Outcomes of Women with Primary and Second Primary Ovarian Cancer in the United States

BackgroundOvarian cancer is a leading cause of gynecologic cancer-related mortality. While most cases arise as a primary malignancy, a subset occurs as a second primary cancer following a previous non-ovarian malignancy. Limited studies have examined the survival differences between these groups. ObjectiveTo compare the characteristics, treatment patterns, and survival outcomes of women with primary ovarian cancer versus second primary ovarian cancer and identify factors associated with cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS). MethodsThis retrospective cohort study utilized data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) 18 Registry (2000-2021). Women aged [&ge;]18 years diagnosed with primary or second primary ovarian cancer were included. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models estimated the association between primary cancer status and survival outcomes, adjusting for demographic, tumor, and treatment-related factors. ResultsA total of 27,308 women were included: 23,132 (84.7%) with primary ovarian cancer and 4,176 (15.3%) with second primary ovarian cancer. Women with second primary ovarian malignancies were older (44.6% vs. 35.6% >64 years, p<0.001) and more likely to be White (71.3% vs. 66.0%, p<0.001). They were diagnosed more frequently at earlier stages (Stage I: 35.4% vs. 32.4%, p<0.001). Women with second primary ovarian cancer had significantly better CSS at 5 years (60.3% vs. 56.8%, p<0.001) and 20 years (43.5% vs. 39.1%, p<0.001). After adjustment, they had a 7.2% lower risk of cancer-specific mortality (HR: 0.928, 95% CI: 0.876-0.982, p=0.010). However, OS was similar at 5 years (53.0% vs. 53.5%, p<0.001), with a survival disadvantage emerging over time (HR: 1.057, 95% CI: 1.005-1.113, p=0.031). ConclusionWomen with second primary ovarian cancer had better CSS than those with primary ovarian cancer, likely due to earlier detection and increased surveillance. However, long-term OS disparities suggest a need for continued optimization of follow-up care and management strategies.