Abstract 3225: A meta-analysis of single agent versus combination immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic triple negative breast cancer

Abstract Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are active against triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), and approved in combination with chemotherapy, or as a single agent in patients with high tumor mutational burden and/or microsatellite instability/mismatch repair deficiency. A number of studies have been conducted with single-agent inhibitors of programmed cell death 1 or its ligand (PD1/PD-L1i), however, responses are typically low, especially in the later line setting. Few studies have evaluated the efficacy of PD1/PD-L1i combined with inhibitors of cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 (CTLA-4i) in metastatic TNBC, and none compared single agent vs combination ICI approaches. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy of PD1/PD-L1i with or without CTLA-4i in TNBC. Methods: A comprehensive literature search across PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library identified 870 unique clinical trials from 2010 - 2024. Studies eligible for inclusion were those of patients with: (1) metastatic TNBC, (2) >1 line of prior therapy, (3) received PD1/PD-L1i with or without CTLA-4i. Studies of combination of ICI with chemotherapy or targeted treatments were excluded with the exception of histone-deacetylase inhibitor (HDACi) combinations. Data were selected and extracted by two reviewers based on the PRISMA-A guidelines. The primary objective of the meta-analysis was objective response rate (ORR). Progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were also determined when available. Results: A total of 10 clinical trials were eligible and included in the meta-analysis, six for single ICI and four for combination ICI. The heterogeneity test indicated no significant heterogeneity (I2) in either of the groups, thus, a fixed-effect model was used. A total of 611 patients with metastatic TNBC (>1L) treated with single ICI showed a pooled ORR of 8.3% (95% CI, 6.1-10.7%), median PFS of 1.7 months (95% CI 1.40-2.06) and OS of 9.13 months (95% CI, 8.09-10.17). Among 42 patients treated with combination ICI, a pooled ORR was 27.7% (95% CI, 14.1%-43.3%). A sensitivity analysis excluding patients that received an HDACi showed an ORR of 7.2% (95% CI, 4.4%-10.6%) vs. 24% (95% CI, 9.5%-41.6%) for the single and combination ICI groups, respectively. Conclusion: The use of combination ICI therapy led to an overall response rate of 27% compared to 8% in the single ICI studies. Our results provide rationale for further studies evaluating combination ICI approaches in patients with metastatic TNBC. Citation Format: Phaedon D. Zavras, Hugo R. Lara-Martinez, Qi Nie, Julius Y. Kattoula, Nicole Strossman, Zehui He, Ming Li, Romualdo Barroso-Sousa, Isaac Chan, Sara M. Tolaney, Vered Stearns, Cesar A. Santa-Maria, Evanthia T. Roussos Torres. A meta-analysis of single agent versus combination immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic triple negative breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2025; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2025 Apr 25-30; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(8_Suppl_1):Abstract nr 3225.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cancer Research
Published
2025-04-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7445.am2025-3225
Primary Topic
Cancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Abstract 3225: A meta-analysis of single agent versus combination immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic triple negative breast cancer

Hugo Lara-Martinez, Qi Nie, Isaac S. Chan, Evanthia T. Roussos Torres et al.
Cancer Research
Cancer Treatment and Pharmacology
article

Abstract 3225: A meta-analysis of single agent versus combination immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic triple negative breast cancer

Hugo Lara-Martinez, Qi Nie, Isaac S. Chan, Evanthia T. Roussos Torres, Cesar A. Santa‐Maria, Phaedon D. Zavras, Vered Stearns, Sara M. Tolaney, Romualdo Barroso‐Sousa, Nicole Strossman, Ming Li, Zehui He, Julius Y. Kattoula
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are active against triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), and approved in combination with chemotherapy, or as a single agent in patients with high tumor mutational burden and/or microsatellite instability/mismatch repair deficiency. A number of studies have been conducted with single-agent inhibitors of programmed cell death 1 or its ligand (PD1/PD-L1i), however, responses are typically low, especially in the later line setting. Few studies have evaluated the efficacy of PD1/PD-L1i combined with inhibitors of cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 (CTLA-4i) in metastatic TNBC, and none compared single agent vs combination ICI approaches. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy of PD1/PD-L1i with or without CTLA-4i in TNBC. Methods: A comprehensive literature search across PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library identified 870 unique clinical trials from 2010 - 2024. Studies eligible for inclusion were those of patients with: (1) metastatic TNBC, (2) >1 line of prior therapy, (3) received PD1/PD-L1i with or without CTLA-4i. Studies of combination of ICI with chemotherapy or targeted treatments were excluded with the exception of histone-deacetylase inhibitor (HDACi) combinations. Data were selected and extracted by two reviewers based on the PRISMA-A guidelines. The primary objective of the meta-analysis was objective response rate (ORR). Progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were also determined when available. Results: A total of 10 clinical trials were eligible and included in the meta-analysis, six for single ICI and four for combination ICI. The heterogeneity test indicated no significant heterogeneity (I2) in either of the groups, thus, a fixed-effect model was used. A total of 611 patients with metastatic TNBC (>1L) treated with single ICI showed a pooled ORR of 8.3% (95% CI, 6.1-10.7%), median PFS of 1.7 months (95% CI 1.40-2.06) and OS of 9.13 months (95% CI, 8.09-10.17). Among 42 patients treated with combination ICI, a pooled ORR was 27.7% (95% CI, 14.1%-43.3%). A sensitivity analysis excluding patients that received an HDACi showed an ORR of 7.2% (95% CI, 4.4%-10.6%) vs. 24% (95% CI, 9.5%-41.6%) for the single and combination ICI groups, respectively. Conclusion: The use of combination ICI therapy led to an overall response rate of 27% compared to 8% in the single ICI studies. Our results provide rationale for further studies evaluating combination ICI approaches in patients with metastatic TNBC. Citation Format: Phaedon D. Zavras, Hugo R. Lara-Martinez, Qi Nie, Julius Y. Kattoula, Nicole Strossman, Zehui He, Ming Li, Romualdo Barroso-Sousa, Isaac Chan, Sara M. Tolaney, Vered Stearns, Cesar A. Santa-Maria, Evanthia T. Roussos Torres. A meta-analysis of single agent versus combination immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic triple negative breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2025; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2025 Apr 25-30; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(8_Suppl_1):Abstract nr 3225.

Cancer ResearchVol. 85(8_Supplement_1)
University of Southern California (US), The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US), D’Or Institute for Research and Education (BR), Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (US), Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center (US), The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 88%
Cancer Treatment and Pharmacology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.