors can better identify those at highest risk of morbidity and mortality and identify a population of HSCT recipients in whom adoptive therapy with viral specific T cells should be considered for either prophylaxis or second line treatment early after inadequate response to first line antiviral therapy. Broadening these approaches to improve outcomes for transplant recipients in countries with limited resources is a major challenge. While the principles of risk stratification can be applied, early detection of viral reactivation as well as treatment is challenging in regions where commercial PCR assays and antiviral agents are not readily available.

Unrelated donors (UDs) are the commonest source for allogeneic transplantation (alloSCT), with higher non-relapse mortality (NRM) than siblings. We analyzed data from the Australasian Bone Marrow Transplant Recipient Registry from adults receiving a first UD alloSCT during 2001-2015, to determine whether and how NRM has changed. Predictors of outcome were determined using cox regression, accounting for time-interactions and competing risks. A total of 2308 patients met inclusion criteria. Changes over time included increasing age, utilization of peripheral blood cells, reduced intensity conditioning, and T-cell depletion. Three-year OS increased significantly from 44% in 2001-2005 to 58% in 2011-2015 (p 0.001). This was attributed to a reduction in NRM from 35% to 24% (p 0.001) with no change in relapse. Factors associated with increased NRM included age, male sex, CMV seropositivity, HLA mismatch, transplant more than 6 months from diagnosis, and T-cell depletion when administered during 2001-2005. Survival following UD SCT has improved by almost 15% over the past decade, driven by improvements in NRM. This has occurred despite increasing recipient age and appears to be due to better donor selection, reduced delays to transplantation, and improved prevention and management of GVHD.

Allogeneic stem cell transplantation is a potentially curative therapy for some malignant and non-malignant disease. There have been substantial advances since the approaches first introduced in the 1970s, and the development of approaches to transplant with HLA incompatible or alternative donors has improved access to transplant for those without a fully matched donor. However, success is still limited by morbidity and mortality from toxicity and imperfect disease control. Here we review our emerging understanding of how reconstitution of effective immunity after allogeneic transplant can protect from these events and improve outcomes. We provide perspective on milestones of immune reconstitution that are easily measured and modifiable.

Thalassemia and sickle cell disease (SCD) are the most common monogenic diseases in the world and represent a growing global health burden. Management is limited by a paucity of disease-modifying therapies; however, allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and autologous HSCT after genetic modification offer patients a curative option. Allogeneic HSCT is limited by donor selection, morbidity and mortality from transplant conditioning, graft-versus-host disease and graft rejection, whereas significant concerns regarding long-term safety, efficacy and cost limit the broad applicability of gene therapy. Here the authors review current outcomes in allogeneic and autologous HSCT for transfusion-dependent thalassemia and SCD and provide our perspective on issues surrounding accessibility and costs as barriers to offering curative therapy to patients with hereditary hemoglobinopathies.

Patients post haematopoietic stem cell transplant or CAR-T cell therapy face significant risk of morbidity and mortality from SARS-CoV19, due to their immunosuppressed state. As case numbers in Australia and New Zealand continue to rise, guidance on management in this high-risk population is needed. Whilst we have learnt much from international colleagues who faced high infection rates early in the pandemic, guidance relevant to local health system structures, medication availability and emerging therapies is essential to equip physicians to optimally manage our patients. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Australia and New Zealand have achieved excellent community control of COVID‐19 infection. In light of the imminent COVID‐19 vaccination roll out in both countries, representatives of all adult and paediatric allogeneic bone marrow transplant and cellular therapy (TCT) centres as well as representatives from autologous transplant only centres in Australia and New Zealand collaborated with infectious diseases specialists with expertise in TCT on this consensus position statement regarding COVID‐19 vaccination in TCT patients in Australia and New Zealand. It is our recommendation that TCT patients, should have expedited access to high‐efficacy COVID‐19 vaccines given that these patients are at high risk of morbidity and mortality from COVID‐19 infection. We also recommend prioritising vaccination of TCT healthcare workers and household members of TCT patients. Vaccination should not replace other public health measures in TCT patients given the effectiveness of COVID‐19 vaccination in TCT patients is unknown. Furthermore, given the limited available data, prospective collection of safety and efficacy data of COVID‐19 vaccination in this patient group is a priority.

The health and outcomes of long-term survivors after hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) are areas of evolving interest as short-term transplant outcomes improve. Because recent changes in transplant practice have likely changed the survivor population, we sought to assess the survival of a contemporary cohort of patients who were alive and free of disease 2 years after HCT. Data were extracted from first transplants documented between 2002 and 2011 in the Australasian Bone Marrow Transplant Recipient Registry on patients who received an allogeneic HCT for acute myeloid leukemia (AML), acute lymphoblastic leukemia, chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and myelodysplastic syndromes or an autologous HCT for myeloma or lymphoma. Patients were included if they had survived at least 2 years without disease relapse or progression. Mortality rates were compared with standard Australian and New Zealand populations using relative-survival analysis. A total of 1562 allogeneic and 3822 autologous HCT patients were included, with a median follow-up of 5.6 years. Compared with a matched group of patients from our previous study from 1992 to 2001, the contemporary cohort of allogeneic HCT recipients was older and more likely to receive peripheral blood stem cells and from unrelated donors. Allogeneic HCT for AML increased, wheresa transplants for CML fell from 32% to 8%. Increasing use of reduced-intensity conditioning and unrelated donors was also seen. Long-term survival after allogeneic and autologous HCT were very similar to the previous 1992 to 2001 cohort despite changes in practice over time. Recipients of autologous HCT for myeloma demonstrated substantially lower overall survival than HCT for other indications with no clear plateau. Annual relative survival for survivors of allogeneic HCT was 96% to 99% of the general population but only 89% to 96% of the general population for recipients of autologous HCT. Late deaths were primarily due to nonrelapse causes after allogeneic HCT, but relapse or disease progression remained prominent for recipients of autologous HCT, particularly for myeloma. The management of late HCT effects is important to improve long-term survival of transplant recipients but should be tailored to the risks specific to the primary disease and transplant type. Future planning should account for the impact of the expected increase in transplant activity and number of survivors on resource utilization.

BACKGROUND: Patient outcomes are poor for aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphomas not responding to or progressing within 12 months after first-line therapy. Tisagenlecleucel is an anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy approved for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma after at least two treatment lines. METHODS: We conducted an international phase 3 trial involving patients with aggressive lymphoma that was refractory to or progressing within 12 months after first-line therapy. Patients were randomly assigned to receive tisagenlecleucel with optional bridging therapy (tisagenlecleucel group) or salvage chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) (standard-care group). The primary end point was event-free survival, defined as the time from randomization to stable or progressive disease at or after the week 12 assessment or death. Crossover to receive tisagenlecleucel was allowed if a defined event occurred at or after the week 12 assessment. Other end points included response and safety. RESULTS: A total of 322 patients underwent randomization. At baseline, the percentage of patients with high-grade lymphomas was higher in the tisagenlecleucel group than in the standard-care group (24.1% vs. 16.9%), as was the percentage with an International Prognostic Index score (range, 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating a worse prognosis) of 2 or higher (65.4% vs. 57.5%). A total of 95.7% of the patients in the tisagenlecleucel group received tisagenlecleucel; 32.5% of the patients in the standard-care group received autologous HSCT. The median time from leukapheresis to tisagenlecleucel infusion was 52 days. A total of 25.9% of the patients in the tisagenlecleucel group had lymphoma progression at week 6, as compared with 13.8% of those in the standard-care group. The median event-free survival in both groups was 3.0 months (hazard ratio for event or death in the tisagenlecleucel group, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.82 to 1.40; P = 0.61). A response occurred in 46.3% of the patients in the tisagenlecleucel group and in 42.5% in the standard-care group. Ten patients in the tisagenlecleucel group and 13 in the standard-care group died from adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Tisagenlecleucel was not superior to standard salvage therapy in this trial. Additional studies are needed to assess which patients may obtain the most benefit from each approach. (Funded by Novartis; BELINDA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03570892.).

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused major disruption to health systems, with allogeneic haemopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT) services a particularly vulnerable area. Ongoing provision of alloHCT has required dynamic responses at national and local levels. In Australia and New Zealand (ANZ), a high reliance on unrelated donors from overseas registries has posed an additional challenge.To describe the impact of COVID-19 on alloHCT services in ANZ in the first year of the pandemic.Data from the national alloHCT patient and unrelated donor registries were extracted for a 2-year time frame. Comparisons were made between a pre-pandemic period of 1 March 2019 to 29 February 2020 and the corresponding dates during the pandemic, 1 March 2020 to 28 February 2021.There was a 13% decrease in the number of allogeneic transplants, a reversal of steady increases in previous years, with the largest decrease in unrelated donor transplants. Local donors supplied a greater proportion of unrelated stem cell products. With a switch to universal cryopreservation, the time from request of a product to infusion increased by a median of 25.5 days for overseas products and 14 days for local products. There was a significant increase in the number of products collected but not used.A strong public health response and coordinated transplant community activities allowed for safe provision of alloHCT in ANZ; however, our data suggest that the timely delivery of allogeneic transplants was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Continued dedicated efforts are required to minimise further impacts.

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection causes morbidity and mortality after allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). We investigated whether prophylaxis with high dose valaciclovir is effective at reducing the incidence of clinically significant CMV infection (csCMVi) within six months of allogeneic HSCT. Consecutive allogeneic HSCT recipients who received 2g valaciclovir orally four times daily from transplant until day 100 (prophylaxis group) were compared to subsequent patients who received no CMV prophylaxis (control group). Forty-nine patients in the prophylaxis group and 59 in the control group were included. The cumulative incidence of csCMVi at 6 months was 20% (95% confidence interval (CI): 9%-27%) in the prophylaxis group and 39% (95% CI: 26%-47%) in the control group (P = .009). There was no CMV disease in the prophylaxis group and three cases in the control group. There was no difference in time to neutrophil or platelet recovery nor graft failure between groups. On multivariable analysis, lack of high dose valaciclovir prophylaxis, positive recipient CMV IgG and age were associated with greater likelihood of csCMVi. There was no significant difference in acute graft versus host disease, non-relapse mortality or overall survival between groups. In this retrospective cohort study, high dose valaciclovir prophylaxis resulted in a lower incidence of csCMVi within six months of HSCT.

We present a case of abdominal gastric band–associated Mycobacterium abscessus infection, manifesting after the onset of acute myeloid leukemia, complicated by immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS), and cured while receiving an allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant. IRIS should be considered in less classical situations where there is unexplained clinical deterioration.

The COVID-19 pandemic and the ensuing barriers to the collection and transport of donor cells, it is often necessary to collect and cryopreserve grafts before initiation of transplant conditioning. The effect on transplant outcomes in non-malignant disease is unknown. This analysis examined the effect of cryopreservation of related and unrelated donor grafts for transplantation for severe aplastic anemia in the US during 2013-2019. Included are 52 recipients of cryopreserved grafts who were matched for age, donor type, and graft type to 194 recipients who received non-cryopreserved grafts. Marginal Cox regression models were built to study the effect of cryopreservation and other risk factors associated with outcomes. We recorded higher 1-year rates of graft failure (HR 2.26, 95% CI 1.17 – 4.35, p=0.01) and of 1-year overall mortality (HR 3.13, 95% CI 1.60 – 6.11, p=0.0008) after transplantation of cryopreserved compared to non-cryopreserved grafts with adjustment for sex, performance score, comorbidity, cytomegalovirus serostatus, and ABO blood group match). Acute and chronic GVHD did not differ between groups. Adjusted probabilities of 1-year survival were 73% (95% 60 – 84) and 91% (95% CI 86 – 94) with cryopreserved and non-cryopreserved grafts, respectively. These data support the use of non-cryopreserved grafts, when possible, for severe aplastic anemia.

Background Results have been varied regarding the effect of donor age on the outcome of unrelated donor hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Aims This study sought to determine the influence of donor age on adult unrelated donor HCT outcome in Australia. Methods Patients were included in the study if they were aged 16 or above and underwent first allogeneic unrelated donor HCT in Australia for the indications of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL), acute myelogenous leukaemia (AML), chronic myelogenous leukaemia (CML) or myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) between the years of 2001 and 2014 inclusive. The main outcome measure was overall survival (OS), which was tested against independent variables using univariate Kaplan-Meier methods and multivariate Cox regression. Results A total of 1,158 unrelated donor HCT were represented in the data. Cumulative incidences of engraftment, transplant related mortality (TRM), acute graft-versus-host disease (GvHD), chronic GvHD and relapse were not significantly affected by donor age. OS probability at 5 years post-transplant was 48.3%. In multivariate analysis of OS, year of transplant 2001-2007, recipient age 40 years or greater, poor risk disease, HLA match less than 6/6 and poor performance status at transplant (Karnofsky scale) were independently significant adverse OS risk factors. Donor age was not a significant risk factor for OS in univariate or multivariate analysis. Conclusions The conclusion from this study was that donor age (up to 59 years) did not influence post-transplant outcome among adult unrelated donor HCT performed in Australia for hematologic malignancies. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Key Points CD34+ cell recovery and viability are variable after thawing cryopreserved hematopoietic progenitor cell products.Reduced CD34+ cell recovery and viability are linked to longer storage time and higher white cell concentration before cryopreservation., Donor registries and transplantation societies recommend cryopreservation of unrelated donor hemopoietic progenitor cell (HPC) products before the recipient commences conditioning therapy to mitigate the donor and travel risks associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. However, little is known regarding the postthaw quality of such allogeneic products or the effect of precryopreservation storage and processing on these characteristics. We investigated the postthaw CD34+ cell recovery and viability of 305 allogeneic HPC products cryopreserved at 9 laboratories across Australia. Median postthaw CD34+ cell recovery was 76% and ranged from 6% to 122%. Longer transit time before cryopreservation, white cell count (WCC) during storage, and complex product manipulation before cryopreservation were independently associated with inferior postthaw CD34+ cell recovery. Longer precryopreservation transit time and WCC were also associated with inferior postthaw CD34+ cell viability. We conclude that although postthaw CD34+ cell recovery and viability of cryopreserved allogeneic HPC is generally acceptable, there is a significant risk of poor postthaw product quality, associated with prolonged storage time, higher WCC, and complex product manipulation precryopreservation. Awareness of expected postthaw recovery and practices that influence it will assist collection, processing, and transplant centers in optimizing outcomes for transplant recipients., Visual Abstract

Acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) remains a major limitation of allogeneic stem-cell transplantation; not all patients have a response to standard glucocorticoid treatment. In a phase 2 trial, ruxolitinib, a selective Janus kinase (JAK1 and JAK2) inhibitor, showed potential efficacy in patients with glucocorticoid-refractory acute GVHD.We conducted a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial comparing the efficacy and safety of oral ruxolitinib (10 mg twice daily) with the investigator's choice of therapy from a list of nine commonly used options (control) in patients 12 years of age or older who had glucocorticoid-refractory acute GVHD after allogeneic stem-cell transplantation. The primary end point was overall response (complete response or partial response) at day 28. The key secondary end point was durable overall response at day 56.A total of 309 patients underwent randomization; 154 patients were assigned to the ruxolitinib group and 155 to the control group. Overall response at day 28 was higher in the ruxolitinib group than in the control group (62% [96 patients] vs. 39% [61]; odds ratio, 2.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.65 to 4.22; P0.001). Durable overall response at day 56 was higher in the ruxolitinib group than in the control group (40% [61 patients] vs. 22% [34]; odds ratio, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.43 to 3.94; P0.001). The estimated cumulative incidence of loss of response at 6 months was 10% in the ruxolitinib group and 39% in the control group. The median failure-free survival was considerably longer with ruxolitinib than with control (5.0 months vs. 1.0 month; hazard ratio for relapse or progression of hematologic disease, non-relapse-related death, or addition of new systemic therapy for acute GVHD, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.60). The median overall survival was 11.1 months in the ruxolitinib group and 6.5 months in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.15). The most common adverse events up to day 28 were thrombocytopenia (in 50 of 152 patients [33%] in the ruxolitinib group and 27 of 150 [18%] in the control group), anemia (in 46 [30%] and 42 [28%], respectively), and cytomegalovirus infection (in 39 [26%] and 31 [21%]).Ruxolitinib therapy led to significant improvements in efficacy outcomes, with a higher incidence of thrombocytopenia, the most frequent toxic effect, than that observed with control therapy. (Funded by Novartis; REACH2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02913261.).

BACKGROUND/AIMS: We sought to determine factors associated with the overall survival from relapse (OSR) of acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) after allogeneic haemopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT) and the effect of first salvage therapy and subsequent graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) on OSR. METHODS: Data on 386 patients from nine Australian centres with relapsed AML post-alloHSCT were collected retrospectively. OSR was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted using the log-rank test and proportional hazards modelling, respectively and a prognostic index for OSR was derived from multivariate modelling. RESULTS: On multivariate analysis, relapse within 6 months (hazard ratio (HR) 2.4, P

Background: Standard of care (SOC) for second-line (2L) therapy (tx) of relapsed/refractory aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas (R/R aNHL) includes platinum-based chemotherapy (PCT) followed by autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (aHCT) in responders. Outcomes are poor for patients (pts) with R/R aNHL who experience progression during or within 12 months (mo) of 1L tx. Tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) is an autologous chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell tx targeting CD19 approved for pts with large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL; US) and diffuse LBCL (non-US) after ≥2 lines of tx. BELINDA (NCT03570892) is a Phase III, randomized, global (18 countries) study of tisa-cel vs SOC as 2L tx for R/R aNHL. Methods: Adults with confirmed R/R aNHL within 12 mo after 1L chemo-immunotherapy were eligible. All pts underwent leukapheresis for tisa-cel production and were randomized 1:1 to receive tisa-cel (Arm A) or SOC (Arm B) and stratified by 1L duration of response, International Prognostic Index (IPI), and geographic region. Arm A received optional bridging tx (investigator choice of protocol-defined PCT regimens) followed by lymphodepletion (LD; generally, fludarabine 25 mg/m 2/day [d] + cyclophosphamide 250 mg/m 2/d for 3 d) and followed by a single tisa-cel infusion (0.6-6×10 8 CAR-T cells). Arm B received investigator choice of PCT regimen followed by aHCT in responders or a second PCT in nonresponders. Disease assessments were performed at 6 and 12 weeks (wk), then planned every 3 mo for year (y) 1 and every 6 mo for y 2. The primary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS), defined as time from randomization to stable disease (SD) or progressive disease (PD) at or after wk 12 assessment or death at any time. SD/PD at wk 6 was not considered an event on either Arm. Arm A's wk 6 assessment evaluated disease burden before tisa-cel infusion and after bridging if administered. Arm B's wk 6 assessment determined if response was sufficient for aHCT or if a second PCT regimen was needed prior to aHCT. Results: As of May 6, 2021, 322 pts were randomized: 162 to Arm A and 160 to Arm B. In Arms A and B, 33% and 29% were ≥65 y, and 66% and 67% had primary refractory disease, respectively. Baseline characteristics indicated imbalances with more high-grade B-cell lymphomas (24% vs 17%) and IPI ≥2 (65% vs 58%) in Arm A vs B. In Arm A, 47% received ≥2 cycles of bridging PCT, 36% received 1 cycle, and 17% received 0. In Arm A, 96% received tisa-cel; the median dose was 2.9×10 8 cells. In Arm B, 96% received ≥2 PCT cycles and 54% received ≥2 different PCT regimens; 33% received aHCT, including 10% requiring ≥2 different PCT regimens before aHCT. Median time from randomization to aHCT was 92 d (range, 61-158 d). Median follow-up was 10 mo (range, 2.9-23.2 mo). At wk 6 assessment, 26% had PD in Arm A vs 14% in Arm B. Median EFS in Arms A and B was 3 mo (HR 1.07; 95% CI, 0.82-1.40; P=0.69); Arm A pts with PD at wk 6 had shorter EFS. Overall response rate (ORR) at wk 12 in Arm A was 46% vs 43% in Arm B; complete response rate in both arms was 28%. Some pts responded to tisa-cel after SD/PD at wk 12 without additional tx but were counted as an event in EFS analysis. In Arm B, 81 pts (51%) crossed over to receive tisa-cel, 71 without receiving aHCT. Of 72 crossover pts with response assessment, ORR to tisa-cel was 40%. Overall survival was immature at data cutoff. In Arm A, 84% had a grade ≥3 adverse event (AE; vs 90% in Arm B), including grade ≥3 cytokine release syndrome in 5% (CRS; Lee 2014) and grade ≥3 neurologic events (NE) in 3% (CTCAE v5.0), with no grade 5 CRS/NE. Median times to CRS and NE onset were 4 and 5 d, respectively; median time to resolution was 5 and 9 d. Fifty-two (32%) and 45 (28%) pts in Arms A and B died on study, including 42 (26%) and 32 (20%) deaths due to PD, respectively. Ten pts in Arm A and 13 in Arm B died of AEs. Conclusions: Tisa-cel as 2L tx in R/R aNHL pts did not have a higher EFS vs SOC. Possible contributing factors include study design elements, such as optional PCT bridging tx in Arm A with potential delay of tisa-cel infusion until after wk 6 assessment, allowance of a different PCT regimen to reach aHCT in Arm B after inadequate response to first PCT, and imbalances in relevant pt characteristics. Insights from this randomized Phase III study will inform use of cellular tx in the 2L R/R aNHL setting and the design of future CAR-T trials. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Bishop: Arcellx, Autolus, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CRISPR, Kite/Gilead, and Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb and Kite/Gilead: Other: fees for non-CME/CE services . Dickinson: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodation, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria. Purtill: Novartis: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; BMS Celgene: Honoraria. Barba: Amgen, Celgene, Gilead, Incyte, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and Roche, Jazz Phar,aceuticals: Honoraria; Cqrlos III heqlth Institute, aSOCIACION espanola contra el cancer, PERIS: Research Funding. Santoro: Arqule: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Eli-Lilly: Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Speakers Bureau; Eisai: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Hamad: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Kato: Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Chugai: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Dainippon-Sumitomo: Honoraria; Eisai: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kyowa Kirin: Honoraria, Research Funding; MSD: Honoraria; Mundi: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ono: Honoraria, Research Funding. Sureda: Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Support for attending meetings and/or travel, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Support for attending meetings and/or travel, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Other: Support for attending meetings and/or travel; Bluebird: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Mundipharma: Consultancy. Greil: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Merck Sharp & Dohme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Sandoz: Honoraria, Research Funding. Thieblemont: Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses ; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses ; Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses ; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses , Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses ; Incyte: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses ; Cellectis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses ; Hospira: Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses . Morschhauser: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Epizyme: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Chugai: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Genmab: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZenenca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Consultancy; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Janz: Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Meeting Fees; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel Accommodations, Expenses, Meeting fees; Roche: Honoraria; Gilead: Other: Travel Accommodations, Expenses, Meeting fees. Flinn: Servier Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Yingli Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Seagen: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Servier Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Unum Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Sarah Cannon Research Institute: Current Employment; Vincerx Pharma: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Hutchison MediPharma: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Century Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Triphase Research & Development Corp.: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Trillium Therapeutics: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Teva: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Rhizen Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Portola Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Pfizer: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Merck: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Loxo: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Incyte: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; IGM Biosciences: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Forty Seven: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Forma Therapeutics: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Curis: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Celgene: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Calithera Biosciences: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; ArQule: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Agios: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Other: All research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Yingli Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Verastem: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Unum Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Seagen: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Nurix Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Iksuda Therapeutics: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Great Point Partners: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Other: All consultancy and research funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: All Consultancy and Research Funding payments made to Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Research Funding. Kwong: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Kersten: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Takeda: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Miltenyi Biotec: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Minnema: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Other: Travel expenses; BMS: Consultancy; Kite/Gilead: Consultancy; Alnylam: Consultancy. Holte: Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nanovector: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lectures honorarias; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nordic: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Martinez-Lopez: Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Maziarz: Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Data and Safety Monitoring board, Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers, Squibb/Celgene,, Intellia, Kite: Honoraria; Allovir: Consultancy, Research Funding; Artiva Therapeutics: Consultancy; CRISPR Therapeutics: Consultancy; Intellia: Honoraria; Omeros: Research Funding; Athersys: Other: Data and Safety Monitoring Board, Patents & Royalties; Vor Pharma: Other: Data and Safety Monitoring Board. McGuirk: Kite/ Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel accommodations, expense, Kite a Gilead company, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Allovir: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Magenta Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; EcoR1 Capital: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; Fresenius Biotech: Research Funding; Astelllas Pharma: Research Funding; Bellicum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Gamida Cell: Research Funding; Pluristem Therapeutics: Research Funding. Bachy: Kite, a Gilead Company: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Daiishi: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy. Dreyling: Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Genmab: Consultancy; MorphoSys: Consultancy. Harigae: Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Novartis Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Chugai Pharma: Honoraria; Janssen Pharma: Honoraria; Ono pharma: Honoraria, Other: Subsidies or Donations; Astellas Pharma: Other: Subsidies or Donations; Kyowakirin: Other: Subsidies or Donations. Bond: Kite/Gilead: Honoraria. Andreadis: Merck: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; CRISPR Therapeutics: Research Funding; GenMAB: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Roche: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Ended employment in the past 24 months; Epizyme: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria; Kite: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Atara: Consultancy, Honoraria. McSweeney: Kite-Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gamida: Consultancy, Honoraria; TG Theraputics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Autolous Limited: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; NKARTA: Research Funding; Allovir: Research Funding. Newsome: Novartis: Current Employment. Degtyarev: Novartis: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Del Corral: Novartis: Current Employment. Andreola: Novartis: Current Employment, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Masood: Novartis: Current Employment, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Schuster: AbbVie, Acerta, Celgene/Juno, DTRM Bio, Genentech, Incyte, Merck, Novartis, Portola, and TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Acerta, AlloGene, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Celgene/Juno, Genentech/Roche, LoxoOncology, Novartis, and Tessa Therapeutics: Consultancy; Acerta, AlloGene, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Celgene, Genentech/Roche, LoxoOncology, Novartis, Nordic Nanovector, Pfizer, and Tessa Therapeutics;: Honoraria; Novartis: Other: Personal fees, Patents & Royalties; AbbVie, Celgene, Novartis, Juno, Nordic Nanovector, and Pfizer: Other: Steering Committee Participation. Jaeger: BMS/Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Norvartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Westin: Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Umoja: Consultancy; Iksuda Therapeutics: Consultancy; Curis: Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding; 47 Inc: Research Funding.

BACKGROUND: Changes to donor availability, collection centre capacity and travel restrictions during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic led to routine cryopreservation of most unrelated donor products for haematopoietic transplantation prior to the recipient commencing the conditioning regimen. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the effect of this change on unrelated donor product quality and clinical outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Product information was requested from transplant centres in Australia and New Zealand, and clinical outcome data from the Australasian Bone Marrow Transplant Recipient Registry (ABMTRR). RESULTS: 191 products were collected between 01 April 2021 and 30 September 2021 and most (74%) were from international collection centres. Median post-thaw CD34 recovery was 78% (range 25%-176%) and median post-thaw CD34 viability was 87% (range 34-112%). Median time to neutrophil recovery was 17 days (inter-quartile range 10 to 24 days) and graft failure occurred in 6 patients (4%). These clinical outcomes were similar to those of 'fresh' unrelated donor transplants reported to the ABMTRR in 2019. However, recipient transplant centres reported problems with 29% of products in the form of damage during transit, low cell dose, inadequate labelling, missing representative samples or missing documentation. These problems were critical in 7 cases (4%). At last follow-up, 22 products (12%) had not been infused. CONCLUSIONS: Routine cryopreservation of unrelated donor HPC products has enabled safe continuation of allogeneic transplant services during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, practices for product tracing, documentation and transportation can be optimised, and measures to reduce the incidence of unused unrelated donor product are required.

Introduction R-mini-CHOP is an established standard of care in elderly patients with DLBCL, with a 2yr OS of 59% and PFS of 47% (Peyrade et al, Lancet Oncol 2011). The addition of ibrutinib to full dose R-CHOP in younger pts with DLBCL has efficacy, but significant toxicity limits the ability to complete therapy in pts ≥60 yrs (Younes et al, JCO 2019). We previously demonstrated the deliverability of ibrutinib with R-mini-CHOP in 80 pts ≥75yrs with DLBCL with a median average relative total dose of 97%; 77% of pts received 6 cycles of R-mini-CHOP despite SAEs in 62% (Verner et al, Haematol Oncol 2019). Here we present the primary efficacy endpoint and key secondary and exploratory endpoints. Methods This was a prospective, multicenter, single-arm, phase 2 study of patients aged ≥75yrs with newly diagnosed DLBCL. Pts received six 21-day cycles of ibrutinib 560mg/d and R-mini-CHOP (Rituximab 375mg/m 2, cyclophosphamide 400mg/m 2, doxorubicin 25mg/m 2, vincristine 1mg on day 1 & prednisone 40mg/m 2 or 100mg/d x 5) followed by an additional two 21-day cycles of rituximab + ibrutinib (or high dose methotrexate for CNS prophylaxis). The efficacy primary endpoint was 2yr OS. Sample size calculations were made using a one-sample two-sided approach to detect a 15% improvement on the fixed reference OS (59%) and PFS (47%) rates (Peyrade et al, Lancet Oncol 2011). Results Eighty pts were recruited from Nov 2015 to Dec 2018. One died prior to receiving treatment and is not included in the analysis. Median age was 82yrs (75-95); 51% female, 81% stage III/IV and 63% IPI 3-5: 47% had a CIRS-G score of ≥6 (range 0-17). On centralized immunohistochemistry (IHC), 57% (45/79) were non-Germinal Centre B cell-like (GCB) subtype; 43% (34/79) were GCB. At a data cut-off of 6June 21, median follow-up was 29.5 months (m) (0.2 to 66.3). Two-year OS was 68% (95% CI 55-77%), not differing significantly from the null hypothesis of 59% (p=0.10), (Figure 1A). Median OS was not reached (NR) (95% CI 34m to NR), and was longer in those with lower IPI (IPI 1-3: NR, IPI 4: 35m, IPI 5: 19m). Two-year PFS was 60% (95% CI 47-70%), significantly different from the reference 47% (p At least one adverse event (AE) occurred in 99% pts (78/79): 30% (24/79) grade 1-2, 64% (49/79) grade 3-4, and 6% (5/79) grade 5. Most common grade ≥3 AEs were lung infection (13%), other infections (11%), anemia (11%), febrile neutropenia (9%), thrombocytopenia (9%), and atrial fibrillation (8%). Serious AEs occurred in 67%: most commonly lung infection (11%), atrial fibrillation (9%), fever (9%), and other infection (9%). 12/14 pts with atrial fibrillation/flutter were new onset. Ibrutinib was temporarily ceased in 62% of patients, and permanently ceased in 25%, mostly due to adverse events. As previously reported, the overall response rate on an intention to treat basis was 57/80 (71%) (Verner et al, ASH 2019). Response rates did not differ by cell of origin (COO) (ORR: non-GCB 76%, GCB 68% p=0.44). When recorded, pt's EORTC-QLQ-C30 global health status significantly improved between screening [n=78; mean (SD) 58(25)], end of treatment [n=57; 63(23)] and 18mo post-treatment [n=29; 74(19)] p=0.007. Significant reductions in fatigue, nausea and vomiting, pain, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation and diarrhea were also observed in respondents. There was no impact of CIRS-G score on disease response rate or risk of death. Conclusion The addition of ibrutinib to R-mini-CHOP was deliverable and improved 2-yr PFS compared to R-mini-CHOP alone. However, while there was a trend towards improvement in 2-yr OS, a target 15% increase was not achieved in this small sample size. Despite considerable and not unexpected toxicity in this elderly cohort, the QOL and functional improvements in survivors are also promising. These data support further study of the addition of ibrutinib to R-mini-CHOP in elderly patients with DLBCL. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Verner: Janssen-Cilag Pty Ltd: Research Funding. Hawkes: Merck KgA: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squib/Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Specialised Therapeutics: Consultancy; Antigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Regeneron: Speakers Bureau; Merck Sharpe Dohme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel and accommodation expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Astra Zeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Lee: Roche: Honoraria; BeiGene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cheah: BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Ascentage Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Lilly: Consultancy, Honoraria; TG therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, Research Funding. Purtill: Novartis: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; BMS Celgene: Honoraria. Enjeti: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Astra Zeneca: Honoraria. Curnow: Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer/BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Mylan: Consultancy; Norgine: Consultancy, Honoraria. Butcher: WriteSource: Current Employment, Other: Medical writing for Pharma companies. Not pertinent to this abstract for which author is study Statisticiam. Trotman: JANSSEN: Research Funding; TAKEDA: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; PCYC: Research Funding; roche: Research Funding; beigene: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Ibrutinib is not approved for use in DLBCL

Background HLA-matched sibling and unrelated donors are not always available for patients that are in need of an allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplant. Partially HLA-mismatched related (haploidentical) donors can be identified for the vast majority of patients but these transplants were historically complicated by excessive graft versus host disease (GVHD), nonrelapse mortality (NRM), and poor overall survival (OS). Haploidentical haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (Haplo HSCT) has become increasingly common over the last ten years, predominately due to the successful use of post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) in mitigating graft versus host disease (GVHD). Most studies using PTCy have been retrospective with various conditioning regimens and stem cell sources making interpretation of results difficult. ANZHIT-1 is a prospective Australian multi-centre phase II study of Haplo HSCT with defined conditioning and GVHD prophylaxis regimens. Methods: This is an ethics approved Phase II study (ACTRN: 12617000151336) conducted between 2015-2020 at six Australian allogeneic HSCT centres. All patients received peripheral blood Haplo HSCT from haploidentical family members. The reduced intensity regimen (RIC) was fludarabine, cyclophosphamide and 200cGy TBI and the myeloablative regimen (MAC) was fludarabine with IV busulfan 3.2mg/kg x 4. PTCy 50mg/kg D+3, D+4 was used with MMF (to D35) and a calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) as GVHD prophylaxis. CNIs were weaned and ceased by D+120 in patients who did not have evidence of GVHD. Choice of conditioning regimen was based on age and hematopoietic cell transplantation comorbidity index (HCT-CI) scores. Patients who had an HCTCI >3 or age >50yrs received RIC. Data collection was through the Australian Bone Marrow Transplant Recipient Registry. Survival was analysed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Seventy eight patients were included in the study with a median follow up of 402.5 days (28-1259). There was a male predominance (66%). The median age was 53 years (range 18-69) and the median HCT-CI score was 1 (range 0-5). Thirty nine patients had acute myeloid leukaemia, 12 acute lymphoblastic Leukaemia, 14 Non Hodgkin lymphoma or Hodgkin lymphoma, 4 myelodysplastic syndrome and 9 other diagnoses. The majority received RIC (59%). Median neutrophil and platelet engraftment times were 18 days (range: 12-92) and 28 days (range: 13-262) respectively. Acute GVHD grade III-IV occurred in 14.1% of patients whilst chronic GVHD occurred in 20.5%. Moderate to severe cGVHD according to NIH consensus criteria occurred in 10.3% of patients. Overall survival probability at one year was 74.1% (95% CI: 52.9-86.8) for MAC recipients and 77.8% (95% CI: 61.6-87.8) for RIC recipients (Figure 1). Non relapse mortality (NRM) at D100 and 1 year were 2.2% and 8.7% respectively in the RIC group compared to 6.3% and 18.8% respectively in the MAC group. Causes of NRM included infection (n=5), GVHD (n=3) and VOD, respiratory failure and multi-organ failure in one patient each. Haemorrhagic cystitis and poor graft function were relatively common post-transplant morbidities but rarely contributed to NRM. Despite the use of peripheral blood stem cells and early weaning of CNIs, only 3/11 NRM deaths were due to GVHD. Relapse was the most common cause of death in the RIC group with 17.4% of patients relapsing at a median of 114 days (range 36-564) compared to only 6.3% at a median of 90.5 days (range 64-154) in the MAC group. Conclusion: This prospective Haplo HSCT trial utilising PTCY demonstrates encouraging overall survival rates. The RIC regimen had a promising toxicity profile but early relapse remains a concern despite early weaning of CNIs. In contrast, the MAC regimen is associated with a low relapse rate but NRM at one year remains significant. Further refinement of the conditioning and GVHD prophylaxis regimens will be incorporated in the follow-on study, ANZHIT-2, which will begin accrual in late 2020. Disclosures Bajel: Pfizer: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria. Greenwood:Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Hamad:Novartis: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria.

Introduction: Australia's largest state, Western Australia (WA), comprises a land area of more than 2.5 million square kilometres, an area than larger than that of Texas and Alaska in the United States combined, with a population of more than 2.6 million. Whilst a large proportion of Western Australians live in the capital city Perth, approximately 20% are dispersed across the state in regional and remote areas. The diagnosis and treatment of myeloma require specialist Haematologist management and frequent follow-up. Access to Haematology specialist services and treatment in WA is centred in metropolitan Perth, with outreach services visiting regional and remote areas limited in location and frequency. Some patients are required to travel long distances or relocate to access treatment. The aim of our study was to assess difference in clinical presentation, treatment and outcomes of myeloma patients living in regional or remote Western Australia compared to metropolitan Perth. Methods: A retrospective chart review of new cases of symptomatic multiple myeloma diagnosed between January 2008 and December 2019 and referred to Royal Perth Hospital and Fiona Stanley Hospital, two tertiary metropolitan hospitals was conducted. Data was obtained regarding patient demographics, disease characteristics, treatment, response and survival outcomes, through review of patient paper and electronic medical records. Patients were grouped into those living inside or outside the Perth metropolitan area (metro or non-metro) according to area codes obtained from the WA government data suite. Results: Two hundred and seventy-five cases were identified, 218 (79%) metro and 57 (21%) non-metro. Baseline characteristics for the two groups are listed in Table 1. The median age at diagnosis was 68.4 years (range 30-91.5 years) and 47% were female, with no significant difference between the groups. There were a higher number of patients with lytic bone disease at diagnosis in the non-metro cohort (75.4% non-metro vs 60.2% metro, p=0.03) as well as a higher proportion of patients with international staging system (ISS) stage II or III disease (77.8% non-metro vs 55.8% metro, p=0.005). Sixty three percent of patients overall received first line bortezomib based therapy and 27% first line imid based therapy, with no significant difference by location. Overall 41% of patients underwent autologous stem cell transplantation, 70% of those ≤70 years of age, with no significant difference between the groups (33.3% non-metro vs 42.5% metro, p=0.21). The median overall survival (OS) was 47 months for the entire cohort. Survival was lower in the non-metro cohort, although this did not reach statistical significance (median OS 52 months for metro vs 40 months for non-metro, p=0.05) Figure 1. Progression free survival (PFS) was similar between the two groups (median PFS 23 months metro vs 12 months non-metro, p=0.12) Figure 2. Early mortality at 6 and 12 months was higher in the non-metro cohort (Six-month mortality was 21.1% non-metro vs 8.3% metro, p=0.01. Twelve-month mortality was 28.1% non-metro vs 13.4% metro, p=0.01) Figure 3. There was a trend in cause of early mortality due to infection being higher in the metro cohort, and cause of early mortality due to renal failure being higher in the non-metro cohort, Table 1. Conclusions: In our cohort, patients living in non-metropolitan locations were more likely to present with higher ISS stage and lytic lesions at diagnosis. Rates of early mortality were significantly higher in the non-metropolitan cohort. There was a trend towards shorter overall survival although this did not meet statistical significance. These differences may represent delays in clinical presentation and diagnostic workup and highlight the need for optimisation of follow up of patients in non-metropolitan areas particularly during the early time period post diagnosis. Periods of resource constraint and travel restrictions as is faced currently may accentuate these disparities. In addition, the nature of myeloma therapy is evolving with addition of treatments requiring expertise to deliver, such as monoclonal antibodies and chimeric antigen receptor T cells. As these therapies become commercial further studies are needed to assess adequacy of access for patients from non-metropolitan centres. Disclosures Leahy: Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sidiqi:Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Travel grant; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria.

An Australasian Bone Marrow Transplant Registry (ABMTR) Study of the Trends and Outcomes of Allogeneic Haematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (HSCT) in Hodgkin Lymphoma between 2009-2019: Relapse remains the most common cause of death post transplantation Introduction: Hodgkin Lymphoma (HL) is an eminently curable disease, with 80% of cases achieving cure with first line therapies. There are a subset of patients who relapse and require salvage therapy including autologous stem cell transplant and more recently novel agents such as brentuximab vedotin (BV) and the PD-1 inhibitors. The latter are less toxic and achieve durable responses but are not considered curative for most (LaCasce et al., 2019). In Australia BV and PD-1 inhibitors were approved in December 2013 and September 2017 respectively. Allogeneic HSCT offers a graft vs lymphoma (GVL) effect that may contribute to long term survival in some patients (Peggs et al., 2005). The introduction of reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) has seen improved outcomes with an OS of 67% (59-74%) and Progression Free Survival (PFS)of 45% (35-56%) (Rashidi et al., 2016) Patients and methods: Data was collected through the Australasian Bone Marrow Transplant Recipient Registry (ABMTRR) for patients receiving a first allogeneic transplant for HL between 2009 and 2019. The Kaplan Meier method was used to calculate OS and PFS with log rank test for comparison. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify associations with OS. We divided the patients into 5 year cohorts to compare transplant outcomes over time. Results: A total of 149 patients from 16 sites in Australia and New Zealand were included. The median age at time of transplant was 31 years (range 19-61) and the majority were male (60%). Seventy-five percent of patients had undergone previous autologous HSCT with data missing for 22%. Median follow up was 75 months (range 4.7-137.1). Forty five percent of patients were in complete remission (CR), 34% in partial remission and 15% relapsed/primary refractory (RR) at the time of HSCT with information missing in 4%. The majority of donors were matched unrelated donors (47%) and sibling donors were used for 37% of patients, haploidentical in 11% and umbilical cord blood in 5%. Reduced intensity conditioning was used in 86% of patients and in vivo T cell depletion with ATG or alemtuzumab was used in 27%. Acute GVHD occurred in 53/149 (30%) of which 31% was grade III-IV. In patients who survived beyond 100 days, the incidence of chronic GVHD was 38%, of which 53% was preceded by some form of aGVHD. Non-relapse mortality (NRM) at 100 days was 8% with 5/12 of these patients dying from aGVHD. Two-year OS and PFS were 75% and 49% respectively. A period effect was not detected with no significant difference in OS (p=0.8) nor PFS (0.2) based on transplant year (figure 1a & 1b). Multivariate analysis of factors associated with OS identified age at transplant of >40 (HR 3.24, 95% CI 1.71-6.15, p The numbers of HSCT performed each year are illustrated in figure 1c, with a larger proportion of patients in CR from 2014 onward. Post-transplant relapse occurred in 38% of patients (figure 1d)with a median time to relapse of 8.5 months (range 0.2 -42). Forty-eight percent (27/56) of patients who relapsed post HSCT were in CR at the time of HSCT. Of those who relapsed, 37% died due to progressive disease with no evidence of chronic GVHD. Relapse was the most common cause of death (37%) Conclusion: Although the rates of HSCT for HL in Australia and New Zealand have not varied over the past decade despite the availability of novel agents, there is a larger proportion of patients in CR prior to transplant. Survival outcomes for HL post HSCT are comparable to those reported internationally. Despite a higher percentage of patients transplanted in CR in later years, relapse post HSCT remains the major cause of death. Further studies to examine strategies to prevent or treat relapse of HL post-allograft are needed. Disclosures Sharplin: Novartis: Other: FUnded to attend Australian Haematology Conference . Di Ciaccio:Jansen: Honoraria, Other: travel and accomodation grant. Spencer:AbbVie, Celgene, Haemalogix, Janssen, Sanofi, SecuraBio, Specialised Therapeutics Australia, Servier and Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen, Celgene, Haemalogix, Janssen, Servier and Takeda: Research Funding; AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Haemalogix, Janssen, Sanofi, SecuraBio, Specialised Therapeutics Australia, Servier and Takeda: Honoraria; Celgene, Janssen and Takeda: Speakers Bureau. Greenwood:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Hamad:Abbvie: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria.

Introduction Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a mature B lymphoproliferative disorder with a frequently aggressive clinical course. Although the response rates in patients eligible for conventional chemoimmunotherapy are high, relapses are virtually inevitable, with a median overall survival (OS) of three to five years. For some patients allogeneic stem haematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) is a potential therapeutic option. AlloHCT for MCL has been associated with long term overall survival (OS) of around 40%, with high rates of non-relapse mortality (NRM) of 20-40% and relapse rates of 20-30% (Urbano-Ispizua et al., Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2015;21:1746, Robinson et al., Leukemia 2015;29:464). Whilst there is evidence of a graft-versus-lymphoma effect in MCL, it has not been shown to translate into improved OS. We performed a retrospective national registry study to examine alloHCT practice and outcomes for MCL in Australia and New Zealand in the modern era. Methods Data was collected through the Australasian Bone Marrow Transplant Recipient Registry (ABMTRR) for patients receiving an alloHCT for MCL between January 2009 and December 2019. This time range was chosen to capture the era of widespread rituximab use. Survival, relapse and toxicities of alloHCT were investigated, as well as transplant trends over time. Survival was analysed using the Kaplan-Meier method, with comparisons between the transplant periods 2009-2014 and 2015-2019 performed using the log-rank test. Cox proportional hazards regression was performed to determine significant risk factors for transplant outcome. The following risk factors were analysed for impact on outcomes: age, transplant before 2015, previous autologous HCT (autoHCT), remission status at transplant, use of myeloablative conditioning (MAC), haploidentical donor and use of T cell depletion (TCD). Results A total of 86 patients were included in the analysis. The median age was 56 (range 39-71). There was a male predominance with only 12% female patients. At the time of transplant, 51% were in complete remission, 26% had a partial response and 20% had stable or progressive disease (data missing in 3%). Sixty-seven percent had undergone previous autoHCT. The majority of donors were HLA-matched siblings (51%), followed by HLA-matched-unrelated (42%) and haploidentical (7%). Myeloablative conditioning was utilised in 14%, and T-cell depletion (TCD) in 24%. The median times to neutrophil engraftment (>0.5x109/L) and platelet engraftment (>20x109/L) were 16 and 20 days respectively. NRM at 1 and 5 years was 23% (95% confidence interval [95%CI] 10-39%) and 30% (95%CI 15-48%) respectively. The 100-day cumulative incidence of grade II to IV acute GVHD was 29%. The 3-year cumulative incidence of chronic GVHD was 27%. The median duration of follow up was 4.17 years (range 0-9.6 years). Median OS was 4.2 years, with an estimated 5-year OS of 47% (95%CI 35-58%) and 10-year OS of 23% (95%CI 8-43%) (figure 1). Five-year relapse free survival (RFS) was 38% (95%CI 26-50%) (figure 2). The cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) was 20% at 1 year and 33% at 4 years, with a flattening of the curve after this point (figure 3). On multivariate analysis (MVA), the use of myeloablative conditioning (MAC) was associated with inferior RFS (hazard ratio 2.33; 95%CI 1.05-5.17; p=0.038) and OS (hazard ratio 3.11; 95%CI 1.39-7.00; p=0.006) (figure 4). No risk factors on MVA impacted NRM or CIR. Chronic GVHD was not associated with RFS or CIR. An average of nine alloHCTs were performed each year. There was an increase in the proportion of haploidentical transplants between 2009-2014 and 2015-2019 (4% to 10%). There was no significant change over time in OS, RFS or NRM, or in the use of MAC or TCD. Conclusion There has been no significant change in the rates of alloHCT for MCL in Australia and New Zealand over the past decade. Trends show an increasing utilisation of haploidentical donors. Overall outcomes were comparable to those previously published with favourable OS and durable remissions seen in a subset of patients. MAC was associated with inferior OS and RFS, however the cause for this is unclear given the lack of association with NRM or CIR. Ongoing reporting of alloHCT outcomes in MCL is important given the emerging role of novel therapies, such as Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors, bispecific T cells and CAR-T cell therapy. Figure 1 Disclosures Di Ciaccio: Jansen: Honoraria, Other: travel and accomodation grant. Greenwood:MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Hamad:Novartis: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria.

Background The treatment landscape for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) has significantly changed over the past decade with the advent of targeted therapies. Subsequent improvement in remission rates has been seen in all patient groups, however patients with high-risk genetic features (del17p, TP53 mutation) continue to have poorer outcomes. In such patients, and in multiply relapsed/refractory standard risk patients, allogeneic stem cell transplantation remains a viable management option despite the associated morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to examine trends in allogeneic stem cell transplantation for CLL in Australia and New Zealand over the past decade, and to identify predictive factors for overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS). Methods Data was collected through the Australasian Bone Marrow Transplant Recipient Registry (ABMTRR) for patients receiving a first allogeneic stem cell transplantation for CLL, in the absence of Richter's transformation, between January 2009 and December 2018. Transplant outcomes were compared between 2 time periods, 2009-2013 and 2014-2018 using log rank test for survival and Gray's test for cumulative incidence curves. Cox regression analysis was performed to identify factors predictive of survival. Medians are reported with ranges, hazard ratios (HR) and cumulative incidence with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results A total of 153 patients (75% males) were included. Median age at transplantation was 55 years (range 23-69) with a median time from diagnosis to transplantation of 5.7 years (range 100days - 24.7years). Most patients received reduced intensity or non-myeloablative conditioning (84.3%, n=129) and did not receive T cell depleting therapy (73%, n=94). The median follow up was 5.9 years (range 0.8-11years). Median time to neutrophil engraftment was 16 days (range 6-49) and median time to platelet engraftment was 18 days (range 1-69). At 100 days following transplantation the cumulative incidence of graft failure was 3.9%, CMV reactivation 41% (95% CI 31-50%) and CMV disease 3.2% (95% CI 1-8%). Acute graft versus host disease (aGVHD) grade II-IV occurred in 39% (95% CI 29-49%) of patients and grade III-IV in 17% (95% CI 9-25%). The cumulative incidence of chronic GVHD (cGVHD) was 65% (95% CI 53-76%) at 5 years; extensive cGVHD occurred in 77% of patients with cGVHD. Median OS was 4.3 years (95% CI 3.6-not reached) and PFS was 2.6 years (95% CI 1.7-3.9). The most common contributors to mortality were infection (43%), GVHD (40%) and persistent disease or relapse (24%). In a multivariate analysis active disease at time of transplantation was associated with a worse OS (HR 2.16, 1.01-4.63), however, age, matched sibling donor, myeloablative conditioning and the use of T cell depleting therapies did not have a significant impact. The use of myeloablative conditioning was associated with improved PFS (HR 1.85, 1.1-3.1) in a univariate analysis but lost significance in multivariate analysis. Ninety-seven patients underwent transplantation between 2009-2013 and 56 patients between 2014-2018. There was no statistical difference in patient age, performance status, donor or disease status at transplantation between the groups. Myeloablative conditioning was used in 18.6% and 8.9% (p=0.197), and T cell depleting therapy in 25% and 31% (p=0.58), for the 2009-2013 and 2014-2018 periods respectively. There was a significant improvement in 5-year non-relapse mortality (NRM) from 41.5% (31-52%) to 23.4% (13-29%; p=0.04). Five year OS (46% vs 56%), PFS (36% vs 46%) and relapse rates (21% vs 31%) were not statistically different. Cumulative incidence of both acute and chronic GVHD was reduced in the later cohort; aGVHD 51% (95% CI 34-65%) vs 29% (95% CI 16-43%; p=0.03), cGVHD 76% (95% CI 57-88%) vs 53% (36-66%; p=0.02). Kaplan-meier and cumulative incidence curves for these outcomes are presented in figure 1. Conclusion The number of allogeneic stem cell transplantations performed for CLL has reduced over the past decade in Australasia. There has been an improvement in NRM and incidence of GVHD, however OS and PFS have not significantly changed. This may reflect improved GVHD prophylaxis and management, or advances in supportive care. Further analysis of impact of high-risk genetic factors at transplantation is pending at the time of abstract submission. Figure Disclosures Spencer: Celgene, Janssen and Takeda: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie, Celgene, Haemalogix, Janssen, Sanofi, SecuraBio, Specialised Therapeutics Australia, Servier and Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen, Celgene, Haemalogix, Janssen, Servier and Takeda: Research Funding; AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Haemalogix, Janssen, Sanofi, SecuraBio, Specialised Therapeutics Australia, Servier and Takeda: Honoraria. Greenwood:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Tam:AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; BeiGene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Di Ciaccio:Jansen: Honoraria, Other: travel and accomodation grant. Hamad:Novartis: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria.

We present an analysis of 98 consecutive patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) treated over a 10-year period within Western Australia. The most common frontline therapies were CHO(E)P (47%), HyperCVAD (21%), and reduced intensity therapy or supportive care alone (19%). Median and 4-year overall survival (OS) for the whole cohort were 1.59 years and 34%. Amongst CHO(E)P and HyperCVAD-treated patients, elevated LDH, advanced stage, IPI1, and non-ALK + ALCL histology predicted inferior progression-free survival (PFS). Inferior OS was predicted by elevated LDH, age60, IPI1, and non-ALK + ALCL histology. Response rates and PFS were not significantly different between patients treated with CHO(E)P or HyperCVAD. OS was longer in the HyperCVAD group, however this was not significant on multivariable analysis and appears to relate to the younger age and more aggressive therapy at relapse in this group. Our data confirmed the prognostic utility of the IPI in patients with PTCL and do not demonstrate a clear benefit of HyperCVAD.

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is an uncommon and typically aggressive form of lymphoma. Although often initially chemosensitive, relapse is common. Several induction and conditioning regimens are used in transplant-eligible patients, and the optimal approach remains unknown. We performed an international, retrospective study of transplant-eligible patients to assess impact of induction chemoimmunotherapy and conditioning regimens on clinical outcomes. We identified 228 patients meeting inclusion criteria. Baseline characteristics were similar among the induction groups except for some variation in age. The type of induction chemoimmunotherapy received did not influence overall response rates (ORRs) (0.43), progression-free survival (PFS) (P > .67), or overall survival (OS) (P > .35) on multivariate analysis (PFS and OS). Delivery of autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) was associated with favorable PFS and OS (0.01) on univariate analysis only; this benefit was not seen on multivariate analysis-PFS (0.36) and OS (0.21). Compared with busulfan and melphalan (BuMel), the use of the carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan (BEAM)-conditioning regimen was associated with inferior PFS (HR = 2.0 [95% CI 1.1-3.6], 0.02) but not OS (HR = 1.1 [95% CI 0.5-2.3], 0.81) on univariate analysis only. Within the limits of a retrospective study and modest power for some comparisons, type of induction therapy did not influence ORR, PFS, or OS for transplant-eligible patients with MCL. International efforts are required to perform randomized clinical trials evaluating chemoimmunotherapy induction regimens.

Introduction A majority of patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) will be cured with frontline chemoimmunotherapy, however a significant number of patients will relapse. Although autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (autoHCT) may lead to sustained survival in some relapsing patients, long term survival with relapsed DLBCL is approximately 25% (Larouche et al., J Clin Oncol 2010;28(12):2094). Allogeneic HCT (alloHCT) is a potential treatment strategy in some DLBCL patients with relapsed disease. We performed a retrospective national registry study to examine alloHCT practice and outcomes for DLBCL in Australia and New Zealand in the modern era. Methods Data was collected through the Australasian Bone Marrow Transplant Recipient Registry (ABMTRR) for patients receiving an alloHCT for DLBCL between January 2009 and December 2019. Survival was analysed using the Kaplan-Meier method, with comparisons between the transplant periods 2009-2014 and 2015-2019 performed using the log-rank test. Both univariate and Cox proportional hazards regression were performed to determine significant risk factors for transplant outcome. The following risk factors were analysed for impact on outcomes: age, transplant before 2015, previous autoHCT, remission status at transplant, use of myeloablative conditioning (MAC), haploidentical donor (HD) and use of T cell depletion (TCD). Results A total of 154 patients were included in the analysis. The median age was 52 years (range 19-71) and 68% were male. Disease status at transplant was complete remission (CR) in 49%, partial response in 31% and stable or progressive disease in 17% (missing data in 3%). Fifty-five per cent had undergone a previous autoHCT. Approximately equal proportions of donors were HLA-matched siblings or matched unrelated (45% and 46% respectively) and 9% were HDs. MAC was utilised in 26%, and TCD in 24% (alemtuzumab in 3%, anti-thymocyte globulin in 21%) (data missing in 12%). The median times to neutrophil engraftment and platelet engraftment were 16 and 18 days respectively. Non-relapse mortality (NRM) at 1-year and 5-years was 20% (95%CI 7-30%) and 26% (95%CI: 13-38%). The 100-day cumulative incidence of grade II to IV acute graft versus host disease was 15% (95%CI 5-31%). The 3-year cumulative incidence of chronic graft versus host disease (cGVHD) was 56% (95%CI 46-65%) (figure 1). The median duration of follow up for the cohort was 3.98 years (range 0-9.64 years). Median overall survival (OS) post-transplant was 4.01 years, with 5-year OS of 47% (95%CI 38-56%) and 10-year OS of 40% (95%CI 26-54%) (figure 2). The 5-year relapse free survival (RFS) was 45% (95%CI 26-50%) (figure 3). The cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) was 21% at 1 year and 32% at four years, however relapses were not seen after this point, suggesting a subpopulation with durable remissions (figure 4). On univariate analysis, TCD was associated with both reduced incidence of cGVHD (HR 0.35 95%CI 0.19-0.66, p=0.012) and increased NRM (HR 2.10 95%CI 0.88-4.99 p=0.043). These associations were maintained on multivariate analysis (MVA) (HR 0.29 95%CI 0.16-0.76, p=0.011; HR 2.19 95%CI 1.02-4.70, p=0.045) (figures 5, 6). TCD did not impact on RFS. The vast majority of TCD was given in unrelated donor alloHCTs. CR at time of transplant was associated with improved RFS on univariate analysis (HR 1.65 95%CI 1.04-2.64, p=0.034), however this association was not seen on MVA. No other analysed risk factors impacted OS, RFS, NRM, CIR or GVHD rates on either univariate or MVA. An average of 14 alloHCTs were performed each year, with a trend towards increasing annual numbers over time. There was a significant increase in the proportion of haploidentical transplants between 2009 and 2019 (p=0.003), though total numbers were low (n=14). There was no significant change over time for the use of MAC, TCD, nor in OS, RFS or NRM. Conclusion There has been an increase in the rates of alloHCT with HDs for DLBCL in Australia and New Zealand over the past decade. Survival and relapse rates are relatively favourable compared to the published literature, with sustained remissions observed (5 and 10-year OS of 47% and 40% respectively). TCD is associated with reduced cGVHD rates, as well as increased NRM. Ongoing reporting of alloHCT outcomes in DLBCL is important given the emerging role of novel therapies such as bispecific monoclonal antibodies and chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy. Figure 1 Disclosures Di Ciaccio: Jansen: Honoraria, Other: travel and accomodation grant. Greenwood:Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Spencer:Celgene, Janssen and Takeda: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Haemalogix, Janssen, Sanofi, SecuraBio, Specialised Therapeutics Australia, Servier and Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen, Celgene, Haemalogix, Janssen, Servier and Takeda: Research Funding; AbbVie, Celgene, Haemalogix, Janssen, Sanofi, SecuraBio, Specialised Therapeutics Australia, Servier and Takeda: Consultancy. Arthur:Royal North Shore Hospital: Current Employment. Hamad:Novartis: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria.

Because cord blood (CB) lacks memory T and B cells and recent decreases in herd immunity to vaccine-preventable diseases in many developed countries have been documented, vaccine responses in CB transplantation (CBT) survivors are of great interest. We analyzed vaccine responses in double-unit CBT recipients transplanted for hematologic malignancies. In 103 vaccine-eligible patients, graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) most commonly precluded vaccination. Sixty-five patients (63%; engrafting units median HLA-allele match 5/8; range, 2 to 7/8) received protein conjugated vaccines, and 63 patients (median age, 34 years; range, .9 to 64) were evaluated for responses. Median vaccination time was 17 months (range, 7 to 45) post-CBT. GVHD (n = 42) and prior rituximab (n = 13) delayed vaccination. Responses to Prevnar 7 and/or 13 vaccines (serotypes 14, 19F, 23F) were seen in children and adults (60% versus 49%, P = .555). Responses to tetanus, diphtheria, pertussis, Haemophilus influenzae, and polio were observed in children (86% to 100%) and adults (53% to 89%) even if patients had prior GVHD or rituximab. CD4+CD45RA+ and CD19+ cell recovery significantly influenced tetanus and polio responses. In a smaller cohort responses were seen to measles (65%), mumps (50%), and rubella (100%) vaccines. No vaccine side effects were identified, and all vaccinated patients survived (median follow-up, 57 months). Although GVHD and rituximab can delay vaccination, CBT recipients (including adults and those with prior GVHD) have similar vaccine response rates to adult donor allograft recipients supporting vaccination in CBT recipients.

BACKGROUND Adult allogeneic haemopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) usually requires blood transfusion support of red cells and platelets. There are few studies describing transfusion burden after allogeneic HSCT. AIMS This study aims to quantify and identify determinants of transfusion burden after allogeneic HSCT to improve planning, inventory management and patient counselling. METHODS A retrospective audit of blood use (red cells and platelets) of all adult HSCT (n = 169) was performed over an 8-year period extracted from pathology and hospital databases. ABO compatibility, graft type, conditioning regimens and patient factors were analysed for up to 12 months post transplant. RESULTS Transfusion burden was lower than expected and lower than reported by other groups. The median number of units transfused was four red cells and four platelets by day 30, and six red cells and six platelets by day 365. The median time to transfusion independence was 12 days for red cells and 16 days for platelets. Factors associated with increased red cell use included sex, disease stage, graft type (cord blood) and ABO compatibility. Disease stage and graft type (cord blood) were associated with increased platelet transfusion. CONCLUSIONS Donor and patient characteristics are associated with transfusion burden after allogeneic HSCT. Determining transfusion burden in HSCT and identifying determinants of increased transfusion use assist in inventory planning and patient information.

Background: Detection of cytogenetic abnormalities by fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) are a critical component of diagnostic workup and prognostication in patients with multiple myeloma. Higher risk cytogenetic abnormalities are defined as t(4;14), t(14;16) and del(17p),1 with 1q21 gain more recently described, and are associated with reduced overall survival and lower response rate.2 Objectives: To ascertain the impact of presence of multiple high risk cytogenetic abnormalities, "double-hit", on clinical characteristics, response to therapy, overall and progression free survival in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed records of 279 patients with multiple myeloma aged over 18 years reviewed and/or treated across two tertiary hospitals (Fiona Stanley Hospital and Royal Perth Hospital) between 1st January 2008 and 31st of December 2019. Karyotyping and FISH on interphase nuclei on bone marrow cells was recorded. High risk cytogenetic abnormalities (HRC) were categorized in accordance with the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) definition and included deletion (17p), t(4;14) and t(14;16). Patients were categorized into three groups based on number of HRC present (HRC=0, HRC=1 and HRC>1). Results: Two hundred and thirty four patients had complete data on HRC and were included in the analysis (n=182 for HRC=0, n=44 for HRC=1 and n=8 for HRC>1). Baseline characteristics for the three groups are listed in Table 1. One or more high risk cytogenetic abnormalities (HRC) were detected in 22.2% of patients, with del(17p) and t(4;14) identified most commonly, at 10.7% and 9.3% respectively. All patients in the HRC>1 cohort had del (17p) with 62% (n=5) having concurrent t(14;16) and 38% (n=3) having t(4;14). Females were more likely to have HRC (41.2% in HRC=0 vs 68.1% in HRC=1 vs 50% in HRC=>1, p=0.0055). Patients in the HRC>1 cohort appeared to have higher ISS stage (60% stage III) however this did not meet statistical significance due to low numbers in the HRC>1 cohort. A greater proportion of patients in the HRC>1 cohort (100%) received bortezomib-based therapy (p=0.05). Overall response rate (ORR) was similar between cohorts, 84.8%, 86.0% and 71.43% in HRC=0, HRC=1 and HRC>1 respectively, p=0.95. High risk cytogenetic abnormalities were associated with a worse overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) compared to patients with standard risk disease. Median overall survival (OS) was 52, 20 and 8 months for HRC=0, HRC=1 and HRC>1 respectively, p1 respectively, p Conclusions: Patients with multiple high risk cytogenetics, "double hit" myeloma have an exceptionally poor prognosis with earlier relapse and shorter survival than those with a single high risk abnormality. This represents a significant area of unmet need in myeloma therapy and risk adapted treatment intensification strategies need to be evaluated in clinical trials to improve outcomes in this cohort. Disclosures Leahy: Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sidiqi:Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Travel grant; Janssen: Honoraria.

Sustained hematopoiesis after double-unit cord blood transplantation (dCBT) is mediated by 1 unit in nearly all patients. To investigate the associations between nondominant unit characteristics and neutrophil engraftment, we studied 129 consecutive myeloablative dCBT recipients. Ninety-five percent (95% confidence interval, 90 to 98) of patients engrafted. Detection of the nondominant unit 21 to 28 days after dCBT was not associated with improved neutrophil engraftment. In univariate analyses, nondominant unit characteristics (infused total nucleated cell [TNC] and viable CD3(+) cell doses) were significantly associated with speed and success of neutrophil engraftment as were dominant unit characteristics (infused TNC; viable CD34(+), viable CD3(+), and viable CD3-56(+)16(+) cell doses; and post-thaw CD34(+) cell viability). In multivariate analysis, higher infused TNC dose of the nondominant unit was independently associated with improved neutrophil engraftment, even when this unit did not contribute to donor hematopoiesis. In further subgroup analysis, this association was only evident when the infused viable CD34(+) cell dose of the dominant unit was low (1.20 × 10(5)/kg). These findings suggest nondominant units mediate a dose-dependent facilitation of engraftment in myeloablative dCBT and support continued investigation of dCBT biology and the clinical practice of dCBT in adults in whom low cell dose grafts are common.

We investigated the unit characteristics associated with engraftment after double-unit cord blood (CB) transplantation (dCBT) and whether these could be reliably identified during unit selection. Cumulative incidence of neutrophil engraftment in 129 myeloablative dCBT recipients was 95% (95% confidence interval: 90-98%). When precryopreservation characteristics were analyzed, the dominant unit CD34(+) cell dose was the only characteristic independently associated with engraftment (hazard ratio, 1.43; P = .002). When postthaw characteristics were also included, only dominant unit infused viable CD34(+) cell dose independently predicted engraftment (hazard ratio, 1.95; P < .001). We then examined the determinants of infused viable CD34(+) cell dose (precryopreservation count, postthaw recovery, and postthaw viability) in 402 units thawed at our center. This revealed close correlation between precryopreservation and postthaw CD34(+) cell counts (r(2) = 0.73). Median CD34(+) cell recovery was 101%, although it ranged from 12% to 1480%. Notably, units from non-Netcord Foundation for the Accreditation of Cellular Therapy (Netcord-FACT)-accredited banks were more likely to have low recovery (P < .001). Furthermore, although median postthaw CD34(+) cell viability was 92%, 33 (8%) units had

We sought to determine factors associated with the overall survival from relapse (OSR) of acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) after allogeneic haemopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT) and the effect of first salvage therapy and subsequent graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) on OSR.Data on 386 patients from nine Australian centres with relapsed AML post-alloHSCT were collected retrospectively. OSR was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted using the log-rank test and proportional hazards modelling, respectively and a prognostic index for OSR was derived from multivariate modelling.On multivariate analysis, relapse within 6 months (hazard ratio (HR) 2.4, P 0.001) and grade 3-4 acute GVHD preceding relapse (HR 2.0, P = 0.004), were associated with inferior OSR. Patients with 1-2 factors had inferior OSR compared to those with zero factors (all patients: HR 2.3, P 0.001, patients given salvage: HR 1.8, P 0.001). The first salvage therapy used post-relapse was donor cell therapy (DCT) (second alloHSCT or donor lymphocyte infusion) in 75, re-induction chemotherapy (CT) in 103, radiotherapy in 8 and interferon-α in 6. Although re-induction CT death rate was low (2%), survival after CT was inferior to DCT (HR 1.9, P 0.001). No survival benefit was seen for patients who developed GVHD following salvage therapy (P = 0.405).Patients with AML who relapse beyond 6 months from alloHSCT without prior grade 3-4 acute GVHD have a better outcome from salvage therapy. Salvage treatments employing DCT as the initial treatment of AML relapse confer a survival advantage over CT.