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.

Purpose: The introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors represents a major advance in the treatment of lung cancer, allowing sustained recovery in a significant proportion of patients. Nivolumab is a monoclonal anti–programmed death cell protein 1 antibody licensed for the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after prior chemotherapy. In this study, we describe the demographic and clinical outcomes of patients with advanced NSCLC treated with nivolumab in the Korean expanded access program. Materials and Methods: Previously treated patients with advanced non-squamous and squamous NSCLC patients received nivolumab at 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks up to 36 months. Efficacy data including investigator-assessed tumor response, progression data, survival, and safety data were collected. Results: Two hundred ninety-nine patients were treated across 36 Korean centers. The objective response rate and disease control rate were 18% and 49%, respectively; the median progression-free survival was 2.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.87 to 3.45), and the overall survival (OS) was 13.2 months (95% CI, 10.6 to 18.9). Patients with smoking history and patients who experienced immune-related adverse events showed a prolonged OS. Cox regression analysis identified smoking history, presence of immune-related adverse events as positive factors associated with OS, while liver metastasis was a negative factor associated with OS. The safety profile was generally comparable to previously reported data. Conclusion This real-world analysis supports the use of nivolumab for pretreated NSCLC patients, including those with an older age.

OBJECTIVES: Hearing loss disrupts the balance of auditory-somatosensory inputs in the cochlear nucleus (CN) of the brainstem, which has been suggested to be a mechanism of tinnitus. This disruption results from maladaptive auditory-somatosensory plasticity, which is a form of axonal sprouting. Axonal sprouting is promoted by transforming growth factor (TGF)-β signaling, which can be inhibited by losartan. We investigated whether losartan prevents maladaptive auditory-somatosensory plasticity after hearing loss. METHODS: The study consisted of two stages: determining the time course of auditory-somatosensory plasticity following hearing loss and preventing auditory-somatosensory plasticity using losartan. In the first stage, rats were randomly divided into two groups: a control group that underwent a sham operation and a deaf group that underwent cochlea ablation on the left side. CNs were harvested 1 and 2 weeks after surgery. In the second stage, rats were randomly divided into either a saline group that underwent cochlear ablation on the left side and received normal saline or a losartan group that underwent cochlear ablation on the left side and received losartan. CNs were harvested 2 weeks after surgery. Hearing was estimated with auditory brainstem responses (ABRs). Western blotting was performed for vesicular glutamate transporter 1 (VGLUT1), reflecting auditory input; vesicular glutamate transporter 2 (VGLUT2), reflecting somatosensory input; growth-associated protein 43 (GAP-43), reflecting axonal sprouting; and p-Smad2/3. RESULTS: Baseline ABR thresholds before surgery ranged from 20 to 35 dB sound pressure level. After cochlear ablation, ABR thresholds were higher than 80 dB. In the first experiment, VGLUT2/VGLUT1 ratios did not differ significantly between the control and deaf groups 1 week after surgery. At 2 weeks after surgery, the deaf group had a significantly higher VGLUT2/VGLUT1 ratio compared to the control group. In the second experiment, the losartan group had a significantly lower VGLUT2/VGLUT1 ratio along with significantly lower p-Smad3 and GAP-43 levels compared to the saline group. CONCLUSION: Losartan might prevent axonal sprouting after hearing loss by blocking TGF-β signaling thereby preventing maladaptive auditory-somatosensory plasticity.
Animals ; Axons ; Blotting, Western ; Brain Stem ; Cochlea ; Cochlear Nucleus ; Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem ; GAP-43 Protein ; Hearing Loss ; Hearing ; Losartan ; Plastics ; Rats ; Tinnitus ; Transforming Growth Factors ; Vesicular Glutamate Transport Protein 1 ; Vesicular Glutamate Transport Protein 2

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Colorectal cancer is associated with different anatomical, biological, and clinical characteristics. We determined the impact of the primary tumor location in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS: Demographic data and clinical information were collected from 1,115 patients from the Republic of Korea, who presented with mCRC between January 2009 and December 2011, using web-based electronic case report forms. Associations between the primary tumor location and the patient's clinical characteristics were assessed, and factors inf luencing overall survival were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards regression models. RESULTS: Of the 1,115 patients recruited to the study, 244 (21.9%) had right colon cancer, 483 (43.3%) had left colon cancer, and 388 (34.8%) had rectal cancer. Liver and lung metastases occurred more frequently in patients with left colon and rectal cancer (p = 0.005 and p = 0.006, respectively), while peritoneal and ovarian metastases occurred more frequently in patients with right and left colon cancer (p < 0.001 and p = 0.031, respectively). The median overall survival of patients with tumors originating in the right colon was significantly shorter than that of patients whose tumors had originated in the left colon or rectum (13.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 12.0 to 15.5] vs. 18.0 months [95% CI, 16.3 to 19.7] or 19.9 months [95% CI, 18.5 to 21.3], respectively; p = 0.003). Tumor resection, the number of metastatic sites, and primary tumor location correlated with overall survival in the univariate and multivariate analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Primary tumor location influences the metastatic sites and prognosis of patients with mCRC.
Colon ; Colonic Neoplasms ; Colorectal Neoplasms* ; Humans ; Liver ; Lung ; Multivariate Analysis ; Neoplasm Metastasis ; Prognosis ; Rectal Neoplasms ; Rectum ; Republic of Korea

In Korea, the Hospice, Palliative Care, and Life-sustaining Treatment Decision-making Act was enacted in February 2016 in order to ensure that the patient's self-determination in end-of-life care processes is respected. To enhance physicians' understanding of this act and to provide proper criteria for medical judgment in variety of clinical settings, consensus guidelines were published in November 2016. In this article, the characteristics of these guidelines and related issues regarding the definitions of ‘the end stage of disease’ and ‘last days of life’ and the criteria for medical judgment are presented and summarized. According to the guidelines, the term ‘end stage of disease’ refers to a state in which there is no possibility of a fundamental recovery and the symptoms are expected to worsen within months. The terms ‘the last days of life’ and ‘the final days of life’ refer to a state in which, despite treatment, the patient's condition is worsening and death is impending, with no possibility of recovery. The attending physician and another relevant specialist should both judge a patient's medical condition as either ‘end stage of disease’ for hospice/palliative care or ‘the last days of life’ for dying patient care according to the law. Caregivers should provide appropriate medical information to eligible patients for palliative or ‘end stage of disease’ care through advance care planning. Therefore, it is critically necessary that caregivers understand the legitimate process of hospice/palliative and dying patient care based on the patient's wishes and best interests. Physicians should apply these consensus guidelines to eligible patients considering their clinical course and the patients' wishes.

In Korea, the Hospice, Palliative Care, and Life-sustaining Treatment Decision-making Act was enacted in February 2016 in order to ensure that the patient's self-determination in end-of-life care processes is respected. To enhance physicians' understanding of this act and to provide proper criteria for medical judgment in variety of clinical settings, consensus guidelines were published in November 2016. In this article, the characteristics of these guidelines and related issues regarding the definitions of ‘the end stage of disease’ and ‘last days of life’ and the criteria for medical judgment are presented and summarized. According to the guidelines, the term ‘end stage of disease’ refers to a state in which there is no possibility of a fundamental recovery and the symptoms are expected to worsen within months. The terms ‘the last days of life’ and ‘the final days of life’ refer to a state in which, despite treatment, the patient's condition is worsening and death is impending, with no possibility of recovery. The attending physician and another relevant specialist should both judge a patient's medical condition as either ‘end stage of disease’ for hospice/palliative care or ‘the last days of life’ for dying patient care according to the law. Caregivers should provide appropriate medical information to eligible patients for palliative or ‘end stage of disease’ care through advance care planning. Therefore, it is critically necessary that caregivers understand the legitimate process of hospice/palliative and dying patient care based on the patient's wishes and best interests. Physicians should apply these consensus guidelines to eligible patients considering their clinical course and the patients' wishes.
Advance Care Planning ; Caregivers ; Consensus ; Hospices ; Humans ; Judgment ; Jurisprudence ; Korea ; Palliative Care ; Patient Care ; Specialization

In this article, on page 230, Fig. 2A needs to be corrected.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We compared the efficacy and safety of valsartan and rosuvastatin combination therapy with each treatment alone in hypercholesterolemic hypertensive patients. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Patients who met inclusion criteria were randomized to receive 1 of the following 2-month drug regimens: valsartan 160 mg plus rosuvastatin 20 mg, valsartan 160 mg plus placebo, or rosuvastatin 20 mg plus placebo. The primary efficacy variables were change in sitting diastolic blood pressure (sitDBP) and sitting systolic blood pressure (sitSBP), and percentage change in low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) in the combination, valsartan, and rosuvastatin groups. Adverse events (AEs) during the study were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 354 patients were screened and 123 of them were finally randomized. Changes of sitDBP by least squares mean (LSM) were -11.1, -7.2, and -3.6 mm Hg, respectively, and was greater in the combination, as compared to both valsartan (p=0.02) and rosuvastatin (p<0.001). Changes of sitSBP by LSM were -13.2, -10.8, and -4.9 mm Hg, and was greater in the combination, as compared to rosuvastatin (p=0.006) and not valsartan (p=0.42). Percentage changes of LDL-C by LSM were -52, -4, and -47% in each group, and was greater in the combination, as compared to valsartan (p<0.001), similar to rosuvastatin (p=0.16). Most AEs were mild and resolved by the end of the study. CONCLUSION: Combination treatment with valsartan and rosuvastatin exhibited an additive blood pressure-lowering effect with acceptable tolerability, as compared to valsartan monotherapy. Its lipid lowering effect was similar to rosuvatatin monotherapy.
Blood Pressure ; Drug Therapy, Combination ; Humans ; Least-Squares Analysis ; Rosuvastatin Calcium ; Valsartan