Histology (Pre-2007)/Diagnostic Confirmation: Which histology code is preferred if the CBD brushing is positive for malignant cells, cytologically most consistent with ductal adenocarcinoma [8500/3], and the common hepatic artery lymph node biopsy has metastatic adenocarcinoma, consistent with cholangiocarcinoma [8160/3]?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Assign histology code 8160 [Cholangiocarcinoma]. Code from the pathology specimen when available. In this case, the only pathology is from the lymph node specimen.
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.
Histology (Pre-2007): What is the difference between code 8244/3 composite carcinoid (combined carcinoid and adenocarcinoma) and 8245/3 adenocarcinoid tumor?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Assign code 8244/3 [composite carcinoid] when there is a combination of adenocarcinoma and carcinoid tumor.
Assign code 8245/3 [adenocarcinoid] when the diagnosis is exactly "adenocarcinoid."
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.
Reportability/Recurrence (Pre-2007)--Bladder: If a patient has had recurrent invasive bladder cancers since 1971, should the latest recurrence in 2003 be SEER reportable because the case has yet to be reported to SEER?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Because this 2003 recurrent bladder cancer was initially diagnosed prior to 1973, it is not reportable to SEER.
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.
Reportability: Are malignant tumors of genital skin reportable? On page 1 of the 2004 SEER Manual, Reportable Diagnoses, 1.b.i. Exceptions: malignant and invasive histologies not required by SEER - Skin. There is no longer a note that states that lesions ARE reportable for skin of the genital sites. Has SEER discontinued the collection of malignant skin tumors of the genital sites OR is the manual in error?
The histologies listed in the exception on page 1 are NOT reportable when the topography code is C440-C449. The manual specifically lists the topography codes in 1.b.1. Diagnoses with the listed histologies ARE reportable when the topography code is NOT C440-C449. Genital skin sites are not coded C440-C449 so a note is not needed.
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.
CS Eval--Colon: When the surgical resection occurs after radiation or chemo, how is the tumor size/extension evaluation field coded when there is no mention of the tumor size or extension in the surgical resection pathology report? See Discussion.
6/30/04 CT Scan abd/pelvis: 7.5x7.2 cm large rectal mass with l cm nodular densities in perirectal region probably adenopathy; irregularity of perirectal soft tissue which could be due to tumor infiltration. 7/26/04 Patient has radiation therapy and 5FU. 10/19/04 LAR: MD Adenoca rectum with regional node mets (3/8).
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.Based on the information provided above, code CS Tumor Size and Extension from CT scan. Code CS TS/Ext eval 5 [Surgical resection performed with pre-surgical treatment...size based on clinical evidence].
Code CS lymph nodes using information from resection. Code CS Reg Nodes eval 6 [Regional LN removed...with pre-surgical treatment...based on pathologic evidence].
2004 SEER Manual Errata/Grade--Colon/Bones: Is the term "pleomorphic" used to code tumor grade to 3 for selected primaries?
Delete the row containing the word "pleomorphic" from the tables on pages 93, C-219 and C-411. This correction will be included in the next set of replacement pages for the 2004 SEER manual.
CS Lymph Nodes/Scope of Regional Lymph Node Surgery--Prostate: When prostate cancer is an incidental finding at cystoprostatectomy for bladder cancer, is the pelvic lymph node dissection coded for the prostate as well as the bladder?
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, the pelvic lymph node dissection is coded as regional lymph node surgery for both primaries and the nodes are counted in collaborative staging for both primaries. The examination of the pelvic lymph nodes is relevant to both the bladder and the prostatic primaries.
CS Lymph Nodes/CS Site Specific Factor 3--Breast: How are positive intramammary lymph nodes reflected in these fields? See Discussion.
Patient with breast cancer underwent mastectomy. No axillary lymph nodes were positive, but 1 out of 2 intramammary lymph nodes were positive for mets (greater than 2 mm). CS Lymph node codes describe axillary and internal mammary nodes, but do not describe intramammary lymph nodes.
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.
Intramammary lymph nodes are coded as axillary lymph nodes for staging purposes. Intramammary node are nodes within the breast tissue. Both staging and treatment suggest these are equivalent to axillary nodes.
Grade, Differentiation/Priorities: Which has priority, the differentiation or the nuclear grade for a liver biopsy histology described as "well differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma, nuclear grade 3/4"?
For most sites, differentiation has priority over the nuclear grade when both are specified (excluding breast and kidney). Assign grade code 1 [well differentiated] to the example above.
An official website of the United States government
Home