LA MATERNITE SECRETE (A PROPOS D'UNE OBSERVATION DE JUMEAUX DONT L'UN EST MALFORME)

PARIS7-Xavier Bichat (751182101) / SudocPARIS-BIUM (751062103) / SudocSudocFranceF

Are men ready to use thermal male contraception? Acceptability in two French populations: New fathers and new providers.

Since the 1970s, international research has actively pursued hormonal male contraception (HMC) and, to a lesser extent, thermal male contraception (TMC). Although the efficacy of TMC has been confirmed in limited populations, its acceptability has not been studied in either potential users or potential prescribers.A cross-sectional descriptive multicentre study of potential male users of TMC (new fathers) and potential prescribers of TMC (new providers) was conducted between November 2016 and February 2017.The participants completed a 3-part survey, and their responses were evaluated to i) determine their socio-demographic profiles; ii) identify personal experiences with contraception; and iii) gauge the participants' knowledge, interest and preference for male contraception, particularly TMC. For new providers only, the survey included a fourth part to evaluate professional experience with male contraception.The participation rate was 51% for new fathers (305 NFs) and 34% for new providers (300 NPs, including 97 men (male new providers, MNPs) and 203 women (female new providers, FNPs)). Only 3% of NFs and 15% of NPs knew about TMC (including 26% of the MNPs and 10% of the FNPs, p<0.01). After reading information on TMC, new fathers were significantly less willing to try TMC (29%) than were new providers (40%) (p<0.01). The 3 main advantages of TMC for the new fathers included the following factors: "natural" (52%), "without side effects" (38%) and "non-hormonal" (36%). The main disadvantages were "lengthy wear time" (56%), "daily undergarment wear" (43%) and "concern about possible discomfort" (39%).Young male and female providers have limited knowledge of male contraception, are interested in further information and would generally prescribe TMC to their patients. Successful expansion of the use of male contraception, including TMC, would require distribution of better information to potential users and providers

Knowledge and hypothetical acceptability of thermal male contraception among the new fathers.

<p>Knowledge and hypothetical acceptability of thermal male contraception among the new fathers.</p

Male contraception: Known and preferred methods, acceptability and willingness among the new fathers and new providers.

<p>Male contraception: Known and preferred methods, acceptability and willingness among the new fathers and new providers.</p

Frequency of consultation for family planning and attitudes of the new providers towards male contraception as prescribers.

<p>Frequency of consultation for family planning and attitudes of the new providers towards male contraception as prescribers.</p

Socio-demographic characteristics of the new fathers and the new providers.

<p>Socio-demographic characteristics of the new fathers and the new providers.</p

Thermal male contraception: Knowledge and hypothetical acceptability among the new providers as users and as providers–Comparison with the new fathers.

<p>Thermal male contraception: Knowledge and hypothetical acceptability among the new providers as users and as providers–Comparison with the new fathers.</p

Overview of the pathological results and treatment characteristics in the first 1000 patients randomized in the SERC trial: axillary dissection versus no axillary dissection in patients with involved sentinel node

Abstract Background Three randomized trials have concluded at non inferiority of omission of complementary axillary lymph node dissection (cALND) for patients with involved sentinel node (SN). However, we can outline strong limitations of these trials to validate this attitude with a high scientific level. We designed the SERC randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01717131) to compare outcomes in patients with SN involvement treated with ALND or no further axillary treatment. The aim of this study was to analyze results of the first 1000 patients included. Methods SERC trial is a multicenter non-inferiority phase 3 trial. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent factors associated with adjuvant chemotherapy administration and non-sentinel node (NSN) involvement. Results Of the 963 patients included in the analysis set, 478 were randomized to receive cALND and 485 SLNB alone. All patient demographics and tumor characteristics were balanced between the two arms. SN ITC was present in 6.3% patients (57/903), micro metastases in 33.0% (298), macro metastases in 60.7% (548) and 289 (34.2%) were non eligible to Z0011 trial criteria. Whole breast or chest wall irradiation was delivered in 95.9% (896/934) of patients, adjuvant chemotherapy in 69.5% (644/926), endocrine therapy in 89.6% (673/751) and the proportions were similar in the two arms. The overall rate of positive NSN was 19% (84/442) for patients with cALND. Crude rates of positive NSN according to SN status were 4.5% for ITC (1/22), 9.5% for micro metastases (13/137), 23.9% for macro metastases (61/255) and were respectively 29.36% (64/218), 9.33% (7/75) and 7.94% (10/126) when chemotherapy was administered after cALND, before cALND and for patients without chemotherapy. Conclusion The main objective of SERC trial is to demonstrate non inferiority of cALND omission. A strong interaction between timing of cALND and chemotherapy with positive NSN rate was observed. Trial registration This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01717131 October 19, 2012