2084 Background: The Teleoncology model of care, as developed and implemented across health services in Far North Queensland (Australia), improves access to specialist oncology services, including telehealth supervised administration of Oncology drugs for patients in rural/remote towns. There is limited published data regarding the safety of checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy when it is administered via Teleoncology. Aim: Evaluate safety of immunotherapy administration via Teleoncology, including immune-related adverse events (irAE), treatment delays, hospital admissions and interhospital transfers, in comparison to a retrospective control population. Methods: Retrospective review of all patients treated with immunotherapy via Teleoncology as part of Cairns and Hinterland Hospital and Health Service (CHHHS) and the Townsville Teleoncology Network (TTN) between January 2015 and April 2019. A retrospective cohort treated at Townsville Cancer Centre over the same time period was used as a control group. Results: Fifty-one patients received a total of 624 cycles of immunotherapy (all single agent anti-PD-1/L-1) via Teleoncology. The control population included 142 patients who received 1697 cycles of immunotherapy. Baseline characteristics were well matched between groups. Compared to the control population, patients treated via telehealth did not have statistically significant differences in the rate of Grade 3+ irAE (13.7% v 8%), hospital admissions (13.7% v 7.4%) or protocol suspensions due to immune toxicity (16% v 10%). One patient with Grade 3+ irAE required interhospital transfer for investigation and management, which occurred within 24 hours of presentation to hospital. There were no treatment-related mortalities in either group. Conclusions: Checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy can safely be delivered using the Teleoncology model of care in rural and remote centres. The incidence of toxicity for single agent immunotherapy was predictably low and not significantly different between groups, however the numbers in this retrospective study were small. The time to recognition and management of immune mediated toxicity in rural and remote centres is an important factor that was not assessed in this study and will be considered in future work.