1.Association between Tumor Size at the Time of Disease Progression and Survival Outcomes
Chi Hoon MAENG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Myung-Ju AHN ; In Sil CHOI ; Dae Young ZANG ; Bo-Hyung KIM ; Minji KWON ; Dae Seog HEO ; Bhumsuk KEAM
Cancer Research and Treatment 2025;57(2):362-368
Purpose:
This study evaluates the prognostic significance of tumor size at disease progression (PD) and depth of response (DOR) in cancer patients.
Materials and Methods:
We performed post hoc analysis using data from six prospective clinical trials conducted by the Korean Cancer Study Group. Patients with tumor size at PD was categorized into ‘Mild PD’ and ‘Significant PD’ based on the cutoff values of relative change from baseline using maximally selected rank statistics. The overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared between PD and DOR categories.
Results:
Among the 194 evaluable patients, 130 experienced PD. A 35.48% decrease from baseline in tumor size at PD was chosen for the cutoff between mild and significant PD for OS (mild PD: tumor size from the baseline ≤ −35.48%; significant PD > −35.48%). The mild PD had superior OS compared to the significant PD (25.8 vs. 12.8 months; Hazard ratio [HR] 0.47, 95% CI 0.266-0.843, p=0.009). When using an exploratory cutoff based on whether the tumor size was below vs. exceeded from the baseline (mild PD: tumor size from the baseline ≤ 0%; significant PD > 0%), OS remained significantly longer in the mild PD (17.1 vs. 11.8 months; HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.392-0.932, p=0.021). The greatest DOR was associated with the longest OS and PFS (p<0.001 for both).
Conclusion
Tumor size at PD and DOR were significant prognostic factors for progressive disease. Maintaining a sufficiently reduced tumor size even during PD was associated with better survival outcomes.
2.The Survival and Financial Benefit of Investigator-Initiated Trials Conducted by Korean Cancer Study Group
Bum Jun KIM ; Chi Hoon MAENG ; Bhumsuk KEAM ; Young-Hyuck IM ; Jungsil RO ; Kyung Hae JUNG ; Seock-Ah IM ; Tae Won KIM ; Jae Lyun LEE ; Dae Seog HEO ; Sang-We KIM ; Keunchil PARK ; Myung-Ju AHN ; Byoung Chul CHO ; Hoon-Kyo KIM ; Yoon-Koo KANG ; Jae Yong CHO ; Hwan Jung YUN ; Byung-Ho NAM ; Dae Young ZANG
Cancer Research and Treatment 2025;57(1):39-46
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.
3.Association between Tumor Size at the Time of Disease Progression and Survival Outcomes
Chi Hoon MAENG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Myung-Ju AHN ; In Sil CHOI ; Dae Young ZANG ; Bo-Hyung KIM ; Minji KWON ; Dae Seog HEO ; Bhumsuk KEAM
Cancer Research and Treatment 2025;57(2):362-368
Purpose:
This study evaluates the prognostic significance of tumor size at disease progression (PD) and depth of response (DOR) in cancer patients.
Materials and Methods:
We performed post hoc analysis using data from six prospective clinical trials conducted by the Korean Cancer Study Group. Patients with tumor size at PD was categorized into ‘Mild PD’ and ‘Significant PD’ based on the cutoff values of relative change from baseline using maximally selected rank statistics. The overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared between PD and DOR categories.
Results:
Among the 194 evaluable patients, 130 experienced PD. A 35.48% decrease from baseline in tumor size at PD was chosen for the cutoff between mild and significant PD for OS (mild PD: tumor size from the baseline ≤ −35.48%; significant PD > −35.48%). The mild PD had superior OS compared to the significant PD (25.8 vs. 12.8 months; Hazard ratio [HR] 0.47, 95% CI 0.266-0.843, p=0.009). When using an exploratory cutoff based on whether the tumor size was below vs. exceeded from the baseline (mild PD: tumor size from the baseline ≤ 0%; significant PD > 0%), OS remained significantly longer in the mild PD (17.1 vs. 11.8 months; HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.392-0.932, p=0.021). The greatest DOR was associated with the longest OS and PFS (p<0.001 for both).
Conclusion
Tumor size at PD and DOR were significant prognostic factors for progressive disease. Maintaining a sufficiently reduced tumor size even during PD was associated with better survival outcomes.
4.The Survival and Financial Benefit of Investigator-Initiated Trials Conducted by Korean Cancer Study Group
Bum Jun KIM ; Chi Hoon MAENG ; Bhumsuk KEAM ; Young-Hyuck IM ; Jungsil RO ; Kyung Hae JUNG ; Seock-Ah IM ; Tae Won KIM ; Jae Lyun LEE ; Dae Seog HEO ; Sang-We KIM ; Keunchil PARK ; Myung-Ju AHN ; Byoung Chul CHO ; Hoon-Kyo KIM ; Yoon-Koo KANG ; Jae Yong CHO ; Hwan Jung YUN ; Byung-Ho NAM ; Dae Young ZANG
Cancer Research and Treatment 2025;57(1):39-46
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.
5.Association between Tumor Size at the Time of Disease Progression and Survival Outcomes
Chi Hoon MAENG ; Bum Jun KIM ; Myung-Ju AHN ; In Sil CHOI ; Dae Young ZANG ; Bo-Hyung KIM ; Minji KWON ; Dae Seog HEO ; Bhumsuk KEAM
Cancer Research and Treatment 2025;57(2):362-368
Purpose:
This study evaluates the prognostic significance of tumor size at disease progression (PD) and depth of response (DOR) in cancer patients.
Materials and Methods:
We performed post hoc analysis using data from six prospective clinical trials conducted by the Korean Cancer Study Group. Patients with tumor size at PD was categorized into ‘Mild PD’ and ‘Significant PD’ based on the cutoff values of relative change from baseline using maximally selected rank statistics. The overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were compared between PD and DOR categories.
Results:
Among the 194 evaluable patients, 130 experienced PD. A 35.48% decrease from baseline in tumor size at PD was chosen for the cutoff between mild and significant PD for OS (mild PD: tumor size from the baseline ≤ −35.48%; significant PD > −35.48%). The mild PD had superior OS compared to the significant PD (25.8 vs. 12.8 months; Hazard ratio [HR] 0.47, 95% CI 0.266-0.843, p=0.009). When using an exploratory cutoff based on whether the tumor size was below vs. exceeded from the baseline (mild PD: tumor size from the baseline ≤ 0%; significant PD > 0%), OS remained significantly longer in the mild PD (17.1 vs. 11.8 months; HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.392-0.932, p=0.021). The greatest DOR was associated with the longest OS and PFS (p<0.001 for both).
Conclusion
Tumor size at PD and DOR were significant prognostic factors for progressive disease. Maintaining a sufficiently reduced tumor size even during PD was associated with better survival outcomes.
6.The Survival and Financial Benefit of Investigator-Initiated Trials Conducted by Korean Cancer Study Group
Bum Jun KIM ; Chi Hoon MAENG ; Bhumsuk KEAM ; Young-Hyuck IM ; Jungsil RO ; Kyung Hae JUNG ; Seock-Ah IM ; Tae Won KIM ; Jae Lyun LEE ; Dae Seog HEO ; Sang-We KIM ; Keunchil PARK ; Myung-Ju AHN ; Byoung Chul CHO ; Hoon-Kyo KIM ; Yoon-Koo KANG ; Jae Yong CHO ; Hwan Jung YUN ; Byung-Ho NAM ; Dae Young ZANG
Cancer Research and Treatment 2025;57(1):39-46
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.
7.Varlitinib and Paclitaxel for EGFR/HER2 Co-expressing Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Multicenter Phase Ib/II Study (K-MASTER-13)
Dong-Hoe KOO ; Minkyu JUNG ; Yeul Hong KIM ; Hei-Cheul JEUNG ; Dae Young ZANG ; Woo Kyun BAE ; Hyunki KIM ; Hyo Song KIM ; Choong-kun LEE ; Woo Sun KWON ; Hyun Cheol CHUNG ; Sun Young RHA
Cancer Research and Treatment 2024;56(4):1136-1145
Purpose:
Varlitinib is a pan-human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER) inhibitor targeting epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), and HER4. We present a phase Ib/II study of a combination of varlitinib and weekly paclitaxel as a second-line treatment for patients with EGFR/HER2 co-expressing advanced gastric cancer (AGC).
Materials and Methods:
Patients whose tumors with EGFR and HER2 overexpression by immunohistochemistry (≥ 1+) were enrolled. Varlitinib and paclitaxel were investigated every 4 weeks. After determining the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) in phase Ib, a phase II study was conducted to evaluate the antitumor activity.
Results:
RP2D was treated with a combination of varlitinib (300 mg twice daily) and paclitaxel. Among 27 patients treated with RP2D, the median progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were 3.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7 to 4.9) and 7.9 months (95% CI, 5.0 to 10.8), respectively, with a median follow-up of 15.7 months. Among 16 patients with measurable disease, the objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate were 31% and 88%, respectively. Patients with strong HER2 expression (n=8) had a higher ORR and longer OS, whereas those with strong EGFR expression (n=3) had poorer outcomes. The most common adverse events (AEs) of any grade were neutropenia (52%), diarrhea (27%), aspartate aminotransferase/alanine transaminase elevation (22%), and nausea (19%). No treatment-related deaths or unexpected AEs resulting from treatment cessation were observed in patients with RP2D.
Conclusion
A combination of varlitinib and paclitaxel displayed manageable toxicity and modest antitumor activity in patients with EGFR/HER2 co-expressing AGC who progressed after first-line chemotherapy.
8.ERRATUM: Recommendations for the Use of Next-Generation Sequencing and the Molecular Tumor Board for Patients with Advanced Cancer: A Report from KSMO and KCSG Precision Medicine Networking Group
Shinkyo YOON ; Miso KIM ; Yong Sang HONG ; Han Sang KIM ; Seung Tae KIM ; Jihun KIM ; Hongseok YUN ; Changhoon YOO ; Hee Kyung AHN ; Hyo Song KIM ; In Hee LEE ; In-Ho KIM ; Inkeun PARK ; Jae Ho JEONG ; Jaekyung CHEON ; Jin Won KIM ; Jina YUN ; Sun Min LIM ; Yongjun CHA ; Se Jin JANG ; Dae Young ZANG ; Tae Won KIM ; Jin Hyoung KANG ; Jee Hyun KIM
Cancer Research and Treatment 2023;55(3):1061-1061
9.A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial to Compare Efficacy and Safety between Combination Therapy and Monotherapy in Elderly Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer (KCSG ST13-10)
Keun-Wook LEE ; Dae Young ZANG ; Min-Hee RYU ; Hye Sook HAN ; Ki Hyang KIM ; Mi-Jung KIM ; Sung Ae KOH ; Sung Sook LEE ; Dong-Hoe KOO ; Yoon Ho KO ; Byeong Seok SOHN ; Jin Won KIM ; Jin Hyun PARK ; Byung-Ho NAM ; In Sil CHOI
Cancer Research and Treatment 2023;55(4):1250-1260
Purpose:
This study evaluated whether combination therapy is more effective than monotherapy in elderly patients with metastatic or recurrent gastric cancer (MRGC) as first-line chemotherapy.
Materials and Methods:
Elderly (≥ 70 years) chemo-naïve patients with MRGC were allocated to receive either combination therapy (group A: 5-fluorouracil [5-FU]/oxaliplatin, capecitabine/oxaliplatin, capecitabine/cisplatin, or S-1/cisplatin) or monotherapy (group B: 5-FU, capecitabine, or S-1). In group A, starting doses were 80% of standard doses, and they could be escalated to 100% at the discretion of the investigator. Primary endpoint was to confirm superior overall survival (OS) of combination therapy vs. monotherapy.
Results:
After 111 of the planned 238 patients were randomized, enrollment was terminated due to poor accrual. In the full-analysis population (group A [n=53] and group B [n=51]), median OS of combination therapy vs. monotherapy was 11.5 vs. 7.5 months (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56 to 1.30; p=0.231). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.6 vs. 3.7 months (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.83; p=0.005). In subgroup analyses, patients aged 70-74 years tended to have superior OS with combination therapy (15.9 vs. 7.2 months, p=0.056). Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred more frequently in group A vs. group B. However, among severe TRAEs (≥ grade 3), there were no TRAEs with a frequency difference of > 5%.
Conclusion
Combination therapy was associated with numerically improved OS, although statistically insignificant, and a significant PFS benefit compared with monotherapy. Although combination therapy showed more frequent TRAEs, there was no difference in the frequency of severe TRAEs.
10.Safety and efficacy of nilotinib in adult patients with chronic myeloid leukemia: a post-marketing surveillance study in Korea
Seo-Yeon AHN ; Sang Kyun SON ; Gyu Hyung LEE ; Inho KIM ; June-Won CHEONG ; Won Sik LEE ; Byung Soo KIM ; Deog-Yeon JO ; Chul Won JUNG ; Chu Myoung SEONG ; Jae Hoon LEE ; Young Jin YUH ; Min Kyoung KIM ; Hun-Mo RYOO ; Moo-Rim PARK ; Su-Hee CHO ; Hoon-Gu KIM ; Dae Young ZANG ; Jinny PARK ; Hawk KIM ; Seryeon LEE ; Sung-Hyun KIM ; Myung Hee CHANG ; Ho Sup LEE ; Chul Won CHOI ; Jihyun KWON ; Sung-Nam LIM ; Suk-Joong OH ; Inkyung JOO ; Dong-Wook KIM
Blood Research 2022;57(2):144-151
Background:
Nilotinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved by the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety for frontline and 2nd line treatment of Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukemia (Ph+ CML). This study aimed to confirm the safety and efficacy of nilotinib in routine clinical practice within South Korea.
Methods:
An open-label, multicenter, single-arm, 12-week observational post-marketing surveillance (PMS) study was conducted on 669 Korean adult patients with Ph + CML from December 24, 2010, to December 23, 2016. The patients received nilotinib treatment in routine clinical practice settings. Safety was evaluated by all types of adverse events (AEs) during the study period, and efficacy was evaluated by the complete hematological response (CHR) and cytogenetic response.
Results:
During the study period, AEs occurred in 61.3% (410 patients, 973 events), adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in 40.5% (271/669 patients, 559 events), serious AEs in 4.5% (30 patients, 37 events), and serious ADRs in 0.7% (5 patients, 8 events). Furthermore, unexpected AEs occurred at a rate of 6.9% (46 patients, 55 events) and unexpected ADRs at 1.2% (8 patients, 8 events). As for the efficacy results, CHR was achieved in 89.5% (442/494 patients), and minor cytogenetic response or major cytogenetic response was achieved in 85.8% (139/162 patients).
Conclusion
This PMS study shows consistent results in terms of safety and efficacy compared with previous studies. Nilotinib was well tolerated and efficacious in adult Korean patients with Ph + CML in routine clinical practice settings.

Result Analysis
Print
Save
E-mail