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.
MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries--Breast: Would a left chest wall mass excision stated to be ductal carcinoma consistent with a breast primary and, "compatible with either local recurrence or potentially a metastasis" be a new primary per the MP/H rules? See Discussion.
Patient underwent mastectomy in 1986 for infiltrating ductal carcinoma of left breast. Excision of left chest wall mass in March 2009 showed ductal carcinoma consistent with breast primary. The pathology report COMMENT stated it would be compatible with either local recurrence or a metastasis. The patient's primary breast carcinoma material is not available for direct comparison and the MP/H rules instruct us to ignore metastasis.
For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, the MP/H rules do not apply to metastasis. If there is no further information available for this case, the MP/H rules do not apply to the 2009 diagnosis.
MP/H Rules/Histology--Esophagus: Should the modifying expression "with areas of" be used to code histology? See Discussion.
Patient was found to have two tumors in the esophagus. The large tumor was diagnosed as adenocarcinoma with areas of neuroendocrine differentiation (small cell carcinoma). The smaller tumor was diagnosed as small cell carcinoma. If we accept the "areas of" to be part of the diagnosis, rule H16 indicates that histology for the large tumor would be coded 8045 (combined small cell and adenocarcinoma). If we ignore the "areas of," then histology for the large tumor would be coded to 8140 (adenocarcinoma). Either way, when counting primaries, rule M17 would be applied and the two tumors would be classified as separate primaries. However, it seems that the two tumors are probably the same disease process since they both show small cell carcinoma.
For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, do not use the modifying expression "with areas of" to determine a more specific histology per rule H13 in the MP/H rules.
Grade: Can FIGO grade be used to code Grade/Differentiation? See Discussion.
SINQ 20020059 says not to use FIGO grade to code differentiation. It also says SEER is evaluating whether the ICD-O-3 sixth digit differentiation codes accurately represent the FIGO grade. For the time being, do not code FIGO grade. What is the result of the evaluation? Any new information regarding FIGO grade?
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.Do not code FIGO grade in the grade field. The conversion from a three-grade system to a four-grade system does not work for FIGO grade three. Since FIGO G3 includes both Poorly differentiated and undifferentiated, it cannot be converted.
FIGO grade may be captured in a CS site specific factor in the future.
Behavior--Breast: How is this field coded for a case in which the final diagnosis reports DCIS, but the CAP protocol or microscopic findings show microinvasion? See Discussion.
1. Path report for breast cancer has final diagnosis as 'DCIS' but the CAP protocol in the body of the report says 'microinvasion seen, T1mic.'
2. Path report says 'DCIS' in the final diagnosis and microinvasion is identified in the microscopic portion of the report, but it is not in CAP protocol format and not stated in the final diagnosis.
Code both scenarios /3 [malignant (invasive)]. Information regarding behavior is not limited to the final diagnosis or the CAP protocol. See page 84 in the 2007 SEER manual:
Code the behavior as malignant /3 if any portion of the primary tumor is invasive no matter how limited; i.e. microinvasion.
MP/H Rules/Histology--Breast: How is histology coded for a diagnosis of "metaplastic carcinoma with the sarcomatous component of high grade sarcoma with focal areas of osteoid formation"? See Discussion.
Right breast simple mastectomy, path: 2.5 x 1.5 x 1.5 cm metaplastic carcinoma with; the sarcomatous component is high grade sarcoma with focal areas of osteoid formation. The epithelial component is predominantly grade 2 DCIS.
For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, assign code 8575 [Metaplastic carcinoma, NOS]. Metaplastic carcinomas often include mixtures of epithelial carcinoma with sarcoma, for example.
Surgery of Primary Site - - Esophagus/Stomach/Colon: Is an endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for an esophagus, stomach or colon malignancy coded to 20 [local tumor excision, NOS] or to a more specific code such as 22 [local tumor excision combined with electrocautery]?
Assign code 20 [local tumor excision, NOS] for a procedure described as an esophagus stomach or colon endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), NOS. If there is additional information specifying electrocautery, laser or PDT (for example), assign a more specific code.
Primary Site/CS Extension--Lymphoma: How should these fields be coded for a malignant lymphoma with spleen involvement, inguinal and iliac adenopathy, T12 lesion with bony destruction, and a paraspinal mass in lower lumbar region with extension into iliac fossa involving left psoas muscle and causing bony destruction?
For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010, 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 primary site C496 [Connective, subcutaneous and other soft tissue of trunk]. When lymphoma is present in an extranodal organ/site and in that organ/site's regional lymph nodes, code the extranodal organ/site as the primary site. In this case, there is a soft tissue paraspinal mass at T12 extending into iliac fossa, left psoas muscle and bone. Lymph nodes are also involved. Assign CS extension code 21 [Direct extension to adjacent organs or tissues].
For cases diagnosed 1/1/10 and later, refer to the Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Neoplasm Case Reportability and Coding Manual and the Hematopoietic Database (Hematopoietic DB) provided by SEER on its website to research your question. If those resources do not adequately address your issue, submit a new question to SINQ.
Grade/Cell indicator--Lymphoma: How is Grade/Cell indicator coded for anaplastic large cell lymphoma? See Discussion.
The SPCM states cell indicator codes take precedence over grade/differentiation codes for lymphoma and leukemia cases.
For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:Because there is no cell indicator information, code 9 [cell type not determined] in the grade/cell indicator field. Do not code grade for lymphoma. For lymphoma and leukemia this field is the cell indicator.
For cases diagnosed 1/1/10 and later, refer to the Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Neoplasm Case Reportability and Coding Manual and the Hematopoietic Database (Hematopoietic DB) provided by SEER on its website to research your question. If those resources do not adequately address your issue, submit a new question to SINQ.
MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries--Urinary: Are diagnoses in bladder, ureter, renal pelvis, and other urinary made prior to 2007 used in determining multiple primaries? See Discussion.
Per the General Information for MPH, Rule #3, the rules are effective for cases diagnosed January 1, 2007 and after. Do not use these rules to abstract cases diagnosed prior to January 1, 2007.
Example: Is a 2006 diagnosis of a renal pelvis primary with the histology 8130/3 and a 2007 diagnosis of a bladder primary with histology 8130/3 "multiple tumors" or is the bladder tumor a new primary because it is a single tumor at the time of diagnosis in 2007?
For cases diagnosed 2007 or later:
Use the 2007 MP/H rules for urinary sites to assess tumors diagnosed in 2007 or later.
For the example above, use the 2007 rules to determine whether or not the bladder tumor diagnosed in 2007 is a new primary. Use the Multiple Tumors module when comparing a 2007 or later diagnosis to an earlier diagnosis. Start with rule M3. Stop at rule M8. The 2007 bladder urothelial tumor is not a new primary since there is an existing 2006 renal pelvis urothelial primary.
An official website of the United States government
Home