SEER Inquiry System - Report
Produced: 11/25/2024 11:14 PM
Question 20091049
Inquiry Details
References:
2007 SEER Manual, 7. Rule A.7
Question:
Discussion:
The MP/H rule general information section states that we do not accession a second primary unless a pathologist compares the current tumor to the original tumor and states that the current tumor is a recurrence of cancer from the previous primary. In our experience it is rare that a pathologist speaks so bluntly. They frequently hedge somewhat.
Are the following statements worded strongly enough for us to make the assumption that the current tumor is a recurrence of patient's previous cancer?
Example 1: Pathologist states: Patient's prior lung tumor reviewed. The tumor in the current case (left lower lobe) shows similarities to some areas of the patient's prior left lower lobe tumor.
Example 2: Pathologist states: The focus of ductal carcinoma in the mastectomy specimen does resemble the carcinoma in the previous partial mastectomy specimen. (Slides reviewed).