System Guide
Back to Search Results

Search Results

Display Options
Display Options
Select Fields
Export Results to CSV Create Report 0
+ Add all results to report

Report Produced: 05/03/2026 11:23 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20130058 Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is EBV-positive hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) reportable when diagnosed in a 5 year old child and resulted in death in less than two months?

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) is not a reportable disease because it is not listed in the Heme DB.

Per our expert pathologist consultant, "HLH is a lymphocyte driven hemophagocytic syndrome which may be either genetically based or caused by over-activated lymphoid cells, often in response to a viral infection. It is an abnormal immune response and is not considered a malignant disease, and is, therefore, not reportable. It is not synonymous with EBV-positive T-cell lymphoproliferative disease of childhood (9724/3)."

SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx.

2013
20091103 Reportability/Ambiguous Terminology--Prostate: Is a prostate biopsy that states "highly suspicious for, but not diagnostic of adenocarcinoma, suggest another biopsy" reportable? Do not report. "Not diagnostic of" means that while the pathologist is seeing some features that resemble cancer, there are not enough features to feel comfortable making an unquestionable diagnosis. Watch for another biopsy of the patient in the next 3-6 months. The statement "not diagnostic of" overrules the "highly suspicious" statement. 2009
20091032 Surgery of Primary Site--Ovary: How should this field be coded for an ovarian primary when there is a BSO and only the fundus of uterus is removed (not a full hysterectomy)? Assign surgery code 52 [Bilateral (salpingo-) oophorectomy; WITH hysterectomy]. Code 52 does not exclude a partial hysterectomy. 2009
20051011 CS Lymph Nodes/CS Site Specific Factor--Breast: When there are no lymph nodes removed and none palpable for an inflammatory breast cancer and the physician stages the case Nx, is the CS Lymph Node field code to 00 [None, no regional lymph nodes involved] or 99 [Unknown, not stated] and would SSF 4 and 5 be coded to 000 [Regional lymph nodes negative...] or 888 [Not applicable]?

This answer was provided in the context of CSv1 coding guidelines. The response may not be used after your registry database has been converted to CSv2.

Code CS Lymph Nodes 00 [clinically negative]. See note 3 for CS Lymph Nodes.

Code SSF 4 and 5 000 [Nodes clinically negative].

 2005
20021008 Surgery of Primary Site/Surgical Procedure of Other Site--Bladder: What codes are used to represent these fields for a deeply invasive bladder primary treated initially with a TURP (for suspected prostate extension that turns out to be pathologically negative) and a TURB that is subsequently treated with a cystoprostatectomy?

For cases diagnosed 1/1/2003 and after, code:

1. Surgery of Primary Site field to 60 [Radical cystectomy (male only)] because the cystoprostatectomy was the most extensive (definitive) surgery performed to the primary site.

2. Surgical Procedure of Other Site to 2 [Non-primary surgical procedure to other regional sites] based on the TURP.

 2002
20061033

Reportability--Brain and CNS: Is benign neural tissue compatible with a glioneuronal hamartoma of the cerebellopontine angle reportable?

No. A glioneuronal hamartoma is not neoplastic and not reportable. See page 2 of the 2004 SEER Program Coding and Staging manual for the list of reportable brain/CNS tumors. There is no ICD-O-3 code for hamartoma.

 2006
20010043 Terminology/Terms of involvement: When the terms "lytic" or "lysis" are used in an imaging study, are they to be interpreted as synonymous with metastasis, or can these terms be used to describe a non-malignant condition? Although the term "lytic lesion" is often used to describe bone lesions and "tumor lysis" develops in response to systemic therapy, the words are not a part of the SEER list of terms used to describe involvement. Do not code distant metastasis based only on these words. 2001
20061085 Histology (Pre-2007)--Breast: Is histology coded from the more representative specimen or should the combination code 8522/3 [Infiltrating duct and lobular carcinoma] be used for a case in which a right breast mass needle core biopsy revealed infiltrating ductal ca, grade III and the subsequent right mastectomy revealed a 2.3 cm lobular carcinoma?

For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:

Code the histology using the final diagnosis on the pathology report of the procedure that resected the majority of the primary tumor. In this case, the mastectomy removed more of the tumor than the needle biopsy. The final diagnosis from the mastectomy is infiltrating lobular carcinoma. Code histology to 8520/3 [lobular carcinoma].

For tumors diagnosed 2007 or later, refer to the MP/H rules. If there are still questions about how this type of tumor should be coded, submit a new question to SINQ and include the difficulties you are encountering in applying the MP/H rules.

 2006
20031102

Histology (Pre-2007)--Lung: Should the histology "Polymorphic Adenocarcinoma" be coded to 8022/33 [Polymorphic Carcinoma] or 8140/33 [Adenocarcinoma, NOS]?

For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:

The histology code for pleomorphic adenocarcinoma of the lung is 8140 [Adenocarcinoma, NOS]. According to our pathologist consultant, "Given lung as primary site I prefer 8140. This loses the pleomorphic modifier, but going to 8022 loses the adeno- designation which is more important. Pathologists occasionally use pleomorphic carcinoma for lung tumors which otherwise dont show any adeno or squamous differentiation, for which 8022 would be appropriate, but in this case we do have the adeno designation."

For tumors diagnosed 2007 or later, refer to the MP/H rules. If there are still questions about how this type of tumor should be coded, submit a new question to SINQ and include the difficulties you are encountering in applying the MP/H rules.

 2003
20120036 Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Should the primary site be coded to C779 or C809 when a patient is diagnosed at another facility with mantle cell lymphoma and the staging bone marrow biopsy performed at this facility is negative? There is no available information concerning where the lymphoma originated.

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

Per PH Rule22, code the primary site to C779 [lymph nodes, NOS].

Rule PH22 is a default rule for lymphomas that is used when there is no other information regarding the primary site and the Heme DB does not indicate a primary site under its Primary Site(s) section. Rule PH27, code the primary site to unknown [C809], does not apply. Only use C809 [unknown] as the primary site when there is no evidence of lymphoma in lymph nodes AND the physician documents that the lymphoma originates in an organ(s).

SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx.

2012