Abstract: Around one-third of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 develop a severe illness that requires admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). In clinical practice, clinicians have learned that patients admitted to the ICU due to severe COVID-19 frequently develop ventilator-associated lower respiratory tract infections (VA-LRTI). This study aims to describe the clinical characteristics, the factors associated with VA-LRTI, and its impact on clinical outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19. This was a multicentre, observational cohort study conducted in ten countries in Latin America and Europe. We included patients with confirmed rtPCR for SARS-CoV-2 requiring ICU admission and endotracheal intubation. Only patients with a microbiological and clinical diagnosis of VA-LRTI were included. Multivariate Logistic regression analyses and Random Forest were conducted to determine the risk factors for VA-LRTI and its clinical impact in patients with severe COVID-19. In our study cohort of 3287 patients, VA-LRTI was diagnosed in 28.8% [948/3287]. The cumulative incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) was 18.6% [610/3287] , followed by ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis (VAT) 10.3% [338/3287]. A total of 1252 bacteria species were isolated. The most frequently isolated pathogens were Pseudomonas aeruginosa (21.2% [266/1252]), followed by Klebsiella pneumoniae (19.1% [239/1252]) and Staphylococcus aureus (15.5% [194/1,252]). The factors independently associated with the development of VA-LRTI were prolonged stay under invasive mechanical ventilation, AKI during ICU stay, and the number of comorbidities. Regarding the clinical impact of VA-LRTI, patients with VAP had an increased risk of hospital mortality (OR [95% CI] of 1.81 [1.40–2.34]), while VAT was not associated with increased hospital mortality (OR [95% CI] of 1.34 [0.98–1.83]). VA-LRTI, often with difficult-to-treat bacteria, is frequent in patients admitted to the ICU due to severe COVID-19 and is associated with worse clinical outcomes, including higher mortality. Identifying risk factors for VA-LRTI might allow the early patient diagnosis to improve clinical outcomes. Trial registration: This is a prospective observational study; therefore, no health care interventions were applied to participants, and trial registration is not applicable.

Abstract: We aim to compare the outcome of patients from urban areas, where the referral center is able to perform thrombectomy, with patients from nonurban areas enrolled in the RACECAT trial (Direct Transfer to an Endovascular Center Compared to Transfer to the Closest Stroke Center in Acute Stroke Patients With Suspected Large Vessel Occlusion). Methods: Patients with suspected large vessel occlusion stroke, as evaluated by a Rapid Arterial Occlusion Evaluation score of ≥5, from urban catchment areas of thrombectomy-capable centers during RACECAT trial enrollment period were included in the Stroke Code Registry of Catalonia. Primary outcome was disability at 90 days, as assessed by the shift analysis on the modified Rankin Scale score, in patients with an ischemic stroke. Secondary outcomes included mortality at 90 days, rate of thrombolysis and thrombectomy, time from onset to thrombolysis, and thrombectomy initiation. Propensity score matching was used to assemble a cohort of patients with similar characteristics. Results: The analysis included 1369 patients from nonurban areas and 2502 patients from urban areas. We matched 920 patients with an ischemic stroke from urban areas and nonurban areas based on their propensity scores. Patients with ischemic stroke from nonurban areas had higher degrees of disability at 90 days (median [interquartle range] modified Rankin Scale score, 3 [2–5] versus 3 [1–5], common odds ratio, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.06–1.48] ); the observed average effect was only significant in patients with large vessel stroke (common odds ratio, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.08–1.65]). Mortality rate was similar between groups(odds ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.81–1.28] ). Patients from nonurban areas had higher odds of receiving thrombolysis (odds ratio, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.16–1.67]), lower odds of receiving thrombectomy(odds ratio, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.51–0.75] ), and longer time from stroke onset to thrombolysis (mean difference 38 minutes [95% CI, 25–52]) and thrombectomy(mean difference 66 minutes [95% CI, 37–95] ). Conclusions: In Catalonia, Spain, patients with large vessel occlusion stroke triaged in nonurban areas had worse neurological outcomes than patients from urban areas, where the referral center was able to perform thrombectomy. Interventions aimed at improving organizational practices and the development of thrombectomy capabilities in centers located in remote areas should be pursued. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT02795962.

Abstract: In nonurban areas with limited access to thrombectomy-capable centers, optimal prehospital transport strategies in patients with suspected large-vessel occlusion stroke are unknown. Objective To determine whether, in nonurban areas, direct transport to a thrombectomy-capable center is beneficial compared with transport to the closest local stroke center. Design, Setting, and Participants Multicenter, population-based, cluster-randomized trial including 1401 patients with suspected acute large-vessel occlusion stroke attended by emergency medical services in areas where the closest local stroke center was not capable of performing thrombectomy in Catalonia, Spain, between March 2017 and June 2020. The date of final follow-up was September 2020. Interventions Transportation to a thrombectomy-capable center (n = 688) or the closest local stroke center (n = 713). Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was disability at 90 days based on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS; scores range from 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death] ) in the target population of patients with ischemic stroke. There were 11 secondary outcomes, including rate of intravenous tissue plasminogen activator administration and thrombectomy in the target population and 90-day mortality in the safety population of all randomized patients. Results Enrollment was halted for futility following a second interim analysis. The 1401 enrolled patients were included in the safety analysis, of whom 1369 (98%) consented to participate and were included in the as-randomized analysis (56% men; median age, 75 [IQR, 65-83] years; median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, 17 [IQR, 11-21] ); 949 (69%) comprised the target ischemic stroke population included in the primary analysis. For the primary outcome in the target population, median mRS score was 3 (IQR, 2-5) vs 3 (IQR, 2-5) (adjusted common odds ratio [OR], 1.03; 95% CI, 0.82-1.29). Of 11 reported secondary outcomes, 8 showed no significant difference. Compared with patients first transported to local stroke centers, patients directly transported to thrombectomy-capable centers had significantly lower odds of receiving intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (in the target population, 229/482 [47.5%] vs 282/467 [60.4%]; OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.45-0.76) and significantly higher odds of receiving thrombectomy (in the target population, 235/482 [48.8%] vs 184/467 [39.4%]; OR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.13-1.89). Mortality at 90 days in the safety population was not significantly different between groups (188/688 [27.3%] vs 194/713 [27.2%]; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.79-1.18). Conclusions and Relevance In nonurban areas in Catalonia, Spain, there was no significant difference in 90-day neurological outcomes between transportation to a local stroke center vs a thrombectomy-capable referral center in patients with suspected large-vessel occlusion stroke. These findings require replication in other settings. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02795962

Abstract: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreaks, health care workers (HCWs) are at a high risk of infection. Strategies to reduce in-hospital transmission between HCWs and to safely manage infected HCWs are lacking. Our aim was to describe an active strategy for the management of COVID-19 in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)–infected HCWs and investigate its outcomes. Methods A prospective cohort study of SARS-CoV-2-infected health care workers in a tertiary teaching hospital in Barcelona, Spain, was performed. An active strategy of weekly polymerase chain reaction screening of HCWs for SARS-CoV-2 was established by the Occupational Health department. Every positive HCW was admitted to the Hospital at Home Unit with daily assessment online and in-person discretionary visits. Clinical and epidemiological data were recorded. Results Of the 590 HCWs included in the cohort, 134 (22%) were asymptomatic at diagnosis, and 15% (89 patients) remained asymptomatic during follow-up. A third of positive cases were detected during routine screening. The most frequent symptoms were cough (68%), hyposmia/anosmia (49%), and fever (41%). Ten percent of the patients required specific treatment at home, while only 4% of the patients developed pneumonia. Seventeen patients required a visit to the outpatient clinic for further evaluation, and 6 of these (1%) required hospital admission. None of the HCWs included in this cohort required intensive care unit admission or died. Conclusions Active screening for SARS-CoV-2 among HCWs for early diagnosis and stopping in-hospital transmission chains proved efficacious in our institution, particularly due to the high percentage of asymptomatic HCWs. Follow-up of HCWs in Hospital at Home units is safe and effective, with low rates of severe infection and readmission.

Abstract: We aim to assess whether time of day modified the treatment effect in the RACECAT trial (Direct Transfer to an Endovascular Center Compared to Transfer to the Closest Stroke Center in Acute Stroke Patients With Suspected Large Vessel Occlusion Trial), a cluster-randomized trial that did not demonstrate the benefit of direct transportation to a thrombectomy-capable center versus nearest local stroke center for patients with a suspected large vessel stroke triaged in nonurban Catalonia between March 2017 and June 2020. Methods: We performed a post hoc analysis of RACECAT to evaluate if the association between initial transport routing and functional outcome differed according to trial enrollment time: daytime (8:00 am –8:59 pm ) and nighttime (9:00 pm –7:59 am ). Primary outcome was disability at 90 days, as assessed by the shift analysis on the modified Rankin Scale score, in patients with ischemic stroke. Subgroup analyses according to stroke subtype were evaluated. Results: We included 949 patients with an ischemic stroke, of whom 258 patients(27%) were enrolled during nighttime. Among patients enrolled during nighttime, direct transport to a thrombectomy-capable center was associated with lower degrees of disability at 90 days (adjusted common odds ratio [acOR] , 1.620 [95% CI, 1.020–2.551]); no significant difference between trial groups was present during daytime (acOR, 0.890 [95% CI, 0.680–1.163] ; P interaction =0.014). Influence of nighttime on the treatment effect was only evident in patients with large vessel occlusion(daytime, acOR 0.766 [95% CI, 0.548–1.072]; nighttime, acOR, 1.785 [95% CI, 1.024–3.112] ; P interaction 〈 0.01); no heterogeneity was observed for other stroke subtypes ( P interaction 〉 0.1 for all comparisons). We observed longer delays in alteplase administration, interhospital transfers, and mechanical thrombectomy initiation during nighttime in patients allocated to local stroke centers. Conclusions: Among patients evaluated during nighttime for a suspected acute severe stroke in non-urban areas of Catalonia, direct transport to a thrombectomy-capable center was associated with lower degrees of disability at 90 days. This association was only evident in patients with confirmed large vessel occlusion on vascular imaging. Time delays in alteplase administration and interhospital transfers might mediate the observed differences in clinical outcome. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT02795962.

Abstract: We evaluated the prognostic value of subclinical congestion assessed by lung ultrasound (LUS) in patients admitted for ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Methods This was a multicentre study that prospectively enrolled 312 patients admitted for STEMI without signs of heart failure (HF) at admission. LUS was performed during the first 24 hours after revascularisation and classified patients as having either wet lung (three or more B-lines in at least one lung field) or dry lung. The primary endpoint was a composite of acute HF, cardiogenic shock or death during hospitalisation. The secondary endpoint was a composite of readmission for HF or new acute coronary syndrome or death during 30-day follow-up. Zwolle score was calculated in all patients to assess predictive improvement by adding the result of the LUS to this score. Results 14 patients (31.1%) in the wet lung group presented the primary endpoint vs 7 (2.6%) in the dry lung group (adjusted RR 6.0, 95% CI 2.3 to 16.2, p=0.007). The secondary endpoint occurred in five patients (11.6%) in the wet lung group and in three (1.2%) in the dry lung group (adjusted HR 5.4, 95% CI 1.0 to 28.7, p=0.049). Addition of LUS improved the ability of the Zwolle score to predict the follow-up composite endpoint (net reclassification improvement 0.99). LUS showed a very high negative predictive value in predicting in-hospital and follow-up endpoints (97.4% and 98.9%, respectively). Conclusion Early subclinical pulmonary congestion identified by LUS in patients with Killip I STEMI at hospital admission is associated with adverse outcomes during hospitalisation and 30-day follow-up.

Abstract: Introduction: Cellular immunotherapy with CD19-targeted chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells has provided new therapeutic options for patients with high-risk hematologic malignancies. Following this therapy, patients may experience disease relapse or CAR-mediated toxicity due to cytokine release syndrome (CRS) or immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS). Recent studies have confirmed that the intestinal microbiome can modulate the anti-tumor immune response to chemotherapy, immune checkpoint blockade, graft-versus-host disease after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation, and adoptive cellular therapy. The contribution of the intestinal microbiome on the function of CAR T cells in vivo both with respect to their anti-tumor function and their propensity to induce toxicities is not known. Hence, in a multi-center study we analyzed the association between clinical outcomes and (1) antibiotic exposure prior to CAR T cell infusion and (2) the composition and diversity of the fecal microbiome. Methods and Results: We retrospectively collected clinical data and antibiotic exposures from patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL, n=91) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL, n=137) treated with investigational or commercial CD19 CAR T cells at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK) and the University of Pennsylvania (Penn). We considered any antibiotic exposure between day -30 and the day of CAR T cell infusion. We focused our analysis on anaerobe-targeting antibiotics used in the setting of neutropenic fever: piperacillin-tazobactam, imipenem-cilastatin, and meropenem (here referred to as "P-I-M"). We found that forty-seven (20.6%) of 228 patients were exposed to P-I-M in the four weeks before CAR T cell infusion. Patient characteristics at the time of CAR T cell infusion were similar between the P-I-M-exposed and not-exposed groups, although a worse performance status was observed in patients with NHL treated with P-I-M. We found that overall survival (OS) was significantly decreased following CAR T cell infusion in patients exposed to P-I-M (Fig 1A; OS HR, 2.58; 95% CI, 1.68 - 3.98; p= & lt;0.001). A subgroup analysis of the patients with NHL also demonstrated decreased OS associated with P-I-M exposure whether the costimulatory domain was CD28 or 4-1BB (data not shown). Next, we queried whether patients exposed to P-I-M had more aggressive disease. We evaluated potential confounders for the findings in uni- and multi-variable models. Importantly, exposure to P-I-M remained a strong predictor of decreased OS (HR, 2.58; 95% CI, 1.55 - 4.3; p= & lt;0.001) (Table 1). Exposure to P-I-M was also associated with increased ICANS (p= 0.023) but not CRS (p= 0.058) in patients in the combined NHL and ALL cohort as well as in patients with NHL (CRS: p= 0.154, ICANS: p= 0.002) (data not shown). We also prospectively collected baseline fecal samples prior to cell infusion from CD19 CAR T cells recipients (n=48) at MSK and Penn. Samples were submitted for 16S RNA sequencing of the V4-V5 region on the Illumina MiSeq platform and the amplicon sequence variants (ASVs) were annotated according to the NCBI 16S database using BLAST. In comparison to healthy controls (n=30), we found that alpha-diversity was significantly lower in fecal samples from CAR T cell patients (p= 0.0023, Fig 1B) and the composition of fecal samples was significantly different (p= & lt;0.001, Fig 1C). Finally, linear discriminant analysis effect size (LEfSe) identified an increased abundance of Lachnospiraceae, Ruminococcaceae, and Bacteroidaceae in patients who achieved a Day 100 complete response (CR) and those who experienced CAR-mediated toxicity (data not shown). Conclusion: Our results suggest that exposure to antibiotics, in particular P-I-M, in the four weeks before therapy was associated with worse survival. Profiling of the baseline fecal microbiome samples by 16S revealed that CD19 CAR T cell patients presented with evidence of an altered fecal microbiome as measured by lower alpha-diversity and a composition that is distinct from that of healthy controls. Finally, we identified bacterial taxa that were associated with Day 100 CR and CAR-mediated toxicity. Our findings indicate that the intestinal microbiome can affect the efficacy of CD19 CAR T cell therapy and provides a rationale to target the intestinal microbiome to improve clinical outcomes of patients treated with cellular therapies. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Smith: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Gomes: Xbiome: Current Employment. Schluter: Postbiotics Plus LLC: Other: cofounder. Park: Kura Oncology: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Servier: Consultancy; Autolus: Consultancy; Curocel: Consultancy; Artiva: Consultancy; Kite Pharma: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Affyimmune: Consultancy; Intellia: Consultancy; Innate Pharma: Consultancy; Minerva: Consultancy; PrecisionBio: Consultancy. Palomba: Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Jain: Targeted Healthcare Communications: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Other: for advisory board participation; CareDx: Other: for advisory board participation; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Syneos Health: Research Funding. Pennisi: Gilead Sciences: Consultancy. Perales: Miltenyi Biotec: Honoraria, Other; Novartis: Honoraria, Other; Omeros: Honoraria; NexImmune: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Kite/Gilead: Honoraria, Other; Medigene: Honoraria; Nektar Therapeutics: Honoraria, Other; Cidara: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Sellas Life Sciences: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; MorphoSys: Honoraria; Equilium: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria, Other. Garfall: Amgen: Honoraria; CRISPR Therapeutics: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Tmunity: Research Funding. Landsburg: Triphase: Research Funding; Morphosys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: DSMB member; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ADCT: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Curis: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Gerson: Kite: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy. Svoboda: Imbrium: Consultancy; Genmab: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Atara: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Adaptive: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG: Research Funding. Giralt: AMGEN: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PFIZER: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; SANOFI: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CELGENE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; JAZZ: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; JENSENN: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Actinnum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gill: Interius Biotherapeutics: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company, Research Funding; Novartis: Other: licensed intellectual property, Research Funding; Carisma Therapeutics: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company, Research Funding. Rivière: FloDesign Sonics: Other: Provision of Services; Centre for Commercialization of Cancer Immunotherapy: Other: Provision of Services; Fate Therapeutics: Other: Provision of Services, Patents & Royalties; The Georgia Tech Research Corporation (GTRC): Other: Provision of Services (uncompensated); Juno Therapeutics: Patents & Royalties. Porter: Kite/Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Wiley and Sons Publishing: Honoraria; Tmunity: Patents & Royalties; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ASH: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; DeCart: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Ended employment in the past 24 months; American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy: Honoraria; National Marrow Donor Program: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Schuster: Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; DTRM: Research Funding; Genetech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Juno Theraputics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Loxo Oncology: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Pharmaclcyclics: Research Funding; Tessa Theraputics: Consultancy; TG Theraputics: Research Funding. Sadelain: NHLBI Gene Therapy Resource Program: Other: Provision of Services (uncompensated); Fate Therapeutics: Other: Provision of Services (uncompensated), Patents & Royalties; Atara Biotherapeutics: Patents & Royalties; Ceramedix: Patents & Royalties; Mnemo Therapeutics: Patents & Royalties; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Other: Provision of Services, Patents & Royalties; St. Jude Children's Research Hospital: Other: Provision of Services; Juno Therapeutics: Patents & Royalties; Minerva Biotechnologies: Patents & Royalties. Frey: Novartis: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy; Sana Biotechnology: Consultancy; Syndax Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Brentjens: Gracell Biotechnologies, Inc: Consultancy, Ended employment in the past 24 months; BMS: Consultancy, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; sanofi: Patents & Royalties; Caribou: Patents & Royalties. June: AC Immune, DeCART, BluesphereBio, Carisma, Cellares, Celldex, Cabaletta, Poseida, Verismo, Ziopharm: Consultancy; Novartis: Patents & Royalties; Tmunity, DeCART, BluesphereBio, Carisma, Cellares, Celldex, Cabaletta, Poseida, Verismo, Ziopharm: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Pamer: Diversigen: Other: Advisory board; Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Seres Therapeutics, MedImmune, Novartis and Ferring Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Peled: DaVolterra: Consultancy; MaaT Pharma: Consultancy; CSL Behring: Consultancy; Seres Therapeutics: Research Funding. Ruella: BMS, BAYER, GSK: Consultancy; Novartis: Patents & Royalties; AbClon: Consultancy, Research Funding; Tmunity: Patents & Royalties; viTToria biotherapeutics: Research Funding. van den Brink: WindMILTherapeutics: Honoraria; Pluto Therapeutics: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company, Other: has consulted, received honorarium from or participated in advisory boards ; Priothera: Research Funding; Forty-Seven, Inc.: Honoraria; MagentaTherapeutics: Honoraria; GlaskoSmithKline: Other: has consulted, received honorarium from or participated in advisory boards; Ceramedix: Other: has consulted, received honorarium from or participated in advisory boards ; Merck & Co, Inc: Honoraria; Synthekine (Spouse): Other: has consulted, received honorarium from or participated in advisory boards; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Other; Amgen: Honoraria; Frazier Healthcare Partners: Honoraria; Seres: Other: Honorarium, Intellectual Property Rights, Research Fundingand Stock Options; Rheos: Honoraria; Therakos: Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Notch Therapeutics: Honoraria; Nektar Therapeutics: Honoraria; Wolters Kluwer: Patents & Royalties; Juno Therapeutics: Other; DKMS (nonprofit): Other; Pharmacyclics: Other; Da Volterra: Other: has consulted, received honorarium from or participated in advisory boards; Novartis (Spouse): Other: has consulted, received honorarium from or participated in advisory boards; Lygenesis: Other: has consulted, received honorarium from or participated in advisory boards .

Abstract: Although novel agents (NAs) have improved outcomes for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), a subset will progress through all available NAs. Understanding outcomes for potentially curative modalities including allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHCT) following NA therapy is critical while devising treatment sequences aimed at long-term disease control. In this multicenter, retrospective cohort study, we examined 65 patients with CLL who underwent alloHCT following exposure to ≥1 NA, including baseline disease and transplant characteristics, treatment preceding alloHCT, transplant outcomes, treatment following alloHCT, and survival outcomes. Univariable and multivariable analyses evaluated associations between pre-alloHCT factors and progression-free survival (PFS). Twenty-four-month PFS, overall survival (OS), nonrelapse mortality, and relapse incidence were 63%, 81%, 13%, and 27% among patients transplanted for CLL. Day +100 cumulative incidence of grade III-IV acute graft-vs-host disease (GVHD) was 24%; moderate-severe GVHD developed in 27%. Poor-risk disease characteristics, prior NA exposure, complete vs partial remission, and transplant characteristics were not independently associated with PFS. Hematopoietic cell transplantation–specific comorbidity index independently predicts PFS. PFS and OS were not impacted by having received NAs vs both NAs and chemoimmunotherapy, 1 vs ≥2 NAs, or ibrutinib vs venetoclax as the line of therapy immediately pre-alloHCT. AlloHCT remains a viable long-term disease control strategy that overcomes adverse CLL characteristics. Prior NAs do not appear to impact the safety of alloHCT, and survival outcomes are similar regardless of number of NAs received, prior chemoimmunotherapy exposure, or NA immediately preceding alloHCT. Decisions about proceeding to alloHCT should consider comorbidities and anticipated response to remaining therapeutic options.