Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20190015 | Update to current manual/EOD 2018/EOD Primary Tumor--Pelvic Sites: Should Note 6 in Extent of Disease (EOD) Primary Tumor for the schemas Fallopian Tube, Ovary, and Primary Peritoneal Carcinoma be revised to exclude pelvic sites? See Discussion. |
There is a discrepancy between Notes 3 and 6 in the schemas Fallopian Tube, Ovary, and Primary Peritoneal Carcinoma for EOD Primary Tumor. Note 3 describes extension/discontinuous metastasis to the pelvic sites (code 450) and includes the sigmoid colon, rectosigmoid and rectum since these are all pelvic sites. However, Note 6 also includes rectosigmoid and sigmoid colon. Note 6 is describing extension/discontinuous metastasis to the abdominal sites (600-750), so it should include rectosigmoid or sigmoid colon (since those are pelvic sites). Note 6 indicates, Intestine, large (except rectum). In the previous Collaborative Stage, the corresponding note used to also include: except sigmoid colon, rectosigmoid and rectum. Did sigmoid colon and rectosigmoid get removed from the list here? That is, should Note 6 read, Intestine, large (except sigmoid colon, rectosigmoid, rectum)? Involvement of the sigmoid, rectosigmoid, or rectum via peritoneal seeding/metastasis is consistent with T2b disease and would correlate with code 450 (pelvic sites), not codes 600-750 (abdominal sites). Those codes only correlate with T3 and greater disease (i.e., peritoneal seeding/metastasis of the abdomen). |
Thank you for bringing this issue to our attention. Rectosigmoid and Sigmoid Colon belong in Note 3 and not Note 6 for the following EOD schemas: Fallopian Tube, Ovary, and Primary Peritoneal Carcinoma. Rectosigmoid and sigmoid colon will be removed as separate listings from Note 6. The only mention in Note 6 will be: Intestine, large (except rectum, rectosigmoid, and sigmoid colon) This change will be made for the next update. |
2019 |
|
|
20230062 | Update to current manual/EOD 2018/EOD Primary Tumor--Appendix: Is it correct to code Extent of Disease (EOD) Primary Tumor as code 500 (Invasion of/through serosa (mesothelium) (visceral peritoneum)) and EOD Mets as code 30 (Intraperitoneal metastasis (peritoneal carcinomatosis) WITH or WITHOUT peritoneal mucinous deposits containing tumor cells), when the resection pathology report for a low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm (LAMN) proves “Tumor Extent: Acellular mucin invades visceral peritoneum (serosa)” as well as metastatic LAMN within the right lower quadrant peritoneum? See Discussion. |
This patient had serosal involvement and the pathologist and managing physician staged this as pT4a disease. This extension seems best captured by EOD Primary Tumor code 500. Additionally, the patient had discontinuous metastatic involvement of the peritoneum, and this was staged by the pathologist and managing physician as pM1b (Intraperitoneal metastasis only, including peritoneal mucinous deposits containing tumor cells). Although this peritoneal involvement was present in the right lower quadrant, it was staged as distant metastatic disease and not as part of the primary tumor category. However, currently EOD Primary Tumor code 600 would seem to apply since the peritoneal tumor was in the right lower quadrant. Code 600 is defined as mucinous tumors with peritoneal involvement confined within right lower quadrant. This EOD Primary Tumor code and the physician’s M category assignment do not align; the physician has staged this as distant metastasis (M category, not the T category). Should the peritoneal metastasis (even limited to the right lower quadrant) be included in the EOD Mets field and not in the EOD Primary Tumor field? In other words, should the peritoneal involvement included in EOD Primary Tumor code 600 be reclassified in EOD Mets code 30 (Intraperitoneal metastasis (peritoneal carcinomatosis) WITH or WITHOUT peritoneal mucinous deposits containing tumor cells)? |
Assign code 500 for EOD Primary Tumor and code 30 for EOD Mets. This will correctly derive the T4aM1b stage based on AJCC 8th edition. Abstraction of peritoneal metastasis changed from the T category in the AJCC 7th edition to the M category in the 8th and 9th AJCC editions. As a result, for cases diagnosed in 2018 and later, peritoneal deposits in the right lower quadrant should be abstracted as EOD Primary Tumor code 500 and EOD Mets code 30. However, the EOD Primary Tumor code of 600 has not yet been updated to align with the 8th and 9th AJCC editions. The 2025 updates will correct for this via a conversion for cases diagnosed in 2018 and forward where EOD Primary Tumor = 600 and EOD Mets = 00 or 10 to EOD Primary Tumor = 500 and EOD Mets = 30. Effective immediately, abstract peritoneal deposits in the right lower quadrant as EOD Primary Tumor code 500 and EOD Mets code 30, even though you will still have the ability to assign EOD Primary Tumor code 600 in your abstraction software until the 2025 updates are deployed. |
2023 |
|
|
20230035 | Update to Current Manual/2018 EOD Manual/EOD Primary Tumor--Bladder: According to the American Joint Commission on Cancer (AJCC), a transurethral resection of the bladder (TURB) cannot make a distinction between involvement of the superficial muscle-inner half (Stage T2a) and the deep muscle-outer half (Stage T2b). Is this same criteria applied to Extent of Disease (EOD)? |
EOD follows AJCC criteria in this situation and we have confirmed with AJCC that Stage T2a (superficial muscle) and Stage T2b (deep muscle) cannot be assigned when only a TURB is done. For EOD Primary Tumor, Bladder, codes 200, 250, 300, 350, can only be used when
If a TURB is done and there is mention of the muscularis propria invasion (superficial muscle or deep muscle), use EOD codes 370 or 400. If a TURB is done and the pathology report states superficial or deep muscle, ignore and coded as “invasion of muscularis propria, NOS” (EOD codes 370 or 400). Instructions and code descriptions for EOD Primary Tumor have been updated to indicate this. These updated instructions and code descriptions will be available when SEER*RSA is updated for 2024, Version 3.1 (Sept/Oct 2023). These updates are included here for reference and can be applied for cases diagnosed 2018+. |
2023 | |
|
|
20100015 | Type of Multiple Tumors/Multiplicity Counter--Breast. Are the data items "Type of Multiple Tumors Reported as One Primary" and "Multiplicity Counter" related? How should they be coded for breast cases in which there are multiple measured invasive tumors, plus DCIS which is not measured nor stated whether it is separate from the invasive tumors? See Discussion.
|
For example, path report states only "multifocal invasive ductal carcinoma, 1.5 cm and 0.8 cm, and low-grade DCIS." The Multiplicity Counter instructions tell us to ignore/do not count foci that are not measured. Should we interpret this to mean, count only the two invasive foci and ignore the DCIS? Should Type of Multiple Tumors then be coded 30 or 40, because only the invasive tumors are coded in Multiplicity Counter? | Code Type of Multiple Tumors 30 [in situ and invasive]. The code in Type of Multiple Tumors may or may not reflect the tumors that were counted in Multiplicity Counter. For this case, it is correct to code 02 in multiplicity counter. | 2010 |
|
|
20220031 | Tumor Size/Neoadjuvant Treatment: If a patient discontinues neoadjuvant therapy and then has surgery, how is the pathologic tumor size coded with the pathologic tumor size greater than the clinical tumor size? Currently, we are instructed to code 999 for the pathologic tumor size when neoadjuvant therapy is given; what happens when neoadjuvant chemotherapy is discontinued after 3 cycles (plan for 4 cycles)? |
Assign 999 for pathologic tumor size when patient has received neoadjuvant therapy, even when neo-adjuvant therapy is not completed. Describe the details in text fields. |
2022 | |
|
|
20200065 | Tumor Size/Corpus uteri--Endometrium: Is clinical tumor size coded to the endometrial stripe measurement or thickening in the endometrium. See Discussion. |
Example: Pelvic ultrasound-19 mm thickened endometrium; bilateral ovaries unremarkable. Case was coded to 19 mm for clinical tumor size. I have always been taught NOT to use "endometrial stripe" or "thickening" measurements for clinical size. Can you confirm. Also, is this noted on any of the SEER resources such as SEER training or in the SEER tumor size guidelines? I wanted to point them out to a reference if it is available. |
We consulted with an expert GYN pathologist. He confirmed our thinking that endometrial stripe or thickening does not represent clinical tumor size. We will add this to a future edition of the SEER manual for reference. |
2020 |
|
|
20190046 | Tumor Size/Bladder: The 2018 SEER Coding and Staging Manual says to use imaging over physical exam as priority for determining tumor size. If a bladder tumor is 4 cm visualized on cystoscopy, and is 2.8 cm on CT scan, which should be used as the clinical size? Is cystoscopy (endoscopy) a clinical exam or imaging? |
For the case described here, use the size from the CT scan. Physical exam includes what can be seen by a clinician either directly or through a scope. A tumor size obtained visually via cystoscopy is part of a physical exam. Therefore, the imaging (CT) tumor size is preferred. Use text fields to describe the details. |
2019 | |
|
|
20220022 | Tumor Size--Pathologic--Anus: In 2019, the pathology report of an anal canal squamous cell carcinoma stated the tumor size is 2.5 cm from proximal to distal (3.5 cm in circumference). Is the pathologic tumor size tumor size 025 or 035? |
Based on the information provided, code the tumor size as 035. We asked an expert pathologist to review this question and she said to use the larger measurement. She also said "the pathologist usually cuts the anus and rectum open like a tube; the “circumference” would be measured flat." |
2022 | |
|
|
20190106 | Tumor Size--Esophagus: Can information from the endoscopy procedure that implies a size of 3 cm for Tumor Size--Clinical be used for Esophagus? See Discussion. |
1-28-2018 CT Scan: 2.4 cm mass 2-15-2018 Endoscopy: Mass was present 22 to 25 cm. Biopsies were taken with cold forceps for histology; biopsy positive. |
For the case you describe, we would record the clinical tumor size stated on the CT report. The priority order for clinical tumor size is as follows. 1. Biopsy or operative (surgical exploration) report 2. Imaging 3. Physical exam We do not recommend coding tumor size based on an inferred tumor size from a description such as "Mass was present 22 to 25 cm." Look for an actual measurement of the mass, or a stated tumor size. Use text fields to record details. |
2019 |
|
|
20200015 | Tumor Size--Clinical--Breast: Does information from any type of biopsy take precedence over an imaging report? See Discussion. |
For example, a patient has a 2.6 cm breast tumor on MRI; a core biopsy measuring 0.7 cm is positive for infiltrating duct carcinoma. Rule #1 states "Use the largest measurement of the primary tumor from physical exam, imaging, or other diagnostic procedures before any form of treatment." However, Rule #9 seems to imply that size from an "incisional biopsy" takes precedence over imaging, even though it is known to be less than the entire tumor in size. |
We do not recommend using the size from a core biopsy for clinical tumor size. A core biopsy does not necessarily obtain enough tissue to know the actual tumor size. Since there is imaging for this patient, it is preferable to record clinical tumor size from the imaging report in this case. The instructions will be clarified in the next revision of the SEER manual. |
2020 |
An official website of the United States government
