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: 11/04/2025 22:04 PM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20061013 CS Extension--Hematopoietic, NOS: Can this field be coded to 10 [Localized disease] for an extramedullary plasmacytoma that is limited to an extramedullary primary, such as appendix, given that this histology is not listed as one of the allowable histology/CS extension combinations for this code? See Discussion. The Hematopoietic Diseases scheme for CS lists specific histologies for which CS Extension can be coded to 10. Included is plasmacytoma, NOS [9731/3]. However, extramedullary plasmacytoma [9734/3] is not listed as one of the histologies.

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.Assign code 10 [Localized disease].

Both the 2007 SEER manual (page C-1072) and the CS Version 01.04.00 manual (page II-550) have been updated to include 9734 [extramedullary plasmacytoma] under extension code 10.

 2006
20091059 CS Tumor Size--Breast: How is this field coded for DCIS that is present in scattered small foci over five of eight slides, and the greatest aggregate dimension measures 0.5 cm? See Discussion. Breast biopsy was prompted by abnormality seen on mammography. Would this be an example of when to code 996 (mammographic/xerographic diagnosis only, no size given; clinically not palpable) applies for the CS Tumor Size field?

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.Assign code 005 [0.5 cm] in this case. According to the General Instructions for CS tumor size, it is acceptable to code an aggregate size stated by the pathologist (see instruction 4.i).

 2009
20061044 CS Site Specific Factor--Head & Neck: If a lymph node dissection of the neck reveals that 1/24 lymph nodes is positive and the positive 5.6 cm lymph node extends throughout levels II-IV, how are the SSF 3 (status of levels I-III lymph nodes) and SSF4 (status of levels IV-V lymph nodes) fields coded?

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.According to the CS Steering Committee, code 999 for SSF 3 and SSF 4. In this case, do not make assumptions about which level of lymph nodes were involved.

 2006
20081093

CS Extension: How is CS Ext coded for the following?

Rretroperitoneal primary

Cystic mucinous tumor with intraepithelial carcinoma

There is no CS Extension code for intraepithelial ca in the retroperitoneal scheme.

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.According to the American College of Surgeons I & R system, assign code 10 [confined to site of origin] for intraepithelial carcinoma of the retroperitoneum.

 2008
20041077 CS Site Specific Factor 1--Colon: If the registrar did not support the CEA code recorded with the appropriate text documentation, should the central registry accept the registrars coding or change the value to 999?

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.Accept your registrars' codes at your discretion. It is encouraged, but not required, to enter text for CS data elements. These cases do not automatically default to code 999.

 2004
20061130 CS Extension--Lung: How is extension coded if there is only one cytology done on a pleural effusion that is negative for carcinoma (but shows an exudate) and there is no clinical assessment of the pleural effusion found in the medical record? See Discussion. CS lung extension note 6 provides instructions from the SEER manual and also from the AJCC manual. Per SEER manual, "ignore the effusion that is negative for tumor." Do we ignore the pleural effusion for the case in question because it was negative? Per AJCC manual, "most pleural effusions associated with lung cancers are due to tumor. However, there are a few patients in whom multiple cytopathologic examinations of pleural fluid are negative for tumor. In these cases, fluid is non-bloody and is not an exudate. When these elements and clinical judgment dictate that the effusion is not related to the tumor, the effusion should be excluded as a staging element." For the case in question, pleural fluid was examined only once and clinical judgment is not available. As a SEER registry, do we follow the SEER portion of the note and ignore the pleural effusion? Or do we code extension as involving pleural effusion because it was an exudate?

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.A single negative pleural effusion by itself does not impact the coding of extension.

The SEER note does not alter the AJCC note and the AJCC note does not alter the SEER note. They are two separate statements from two separate staging authorities. Registries follow both notes. For this case, ignore the pleural effusion because there is no clinical judgment available and there was only one cytology on the effusion.

 2006
20041031 CS Extension--Bladder: How should this field be coded when the pathology states "papillary transitional cell carcinoma with no invasion into the submucosa or deep muscularis" but there is "focal extension of tumor into bladder diverticula"?

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 the CS Extension field to 01 [Papillary transitional cell carcinoma stated to be noninvasive]. Extension into bladder diverticula does not change the code. Diverticula are pouches in the mucosa (mucous membrane).

 2004
20091062 CS Site Specific Factor--Head & Neck: How is Site Specific Factor 2 coded when the pathologist describes regional lymph nodes as "matted"? See Discussion. The primary tumor is located in the tonsil. The patient underwent neck dissection. Pathology report stated there were matted regional lymph nodes. Does the term matted describe extracapsular extension? The definition for site specific factor 2 uses the term "fixed" to describe extracapsular extension (but not matted). For breast, fixed/matted appear to be interchangeable. Would they also be interchangeable for head and neck cases?

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."Matted" is not a synonym for "Fixed" in the CS schema for Head and Neck. "Matted" is not indicative of extracapsular extension for the Head and Neck schema.

 2009
20051051

CS Lymph Nodes/Reg LN Pos/Exam: Is a final pathologic diagnosis of "Level 8 lymph node: Fibroadipose tissue containing a minute lymphoid aggregate, negative for malignancy" a lymph node for the purpose of coding these fields?

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.

Yes. "Fibroadipose tissue containing minute lymphoid aggregate" qualifies as a lymph node. Include in count as one lymph node examined in the example above assuming this is regional to the primary site.

 2005
20051145

CS Extension/CS Mets at Dx--Colon: How is a small focus of metastatic disease in the submucosa coded for a sigmoid primary? See Discussion.

Path final diagnosis states: "No lymph node metastases identified. One submucosal met in a block taken from a surgical margin section." Path micro states: "Microscopic involvement of the border between the serosa and muscularis propria. Sections of proximal & distal surgical margins reveal no tumor in one, and a small focus of metastatic disease in the submucosa of the other. This focus of tumor exists in a small vascular channel and is complete in and of itself; ie, it has not been cut thru by excision of the specimen from the patient."

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.

This submucosal metastasis does not affect CS extension. It is not part of CS or TNM staging.

According to the TNM supplement, "Multiple tumour foci in the mucosa or submucosa ("skip metastasis") are not part of the TNM classification and should not be classified as distant metastasis.

 2005