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: 01/14/2026 01:50 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20041040 CS Tumor Size--Unknown & ill-defined site: For an unknown primary site, should this field be coded to 000 [No mass/tumor found] or 999 [Unknown; size not stated; not stated in patient record]?

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 Tumor Size field to 999 [Unknown; size not stated; not stated in patient record] when the primary site is unknown.

There is a discrepancy in Part I of the CS Manual on page 27, rule 5g, which says that primary site C80.9 should be coded as 888 not applicable. The CS Steering Committee has decided that the last line about unknown and ill-defined sites should be deleted from rule 5g. This issue will be addressed in a CS errata to be distributed in July 2004.

 2004
20041010 Multiple Primaries--Lymphoma: How many primaries should we abstract when Single Versus Subsequent Primaries table indicates one primary but special pathological studies indicate two primaries? See Description. The patient had a malignant lymphoma, large B cell (9680) diagnosed in 2000. In 2003, he came in and had a spleen biopsy which showed follicular lymphoma (9690). These are the same NHL, according to the table lookup. However, the pathologist states in 2003, "Special stains now show a kappa clonal lymphoma. Since the first diagnosis was a lambda monoclonal lymphoma, this is not felt to be a recurrence of the original lymphoma."

For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:Abstract the example above as two primaries. Hematologic malignancies (including lymphoma) and solid tumors are handled differently when determining the number of primaries. For hematologic malignancies, take the physician's opinion into account. Use the Single Versus Subsequent Primaries of Lymphatic and Hematopoietic Diseases table as an aid when there is insufficient information available.

For solid tumors, follow the multiple primary rules in the SEER Program Code Manual.

For cases diagnosed 2010 forward, 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.

 2004
20041044 EOD-Extension--Breast: If the pathology report states "infiltrating duct carcinoma...measuring 7mm in diameter...focal areas of intraductal carcinoma," do we code this field to 14 [Invasive and in situ components present, size of entire tumor coded in Tumor Size and in situ described as minimal] or to 16 [Invasive and in situ components present, size of entire tumor coded in Tumor Size and proportions of in situ and invasive not known]?

For cases diagnosed 1998-2003: If 7mm is the measurement of the infiltrating duct portion of this cancer, assign extension code 13 [Invasive and in situ components present, size of invasive component stated and coded in Tumor Size].

If 7mm is the size of the whole malignancy and the size of the invasive portion cannot be determined, assign extension code 14 [Invasive and in situ components present, size of entire tumor coded in Tumor Size (size of invasive component not stated) and in situ described as minimal (less than 25%)]. "Focal areas of in situ carcinoma" qualifies as minimal.

 2004
20041050 Surgery of Primary Site--Rectum: How do you code a procedure described as a "transanal resection, debulking of a large rectal mass"? See Discussion. Patient is not a surgical candidate due to "other medical conditions". Colonoscopy done for anemia and rectal bleeding. At the colonoscopy a "Transanal Resection Debulking of large rectal mass" is performed. Two specimens are sent to the lab. The first is labeled "rectal mass" and is a 2.0 cm diameter spherical fragment of tissue. The second is labeled "transanal debulking rectal mass" and is described as multiple, irregular shaped fragments of tan, rubbery tissue measuring 5.0 x 5.0 x 3.0 cm. Final path diagnosis: Debulking of rectal mass: Adenocarcinoma greater than 2 cm in size, resection margins positive for tumor. For cases diagnosed 1998-2002, code Surgery of Primary Site to 20 [Local tumor excision, NOS]. Because the procedure was performed via colonoscopy and apparently did not involve proctectomy, the best choice is a local excision. 2004
20041095 Primary site: How is this field coded for a malignancy described as a "intracranial squamous cell carcinoma (8070) arising in a previous epidermoid cyst"? See Discussion.

4-5-02 MRI Brain: Enhancing mass is probably a recurrence of the original tumor resected in 1983 (benign). 4-8-02 Gross resection. Lesion was coming up against her brain stem: Removed it grossly.

Path: 4-8-02 Brain tumor, left temporal: SCC arising from a previous epidermoid cyst of the brain. XRT began 4-25-02.

Path states: "Squamous lesions suspicious for malignant transformation of old epidermal cyst (1983). It has been reported in literature that epidermoid cysts in the brain can undergo a malignant transformation which is what happened in this case."

It appears the patient has an intracranial epidermoid cyst that is now

giving rise to SCC. Squamous cell carcinoma (8070) of the brain (C71_) fails the edit Primary Site, Morphology-Imposs ICDO3 (SEER IF38).

 Code the primary site to C760 [Ill-defined site; Head, face or neck, NOS]. There is an intracranial malignancy arising from a previously resected epidermoid cyst. Squamous cell carcinoma, primary of the brain, is a non-overridable edit error. 2004
20041066

Reportability/Date of Diagnosis--Ovary: Is a patient SEER reportable in 2001 or 2003 if she presented with a diagnosis of papillary serous tumor of low malignant potential [borderline tumor] per the 5/2001 surgery but at the time of the planned second look laparoscopic surgery is stated to have Stage 3A ovarian cancer? See Discussion.

A patient was seen in 5/2001 for large pelvic mass growing from right ovary. After TAH and USO and partial omemtectomy, path diagnosis was papillary serous tumor of low malignant potential (borderline tumor), unruptured. Right ovary and omental implant have identical histologic appearance, except the psammoma body formation and the ovary does not.

Patient does not return for lap as planned in 6-12 months.

In 1/03 she returns to hospital with abdominal pain and has debulking, hemicolectomy and Hartmann's procedure. 1/03 Path report "metastatic papillary serous adenoca." Chart now says "History of stage 3A ovarian cancer."

Yes, this case is reportable in 2003. Malignancy was confirmed in 2003. The diagnosis made in 2001 is not reportable for that year, and was not reviewed or revised according to the information provided.

 2004
20041093 Reportability: When a biopsy is suspicious for cancer and re-biopsy is negative, is reportability based on the clinician's judgement (cancer vs NED)? If the re-biopsy was done because the first biopsy was inconclusive, do not report this case. If the re-biopsy was more complete, or performed in an attempt to gain a wider margin, this case is reportable based on the first biopsy. 2004
20041003 EOD-Size of Tumor: How is this field coded when the only description is "greater then 10 cm?" For cases diagnosed 1998-2003: When the only information available is a statement such as "Greater than 10 cm," code tumor size 101 [10.1 cm]. 2004
20041097

Reportability--Brain and CNS: Is a skull tumor schwannoma an intracranial reportable benign tumor if the physician states it arose in the occipital nerve?

No. These schwannomas are not intracranial and therefore, are not reportable to SEER. The occipital nerve is not one of the 12 intracranial nerves (i.e., Abducens, Auditory (vestibulocochlear), Facial, Glossopharyngeal, Hypoglossal, Oculomotor, Olfactory, Optic, Spinal Accessory, Trigeminal, Trochlear, and Vagus).

 2004
20041071 Histology (Pre-2007)--Breast: When the histology from a lumpectomy differs from that of a core needle biopsy, should the lumpectomy histology be coded? See Discussion.

Histology - Page 85 of the SPM 2004, Histology Type Coding Instructions, #2. Use the histology stated in the final diagnosis from the pathology report. Use the pathology from the procedure that resected the majority of the primary tumor.

Based on this rule, should the following case should be coded to Ductal Carcinoma (8500/31)?

Core needle bx: WD Infiltrating Ductal Carcinoma with focal lobular features. Lumpectomy: WD Invasive Ductal Carcinoma.

For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:

Yes, code this case to 8500/31 [Well differentiated invasive ductal carcinoma]. Code the histology stated on the pathology report from the procedure removing the most tumor tissue. A lumpectomy will usually provide more tumor tissue than a core needle biopsy.

First, determine which specimen contains the most TUMOR tissue -- in this case the lumpectomy. Next, apply the histology coding rules to the diagnosis on that pathology report. The rationale is that a diagnosis from a smaller specimen will be less accurate and less representative of the true histology compared to a larger tumor 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.

 2004