Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Christian Kollmannsberger is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Christian Kollmannsberger.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2015

Nivolumab versus Everolimus in Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma

Robert J. Motzer; Bernard Escudier; David F. McDermott; Saby George; Hans J. Hammers; Sandhya Srinivas; Scott S. Tykodi; Jeffrey A. Sosman; Giuseppe Procopio; Elizabeth R. Plimack; Daniel Castellano; Toni K. Choueiri; Howard Gurney; Frede Donskov; Petri Bono; John Wagstaff; Thomas Gauler; Takeshi Ueda; Yoshihiko Tomita; Fabio A.B. Schutz; Christian Kollmannsberger; James Larkin; Alain Ravaud; Jason S. Simon; Li An Xu; Ian M. Waxman; Padmanee Sharma

BACKGROUND Nivolumab, a programmed death 1 (PD-1) checkpoint inhibitor, was associated with encouraging overall survival in uncontrolled studies involving previously treated patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma. This randomized, open-label, phase 3 study compared nivolumab with everolimus in patients with renal-cell carcinoma who had received previous treatment. METHODS A total of 821 patients with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma for which they had received previous treatment with one or two regimens of antiangiogenic therapy were randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) to receive 3 mg of nivolumab per kilogram of body weight intravenously every 2 weeks or a 10-mg everolimus tablet orally once daily. The primary end point was overall survival. The secondary end points included the objective response rate and safety. RESULTS The median overall survival was 25.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 21.8 to not estimable) with nivolumab and 19.6 months (95% CI, 17.6 to 23.1) with everolimus. The hazard ratio for death with nivolumab versus everolimus was 0.73 (98.5% CI, 0.57 to 0.93; P=0.002), which met the prespecified criterion for superiority (P≤0.0148). The objective response rate was greater with nivolumab than with everolimus (25% vs. 5%; odds ratio, 5.98 [95% CI, 3.68 to 9.72]; P<0.001). The median progression-free survival was 4.6 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 5.4) with nivolumab and 4.4 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 5.5) with everolimus (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.03; P=0.11). Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 19% of the patients receiving nivolumab and in 37% of the patients receiving everolimus; the most common event with nivolumab was fatigue (in 2% of the patients), and the most common event with everolimus was anemia (in 8%). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with previously treated advanced renal-cell carcinoma, overall survival was longer and fewer grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred with nivolumab than with everolimus. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; CheckMate 025 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01668784.).


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2009

Prognostic Factors for Overall Survival in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated With Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor–Targeted Agents: Results From a Large, Multicenter Study

Daniel Y. C. Heng; Wanling Xie; Meredith M. Regan; Mark A. Warren; Ali Reza Golshayan; Chakshu Sahi; Bernhard J. Eigl; J. Dean Ruether; Tina Cheng; Scott North; Peter Venner; Jennifer J. Knox; Kim N. Chi; Christian Kollmannsberger; David F. McDermott; William Oh; Michael B. Atkins; Ronald M. Bukowski; B. I. Rini; Toni K. Choueiri

PURPOSE There are no robust data on prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treated with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) -targeted therapy. METHODS Baseline characteristics and outcomes on 645 patients with anti-VEGF therapy-naïve metastatic RCC were collected from three US and four Canadian cancer centers. Cox proportional hazards regression, followed by bootstrap validation, was used to identify independent prognostic factors for OS. RESULTS The median OS for the whole cohort was 22 months (95% CI, 20.2 to 26.5 months), and the median follow-up was 24.5 months. Overall, 396, 200, and 49 patients were treated with sunitinib, sorafenib, and bevacizumab, respectively. Four of the five adverse prognostic factors according to the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) were independent predictors of short survival: hemoglobin less than the lower limit of normal (P < .0001), corrected calcium greater than the upper limit of normal (ULN; P = .0006), Karnofsky performance status less than 80% (P < .0001), and time from diagnosis to treatment of less than 1 year (P = .01). In addition, neutrophils greater than the ULN (P < .0001) and platelets greater than the ULN (P = .01) were independent adverse prognostic factors. Patients were segregated into three risk categories: the favorable-risk group (no prognostic factors; n = 133), in which median OS (mOS) was not reached and 2-year OS (2y OS) was 75%; the intermediate-risk group (one or two prognostic factors; n = 301), in which mOS was 27 months and 2y OS was 53%; and the poor-risk group (three to six prognostic factors; n = 152), in which mOS was 8.8 months and 2y OS was 7% (log-rank P < .0001). The C-index was 0.73. CONCLUSION This model validates components of the MSKCC model with the addition of platelet and neutrophil counts and can be incorporated into patient care and into clinical trials that use VEGF-targeted agents.


European Urology | 2008

European Consensus Conference on Diagnosis and Treatment of Germ Cell Cancer: A Report of the Second Meeting of the European Germ Cell Cancer Consensus group (EGCCCG): Part I

S. Krege; Jörg Beyer; Rainer Souchon; Peter Albers; Walter Albrecht; Ferran Algaba; Michael Bamberg; István Bodrogi; Carsten Bokemeyer; Eva Cavallin-Ståhl; Johannes Classen; Christoph Clemm; Gabriella Cohn-Cedermark; Stéphane Culine; Gedske Daugaard; Pieter H.M. de Mulder; Maria De Santis; Maike de Wit; Ronald de Wit; Hans Günter Derigs; Klaus Peter Dieckmann; Annette Dieing; Jean Pierre Droz; Martin Fenner; Karim Fizazi; Aude Flechon; Sophie D. Fosså; Xavier Garcia del Muro; Thomas Gauler; Lajos Géczi

OBJECTIVES The first consensus report presented by the European Germ Cell Cancer Consensus Group (EGCCCG) in the year 2004 has found widespread approval by many colleagues throughout the world. In November 2006, the group met a second time under the auspices of the Department of Urology of the Amsterdam Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. METHODS Medical oncologists, urological surgeons, radiation oncologists as well as pathologists from several European countries reviewed and discussed the data that had emerged since the 2002 conference, and incorporated the new data into updated and revised guidelines. As for the first meeting, the methodology of evidence-based medicine (EBM) was applied. The results of the discussion were compiled by the writing committee. All participants have agreed to this final update. RESULTS The first part of the consensus paper describes the clinical presentation of the primary tumor, its treatment, the importance and treatment of testicular intraepithelial neoplasia (TIN), histological classification, staging and prognostic factors, and treatment of stage I seminoma and non-seminoma. CONCLUSIONS Whereas the vast majority of the recommendations made in 2004 remain valid 3 yr later, refinements in the treatment of early- and advanced-stage testicular cancer have emerged from clinical trials. Despite technical improvements, expert clinical skills will continue to be one of the major determinants for the prognosis of patients with germ cell cancer. In addition, the particular needs of testicular cancer survivors have been acknowledged.


Lancet Oncology | 2013

External validation and comparison with other models of the International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium prognostic model: a population-based study

Daniel Y.C. Heng; Wanling Xie; Meredith M. Regan; Lauren C. Harshman; Georg A. Bjarnason; Ulka N. Vaishampayan; Mary J. MacKenzie; Lori Wood; Frede Donskov; Min Han Tan; Sun Young Rha; Neeraj Agarwal; Christian Kollmannsberger; Brian I. Rini; Toni K. Choueiri

BACKGROUND The International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium model offers prognostic information for patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. We tested the accuracy of the model in an external population and compared it with other prognostic models. METHODS We included patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma who were treated with first-line VEGF-targeted treatment at 13 international cancer centres and who were registered in the Consortiums database but had not contributed to the initial development of the Consortium Database model. The primary endpoint was overall survival. We compared the Database Consortium model with the Cleveland Clinic Foundation (CCF) model, the International Kidney Cancer Working Group (IKCWG) model, the French model, and the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) model by concordance indices and other measures of model fit. FINDINGS Overall, 1028 patients were included in this study, of whom 849 had complete data to assess the Database Consortium model. Median overall survival was 18·8 months (95% 17·6-21·4). The predefined Database Consortium risk factors (anaemia, thrombocytosis, neutrophilia, hypercalcaemia, Karnofsky performance status <80%, and <1 year from diagnosis to treatment) were independent predictors of poor overall survival in the external validation set (hazard ratios ranged between 1·27 and 2·08, concordance index 0·71, 95% CI 0·68-0·73). When patients were segregated into three risk categories, median overall survival was 43·2 months (95% CI 31·4-50·1) in the favourable risk group (no risk factors; 157 patients), 22·5 months (18·7-25·1) in the intermediate risk group (one to two risk factors; 440 patients), and 7·8 months (6·5-9·7) in the poor risk group (three or more risk factors; 252 patients; p<0·0001; concordance index 0·664, 95% CI 0·639-0·689). 672 patients had complete data to test all five models. The concordance index of the CCF model was 0·662 (95% CI 0·636-0·687), of the French model 0·640 (0·614-0·665), of the IKCWG model 0·668 (0·645-0·692), and of the MSKCC model 0·657 (0·632-0·682). The reported versus predicted number of deaths at 2 years was most similar in the Database Consortium model compared with the other models. INTERPRETATION The Database Consortium model is now externally validated and can be applied to stratify patients by risk in clinical trials and to counsel patients about prognosis. FUNDING None.


The Journal of Urology | 2011

The impact of cytoreductive nephrectomy on survival of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving vascular endothelial growth factor targeted therapy.

Toni K. Choueiri; Wanling Xie; Christian Kollmannsberger; Scott North; Jennifer J. Knox; J. Geoffrey Lampard; David F. McDermott; Brian I. Rini; Daniel Y.C. Heng

PURPOSE Vascular endothelial growth factor targeted therapy is a standard of care in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. The role of cytoreductive nephrectomy in the era of novel agents remains poorly defined. MATERIALS AND METHODS We retrospectively reviewed baseline characteristics and outcomes of 314 patients with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy naïve, metastatic renal cell carcinoma from United States and Canadian cancer centers to study the impact of cytoreductive nephrectomy on overall survival. RESULTS Patients who underwent cytoreductive nephrectomy (201) were younger (p < 0.01), and more likely to have a better Karnofsky performance status (p < 0.01), more than 1 site of metastasis (p = 0.04) and lower corrected calcium levels (p < 0.01) compared to those who did not undergo cytoreductive nephrectomy (113). On univariable analysis cytoreductive nephrectomy was associated with a median overall survival of 19.8 months compared to 9.4 months for patients who did not undergo cytoreductive nephrectomy (HR 0.44; 95% CI 0.32, 0.59; p < 0.01). On multivariable analysis and adjusting for established prognostic risk factors the overall survival difference persisted (adjusted HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.46, 0.99; p = 0.04) in favor of the cytoreductive nephrectomy group. In subgroup analyses stratified for favorable/intermediate/poor risk criteria, patients in the poor risk group had a marginal benefit (p = 0.06). Similarly patients with Karnofsky performance status less than 80% also had a marginal survival benefit (p = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS In this retrospective study cytoreductive nephrectomy was independently associated with a prolonged overall survival of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with vascular endothelial growth factor targeted agents, although the benefit is marginal in those patients with poor risk features.


Annals of Oncology | 2013

Maintaining success, reducing treatment burden, focusing on survivorship: highlights from the third European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer

Joerg Beyer; Peter Albers; Renske Altena; Jorge Aparicio; Carsten Bokemeyer; Jonas Busch; Richard Cathomas; Eva Cavallin-Ståhl; Noel W. Clarke; J Claßen; G. Cohn-Cedermark; Alv A. Dahl; Gedske Daugaard; U. De Giorgi; M. De Santis; M. de Wit; R. de Wit; Klaus Peter Dieckmann; Martin Fenner; Karim Fizazi; Aude Flechon; Sophie D. Fosså; J R Germá Lluch; Jourik A. Gietema; Silke Gillessen; A Giwercman; J. T. Hartmann; Axel Heidenreich; Marcus Hentrich; Friedemann Honecker

In November 2011, the Third European Consensus Conference on Diagnosis and Treatment of Germ-Cell Cancer (GCC) was held in Berlin, Germany. This third conference followed similar meetings in 2003 (Essen, Germany) and 2006 (Amsterdam, The Netherlands) [Schmoll H-J, Souchon R, Krege S et al. European consensus on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer: a report of the European Germ-Cell Cancer Consensus Group (EGCCCG). Ann Oncol 2004; 15: 1377–1399; Krege S, Beyer J, Souchon R et al. European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer: a report of the second meeting of the European Germ-Cell Cancer Consensus group (EGCCCG): part I. Eur Urol 2008; 53: 478–496; Krege S, Beyer J, Souchon R et al. European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer: a report of the second meeting of the European Germ-Cell Cancer Consensus group (EGCCCG): part II. Eur Urol 2008; 53: 497–513]. A panel of 56 of 60 invited GCC experts from all across Europe discussed all aspects on diagnosis and treatment of GCC, with a particular focus on acute and late toxic effects as well as on survivorship issues. The panel consisted of oncologists, urologic surgeons, radiooncologists, pathologists and basic scientists, who are all actively involved in care of GCC patients. Panelists were chosen based on the publication activity in recent years. Before the meeting, panelists were asked to review the literature published since 2006 in 20 major areas concerning all aspects of diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of GCC patients, and to prepare an updated version of the previous recommendations to be discussed at the conference. In addition, ∼50 E-vote questions were drafted and presented at the conference to address the most controversial areas for a poll of expert opinions. Here, we present the main recommendations and controversies of this meeting. The votes of the panelists are added as online supplements.


BJUI | 2011

Targeted therapy for advanced renal cell cancer (RCC): a Cochrane systematic review of published randomised trials.

Chris Coppin; Christian Kollmannsberger; Lyly Le; Franz Porzsolt; Timothy J Wilt

Whats known on the subject? and What does the study add?


European Urology | 2014

Cytoreductive Nephrectomy in Patients with Synchronous Metastases from Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium

Daniel Y.C. Heng; J. Connor Wells; Brian I. Rini; Benoit Beuselinck; Jae Lyun Lee; Jennifer J. Knox; Georg A. Bjarnason; Sumanta K. Pal; Christian Kollmannsberger; Takeshi Yuasa; Sandy Srinivas; Frede Donskov; Aristotelis Bamias; Lori Wood; D. Scott Ernst; Neeraj Agarwal; Ulka N. Vaishampayan; Sun Young Rha; Jenny J. Kim; Toni K. Choueiri

BACKGROUND The benefit of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) for overall survival (OS) is unclear in patients with synchronous metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in the era of targeted therapy. OBJECTIVE To determine OS benefit of CN compared with no CN in mRCC patients treated with targeted therapies. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Retrospective data from patients with synchronous mRCC (n=1658) from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) were used to compare 982 mRCC patients who had a CN with 676 mRCC patients who did not. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OS was compared and hazard ratios (HRs) adjusted for IMDC poor prognostic criteria. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Patients who had CN had better IMDC prognostic profiles versus those without (favorable, intermediate, or poor in 9%, 63%, and 28% vs 1%, 45%, and 54%, respectively). The median OS of patients with CN versus without CN was 20.6 versus 9.5 mo (p<0.0001). When adjusted for IMDC criteria to correct for imbalances, the HR of death was 0.60 (95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.69; p<0.0001). Patients estimated to survive <12 mo may receive marginal benefit from CN. Patients who have four or more of the IMDC prognostic criteria did not benefit from CN. Data were collected retrospectively. CONCLUSIONS CN is beneficial in synchronous mRCC patients treated with targeted therapy, even after adjusting for prognostic factors. Patients with estimated survival times <12 mo or four or more IMDC prognostic factors may not benefit from CN. This information may aid in patient selection as we await results from randomized controlled trials. PATIENT SUMMARY We looked at the survival outcomes of metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients who did or did not have the primary tumor removed. We found that most patients benefited from tumor removal, except for those with four or more IMDC risk factors.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2010

Prognostic Factors in Patients With Metastatic Germ Cell Tumors Who Experienced Treatment Failure With Cisplatin-Based First-Line Chemotherapy

Anja Lorch; Jörg Beyer; Andrew Kramar; Lawrence H. Einhorn; Andrea Necchi; Christophe Massard; Ugo De Giorgi; Aude Flechon; Kim Margolin; Jean Pierre Lotz; José R. Germà; Thomas Powles; Christian Kollmannsberger; Caroline Bascoul-Mollevi

PURPOSE To develop a prognostic model in patients with germ cell tumors (GCT) who experience treatment failure with cisplatin-based first-line chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS Data from 1,984 patients with GCT who progressed after at least three cisplatin-based cycles and were treated with cisplatin-based conventional-dose or carboplatin-based high-dose salvage chemotherapy was retrospectively collected from 38 centers/groups worldwide. One thousand five hundred ninety-four (80%) of 1,984 eligible patients were randomly divided into a training set of 1,067 patients (67%) and a validation set of 527 patients (33%). Seminomas were set aside for posthoc analyses. Primary end point was the 2-year progression-free survival after salvage treatment. RESULTS Overall, 990 patients (62%) relapsed and 604 patients (38%) remained relapse free. Histology, primary tumor location, response, and progression-free interval after first-line treatment, as well as levels of alpha fetoprotein, human chorionic gonadotrophin, and the presence of liver, bone, or brain metastases at salvage were identified as independent prognostic variables and used to build a prognostic model in the training set. Survival rates in the training and validation set were very similar. The estimated 2-year progression-free survival rates in patients not included in the training set was 75% in very low risk, 51% in low risk, 40% in intermediate risk, 26% in high risk, and only 6% in very high-risk patients. Due to missing values in individual variables, 69 patients could not reliably be classified into one of these categories. CONCLUSION Prognostic variables are important in patients with GCT who experienced treatment failure with cisplatin-based first-line chemotherapy and can be used to construct a prognostic model to guide salvage strategies.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 1998

Secondary leukemia following high cumulative doses of etoposide in patients treated for advanced germ cell tumors.

Christian Kollmannsberger; J. Beyer; Jean-P. Droz; A. Harstrick; J. T. Hartmann; P Biron; Aude Flechon; Patrick Schöffski; Markus A. Kuczyk; H.-J. Schmoll; Lothar Kanz; Carsten Bokemeyer

PURPOSE High cumulative epipodophyllotoxin dosages are reported to be associated with an elevated risk for secondary acute myeloid leukemia (s-AML). This study examined the risk of s-AML following cumulative etoposide doses greater than 2 g/m2 in patients with metastatic germ cell tumors (GCT). PATIENTS AND METHODS The incidence of s-AML was retrospectively assessed in patients treated within clinical trials between January 1986 and February 1996 at four university centers. All patients received high-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) plus autologous stem-cell support for metastatic GCT, including high cumulative etoposide doses (> 2 g/m2). Minimum patient follow-up was 12 months. Standardized morbidity ratio (SMR) was calculated to estimate the risk associated with high cumulative etoposide doses, as compared with the general population. RESULTS A total of 302 patients with a median age of 29 years (range, 15 to 55) received a median cumulative etoposide dose of 5 g/m2 (range, 2.4 to 14 g/m2). Four cases of s-AML were observed, which resulted in a cumulative incidence of 1.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38% to 3.59%) at 52 months of median follow-up (range, 12 to 198). Two cases of secondary myelodysplasia (s-MDS) developed in patients with primary mediastinal GCT. Based on the observed four cases of AML, which are most likely etoposide-related, the risk for developing s-AML (SMR, 160 [95% CI, 43.7 to 411.2]) is significantly increased in comparison to the age-matched general population. CONCLUSION Due to the low incidence of AML in the general population, the significantly elevated risk for developing s-AML affects only 1.3% of all patients who receive etoposide doses greater than 2 g/m2. HDCT, including etoposide doses greater than 2 g/m2, is associated with an acceptably low incidence of s-AML in patients with advanced GCT.

Collaboration


Dive into the Christian Kollmannsberger's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Lothar Kanz

University of Tübingen

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Scott North

Cross Cancer Institute

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge