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: 04/25/2026 18:22 PM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20041015 Primary Site--Lymphoma: How should this field be coded when a diffuse large B-cell lymphoma is found in the femur and in the soft tissue of the anterior chest wall but all CT scans are negative for lymphadenopathy?

For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:Code the Primary Site field to C809 [Unknown primary site]. The primary site of diffuse large B cell lymphoma can be either nodal or extranodal. The case described above is likely extranodal because there is no evidence of lymph node involvement. Because the extranodal site of origin is unknown, code the Primary Site to C809.

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
20041078

Ambiguous Terminology: Is the expression "has the markings of a malignancy" a clinically reportable term? See Discussion.

12/02 Baseline mammogram: spiculated mass with associated marked retraction located in UOQ lt breast. This has the markings of malignancy. Several microcalcifications in outer aspect of rt breast. BI-RADS 5 higly suggestive of malignancy.

Do not accession cases using only the term "has the markings of malignancy." This term is not on the list of ambiguous terms that are reportable. If the term does not appear on either the reportable or not reportable list, the term is not diagnostic of cancer. Do not accession the case.

Please see SINQ 20010094 in reference to BI-RADS terminology.

 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
20041082 Date of Diagnosis: When a 4/04 clinical impression indicates the appearance of a carcinoma that is contradicted by a negative 4/04 biopsy but is confirmed by a 5/04 resection, should the diagnosis date be coded to April or May? See Discussion.

4/04 colonscopy: irregular fungating mass that has appearance of carcinoma. 4/04 Bx: high grade dysplasia. 5/04: LAR. 5/04 Path: 3.2 X 2.5 cm mass wd adenoca with invasion of muscularis propria.

Should the diagnosis date be 4/04 based on the clinical impression during the colonoscopy OR 5/04 since the path for the bx was negative?

 The date of diagnosis for the example above is 05/04 -- the date of the pathology report confirming malignacy. The biopsy in 04/04 negated the 04/04 clinical statement. 2004
20041017 EOD-Lymph Nodes--Breast: When isolated tumor cells are found in an axillary lymph node, should lymph node involvement be coded to 0 [no lymph node involvement] or 1 [micrometastasis (less than or equal to 0.2 cm)]? For cases diagnosed prior to 2004: Code the EOD-Lymph Node field to 0 [No lymph node involvement] when regional lymph nodes are negative, even if there are positive isolated tumor cells (ITC). 2004
20041069

Reportability--Brain and CNS: Is a meningioma invading the bone malignant and, therefore, SEER reportable if diagnosed prior to 2004? See Discussion.

1. Meningothelial meningioma with prominent nuclear pleomorphism, infiltration into dura, calvarium, temporalis skeletal muscle.

Microscopic: Multifocal infiltration by meningothelial tumor...extensive infiltration of trabecular spaces, extension through inner and outer calvarial layers by meningioma...mitotic activity in tumor noted but below the 4 per 10 high power field threshold for diagnosis of atypical meningioma.

2. Aggressive (invasive) transitional type meningioma, neuroimaging and histology imply extensive invasive meningioma involving bone and paraspinal soft tissues. Microscopy:...invaded bone...focal EMA positivity diagnostic of invasive transitional type meningioma... tumor invades bone.

The two cases above are benign meningiomas and not reportable prior to 2004. According to an expert consultant, meningiomas are in the lining cells for the inner table of the skull and as such have an affinity for bone that allows them to penetrate adjacent bone without being "malignant."

The WHO Nervous System Tumor Classification states malignant meningioma exibits histological features of frank malignancy far in excess of the abnormalities present in atypical meningioma (WHO grade II). Examples of the histologic features of malignant meningioma are obviously malignant cytology, or high mitotic index (20 or more mitoses per 10 high-power fields). They correspond to WHO grade III and are usually fatal.

 2004
20041102 CS Tumor Size--Breast: How is this field coded when a core needle biopsy removes the majority of the tumor? See Discussion.

Rule 4.j on page 128 of the 2004 SEER Manual states "Do not code the tumor size from a needle biopsy unless no residual tumor is found on further resection".

Example: 3/04/04 core biopsy Rt breast grade 1 infiltrating ductal carcinoma tumor size 0.8cm. 3/10/04 Lumpectomy: 3mm focus of residual infiltrating ductal carcinoma. If we can not take the size of the core needle biopsy, do we use the residual size of 3mm or the clinical size which was 1cm on mammogram?

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 tumor size from the mammogram. Do not code the tumor size from the needle biopsy because residual tumor was present in the lumpectomy specimen.

 2004
20041006 Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007)/Date of Diagnosis--Bladder: How is date of diagnosis coded when metastases consistent with a bladder primary are found more than a year after a diagnosis of non-invasive bladder cancer? See Description. A non-invasive papillary transitional cell carcinoma is removed by TURB in May 2002. In January 2003, a bone biopsy reveals metastatic transitional cell carcinoma consistent with bladder primary.

For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:

Code a second bladder primary diagnosed in January 2003.

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
20041045 Histology (Pre-2007)--Ovary: What code is used to represent clear cell cystadenocarcinoma of the ovary?

For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:

Code histology to 8310/3 [Clear cell adenocarcinoma, NOS]. This is consistent with the WHO Classification of Tumours and reflects the current practice of placing less emphasis on "cyst-" prefix for ovarian malignancies.

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
20041070 Primary Site: What would the primary site be for carcinoma of the renal pelvis, status post transplant? Please see details below. See Discussion. The patient has a renal pelvis urothelial carcinoma confined to the pelvis but is status post renal pelvic transplant of the same renal pelvis. Code the primary site to renal pelvis [C659]. Code the site in which the primary tumor originated. The transplant status in this example does not affect the primary site. 2004