IntroductionToo few women with invasive breast cancer are informed of the risk of hypofertility after chemotherapy. However, this risk can be prevented by offering gamete preservation by a specialized team. We believe that if more women were informed about gamete preservation, more of them would accept it.ObjectivesThe primary objective is to describe each step of the oncofertility care pathway from provision of information to gamete preservation. The secondary objective is to estimate the impact of not receiving information by determining the proportion of women who would have undergone gamete preservation if they had been informed.Method575 women aged 18–40 years treated with chemotherapy for breast cancer between 2012 and 2017 in the Ouest-Occitanie region (~3 million inhabitants) were included. We first constructed a multivariate predictive model to determine the parameters influencing the uptake of the offer of gamete preservation among women who were informed and then applied it to the population of uninformed women.ResultsOnly 39% of women were informed of the risks of hypofertility related to chemotherapy and 11% ultimately received gamete preservation. If all had been informed of the risk, our model predicted an increase in gamete preservation of 15.35% in the youngest women (<30 years), 22.88% in women aged between 30 and 35 years and zero in those aged ≥36 years. We did not find any association with the European Deprivation Index (EDI).ConclusionOncologists should be aware of the need to inform patients aged ≤ 35 years about gamete preservation. If all received such information, the impact in terms of gamete preservation would likely be major.

Non-menopausal women with breast cancer treated with chemotherapy are at intermediate risk of post-treatment amenorrhea and decreased fertility. Although they should receive appropriate information, studies until now show that this is inadequate. We investigated the proportion of women who received information about this risk during the pre-treatment consultation, and those who received an oncofertility consultation to preserve their gametes. We also analysed the medical and non-medical factors influencing the transmission of information to patients and their uptake of oncofertility consultations. We included women aged 18–40 years treated with chemotherapy for breast cancer between 2012 and 2017 in the Midi-Pyrénées region (ca. 3 million inhabitants), France. Studied variables were included in a multilevel model. Among the 575 women, 41% of the women received information and 28% received an oncofertility consultation. These two steps on the care pathway were significantly influenced by the type of care structure, the woman's age, her parity at the time of diagnosis, and the metastatic status of the cancer. Female oncologist gender was significantly associated with higher transmission rate. We found no association between neoadjuvant chemotherapy status, level of deprivation (EDI), triple-negative status, marital status, and first-degree family history of cancer and information transmission or uptake of oncofertility consultation. Our study shows that not enough women are informed and have recourse to an oncofertility consultation. Despite a legal obligation, the health care system does not offer the necessary conditions for access to oncofertility care.

No abstract

Introduction : Le virus du SRAS-CoV-2 apparu fin 2019 dans la ville de Wuhan en Chine s’est rapidement propagé. Les formes graves de cette infection virale provoquent des syndromes de détresse respiratoire aiguë (SDRA) nécessitant l’hospitalisation des patients en réanimation. La capacité des services de réanimation dans les pays les plus touchés par cette crise sanitaire a été rapidement dépassée, obligeant les personnels soignants à faire des choix parmi les patients. La gestion de la surcharge du système de santé est le rôle de la médecine de catastrophe, notamment grâce au triage des patients en fonction de leur gravité. Faire ce choix quant à l’allocation des ressources rares impose de prendre position dans le débat entre déontologie (juger la moralité d’une action en fonction de son intention) et l’utilitarisme (juger la moralité d’une action en fonction de ses conséquences). Objectif : L’objectif de cet article est, à travers l’analyse du « dilemme du tramway », de comprendre et de justifier les processus d’allocation des ressources rares, que l’on trouve dans les recommandations utilisées dans le contexte de la pandémie COVID-19. Résultats : L’analyse du dilemme du tramway permet de comprendre en quoi nos choix sont utilitaristes ou déontologiques. Le fait de « sauver le plus de vies possible », préconisé dans les recommandations est utilitariste. Conclusions : Ces réponses permettront de mieux comprendre les différentes façons d’allouer les ressources rares selon l’approche déontologique ou utilitaire (retrouvée dans les directives de la médecine de catastrophe).