Purpose: The Korean Cancer Study Group (KCSG) is a nationwide cancer clinical trial group dedicated to advancing investigator-initiated trials (IITs) by conducting and supporting clinical trials. This study aims to review IITs conducted by KCSG and quantitatively evaluate the survival and financial benefits of IITs for patients. Materials and Methods: We reviewed IITs conducted by KCSG from 1998 to 2023, analyzing progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) gains for participants. PFS and OS benefits were calculated as the difference in median survival times between the intervention and control groups, multiplied by the number of patients in the intervention group. Financial benefits were assessed based on the cost of investigational products provided. Results: From 1998 to 2023, KCSG conducted 310 IITs, with 133 completed and published. Of these, 21 were included in the survival analysis. The analysis revealed that 1,951 patients in the intervention groups gained a total of 2,558.4 months (213.2 years) of PFS and 2,501.6 months (208.5 years) of OS, with median gains of 1.31 months in PFS and 1.58 months in OS per patient. When analyzing only statistically significant results, PFS and OS gain per patients was 1.69 months and 3.02 months, respectively. Investigational drug cost analysis from six available IITs indicated that investigational products provided to 252 patients were valued at 10,400,077,294 won (approximately 8,046,481 US dollars), averaging about 41,270,148 won (approximately 31,930 US dollars) per patient. Conclusion Our findings, based on analysis of published research, suggest that IITs conducted by KCSG led to survival benefits for participants and, in some studies, may have provided financial benefits by providing investment drugs.

Purpose: The Korean Cancer Study Group (KCSG) is a nationwide cancer clinical trial group dedicated to advancing investigator-initiated trials (IITs) by conducting and supporting clinical trials. This study aims to review IITs conducted by KCSG and quantitatively evaluate the survival and financial benefits of IITs for patients. Materials and Methods: We reviewed IITs conducted by KCSG from 1998 to 2023, analyzing progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) gains for participants. PFS and OS benefits were calculated as the difference in median survival times between the intervention and control groups, multiplied by the number of patients in the intervention group. Financial benefits were assessed based on the cost of investigational products provided. Results: From 1998 to 2023, KCSG conducted 310 IITs, with 133 completed and published. Of these, 21 were included in the survival analysis. The analysis revealed that 1,951 patients in the intervention groups gained a total of 2,558.4 months (213.2 years) of PFS and 2,501.6 months (208.5 years) of OS, with median gains of 1.31 months in PFS and 1.58 months in OS per patient. When analyzing only statistically significant results, PFS and OS gain per patients was 1.69 months and 3.02 months, respectively. Investigational drug cost analysis from six available IITs indicated that investigational products provided to 252 patients were valued at 10,400,077,294 won (approximately 8,046,481 US dollars), averaging about 41,270,148 won (approximately 31,930 US dollars) per patient. Conclusion Our findings, based on analysis of published research, suggest that IITs conducted by KCSG led to survival benefits for participants and, in some studies, may have provided financial benefits by providing investment drugs.

Purpose: The Korean Cancer Study Group (KCSG) is a nationwide cancer clinical trial group dedicated to advancing investigator-initiated trials (IITs) by conducting and supporting clinical trials. This study aims to review IITs conducted by KCSG and quantitatively evaluate the survival and financial benefits of IITs for patients. Materials and Methods: We reviewed IITs conducted by KCSG from 1998 to 2023, analyzing progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) gains for participants. PFS and OS benefits were calculated as the difference in median survival times between the intervention and control groups, multiplied by the number of patients in the intervention group. Financial benefits were assessed based on the cost of investigational products provided. Results: From 1998 to 2023, KCSG conducted 310 IITs, with 133 completed and published. Of these, 21 were included in the survival analysis. The analysis revealed that 1,951 patients in the intervention groups gained a total of 2,558.4 months (213.2 years) of PFS and 2,501.6 months (208.5 years) of OS, with median gains of 1.31 months in PFS and 1.58 months in OS per patient. When analyzing only statistically significant results, PFS and OS gain per patients was 1.69 months and 3.02 months, respectively. Investigational drug cost analysis from six available IITs indicated that investigational products provided to 252 patients were valued at 10,400,077,294 won (approximately 8,046,481 US dollars), averaging about 41,270,148 won (approximately 31,930 US dollars) per patient. Conclusion Our findings, based on analysis of published research, suggest that IITs conducted by KCSG led to survival benefits for participants and, in some studies, may have provided financial benefits by providing investment drugs.

In this paper, we review the use of hypofractionated radiotherapy for gastrointestinal malignancies, focusing on primary and metastatic liver cancer, and recurrent rectal cancer. Technological advancements in radiotherapy have facilitated the direct delivery of high-dose radiation to tumors, while limiting normal tissue exposure, supporting the use of hypofractionation. Hypofractionated radiotherapy is particularly effective for primary and metastatic liver cancer where high-dose irradiation is crucial to achieve effective local control. For recurrent rectal cancer, the use of stereotactic body radiotherapy offers a promising approach for re-irradiation, balancing efficacy and safety in patients who have been administered previous pelvic radiotherapy and in whom salvage surgery is not applicable. Nevertheless, the potential for radiation-induced liver disease and gastrointestinal complications presents challenges when applying hypofractionation to gastrointestinal organs. Given the lack of universal consensus on hypofractionation regimens and the dose constraints for primary and metastatic liver cancer, as well as for recurrent rectal cancer, this review aims to facilitate clinical decision-making by pointing to potential regimens and dose constraints, underpinned by a comprehensive review of existing clinical studies and guidelines.

Hypofractionated radiotherapy (RT) has become a trend in the modern era, as advances in RT techniques, including intensity-modulated RT and image-guided RT, enable the precise and safe delivery of high-dose radiation. Hypofractionated RT offers convenience and can reduce the financial burden on patients by decreasing the number of fractions. Furthermore, hypofractionated RT is potentially more beneficial for tumors with a low α/β ratio compared with conventional fractionation RT. Therefore, hypofractionated RT has been investigated for various primary cancers and has gained status as a standard treatment recommended in the guidelines. In genitourinary (GU) cancer, especially prostate cancer, the efficacy, and safety of various hypofractionated dose schemes have been evaluated in numerous prospective clinical studies, establishing the standard hypofractionated RT regimen. Hypofractionated RT has also been explored for gynecological (GY) cancer, yielding relevant evidence in recent years. In this review, we aimed to summarize the representative evidence and current trends in clinical studies on hypofractionated RT for GU and GY cancers addressing several key questions. In addition, the objective is to offer suggestions for the available dose regimens for hypofractionated RT by reviewing protocols from previous clinical studies.

In this paper, we review the use of hypofractionated radiotherapy for gastrointestinal malignancies, focusing on primary and metastatic liver cancer, and recurrent rectal cancer. Technological advancements in radiotherapy have facilitated the direct delivery of high-dose radiation to tumors, while limiting normal tissue exposure, supporting the use of hypofractionation. Hypofractionated radiotherapy is particularly effective for primary and metastatic liver cancer where high-dose irradiation is crucial to achieve effective local control. For recurrent rectal cancer, the use of stereotactic body radiotherapy offers a promising approach for re-irradiation, balancing efficacy and safety in patients who have been administered previous pelvic radiotherapy and in whom salvage surgery is not applicable. Nevertheless, the potential for radiation-induced liver disease and gastrointestinal complications presents challenges when applying hypofractionation to gastrointestinal organs. Given the lack of universal consensus on hypofractionation regimens and the dose constraints for primary and metastatic liver cancer, as well as for recurrent rectal cancer, this review aims to facilitate clinical decision-making by pointing to potential regimens and dose constraints, underpinned by a comprehensive review of existing clinical studies and guidelines.

Hypofractionated radiotherapy (RT) has become a trend in the modern era, as advances in RT techniques, including intensity-modulated RT and image-guided RT, enable the precise and safe delivery of high-dose radiation. Hypofractionated RT offers convenience and can reduce the financial burden on patients by decreasing the number of fractions. Furthermore, hypofractionated RT is potentially more beneficial for tumors with a low α/β ratio compared with conventional fractionation RT. Therefore, hypofractionated RT has been investigated for various primary cancers and has gained status as a standard treatment recommended in the guidelines. In genitourinary (GU) cancer, especially prostate cancer, the efficacy, and safety of various hypofractionated dose schemes have been evaluated in numerous prospective clinical studies, establishing the standard hypofractionated RT regimen. Hypofractionated RT has also been explored for gynecological (GY) cancer, yielding relevant evidence in recent years. In this review, we aimed to summarize the representative evidence and current trends in clinical studies on hypofractionated RT for GU and GY cancers addressing several key questions. In addition, the objective is to offer suggestions for the available dose regimens for hypofractionated RT by reviewing protocols from previous clinical studies.

In this paper, we review the use of hypofractionated radiotherapy for gastrointestinal malignancies, focusing on primary and metastatic liver cancer, and recurrent rectal cancer. Technological advancements in radiotherapy have facilitated the direct delivery of high-dose radiation to tumors, while limiting normal tissue exposure, supporting the use of hypofractionation. Hypofractionated radiotherapy is particularly effective for primary and metastatic liver cancer where high-dose irradiation is crucial to achieve effective local control. For recurrent rectal cancer, the use of stereotactic body radiotherapy offers a promising approach for re-irradiation, balancing efficacy and safety in patients who have been administered previous pelvic radiotherapy and in whom salvage surgery is not applicable. Nevertheless, the potential for radiation-induced liver disease and gastrointestinal complications presents challenges when applying hypofractionation to gastrointestinal organs. Given the lack of universal consensus on hypofractionation regimens and the dose constraints for primary and metastatic liver cancer, as well as for recurrent rectal cancer, this review aims to facilitate clinical decision-making by pointing to potential regimens and dose constraints, underpinned by a comprehensive review of existing clinical studies and guidelines.

Hypofractionated radiotherapy (RT) has become a trend in the modern era, as advances in RT techniques, including intensity-modulated RT and image-guided RT, enable the precise and safe delivery of high-dose radiation. Hypofractionated RT offers convenience and can reduce the financial burden on patients by decreasing the number of fractions. Furthermore, hypofractionated RT is potentially more beneficial for tumors with a low α/β ratio compared with conventional fractionation RT. Therefore, hypofractionated RT has been investigated for various primary cancers and has gained status as a standard treatment recommended in the guidelines. In genitourinary (GU) cancer, especially prostate cancer, the efficacy, and safety of various hypofractionated dose schemes have been evaluated in numerous prospective clinical studies, establishing the standard hypofractionated RT regimen. Hypofractionated RT has also been explored for gynecological (GY) cancer, yielding relevant evidence in recent years. In this review, we aimed to summarize the representative evidence and current trends in clinical studies on hypofractionated RT for GU and GY cancers addressing several key questions. In addition, the objective is to offer suggestions for the available dose regimens for hypofractionated RT by reviewing protocols from previous clinical studies.

Several recent studies have investigated the use of hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) for various cancers. However, HFRT for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with or without concurrent chemotherapy is not yet widely used because of concerns about serious side effects and the lack of evidence for improved treatment results. Investigations of HFRT with concurrent chemotherapy in NSCLC have usually been performed in single-arm studies and with a small number of patients, so there are not yet sufficient data. Therefore, the Korean Society for Radiation Oncology Practice Guidelines Committee planned this review article to summarize the evidence on HFRT so far and provide it to radiation oncology clinicians. In summary, HFRT has demonstrated promising results, and the reviewed data support its feasibility and comparable efficacy for the treatment of locally advanced NSCLC. The incidence and severity of esophageal toxicity have been identified as major concerns, particularly when treating large fraction sizes. Strategies, such as esophagus-sparing techniques, image guidance, and dose constraints, may help mitigate this problem and improve treatment tolerability. Continued research and clinical trials are essential to refine treatment strategies, identify optimal patient selection criteria, and enhance therapeutic outcomes.