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: 12/27/2025 07:12 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20130102

Histology--Heme & Lymph Neoplasms: Is follicular lymphoma, high grade synonymous with grade 3 lymphoma [9698/3] or is the "high grade" ignored and the histology coded to follicular lymphoma, NOS [9690]?

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

Code histology to 9698/3 [follicular lymphoma, grade 3].

Follicular lymphoma, high grade is listed under the Alternate Names section of the Heme DB for Follicular lymphoma, grade 3.

SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx.

 2013
20130150

MP/H Rules/Histology--Bladder: What is the histology code histology code for a bladder TUR that demonstrates mixed invasive urothelial and small cell carcinoma? See Discussion.

SINQ 20041104 (prior to 2007 MP/H rules) states to code histology to 8045. The MP/H rules do not address this combination of urothelial and small cell carcinoma. The current MP/H rule that applies is Rule H8, code the higher histology (8120/3). However, if the histology is coded to 8120/3, the fact that small cell carcinoma exists will be lost. If the small cell carcinoma drives the treatment plan/prognosis, shouldn't this situation be reflected in the rules for coding histology?

Code the histology to 8045/3 [mixed small cell carcinoma]. The presence of small cell carcinoma drives the treatment decisions for this case.

This issue will be addressed in the next revision of the MP/H rules.

2013
20130195 Laterality--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is laterality coded to 0 [not paired] for all lymphoma cases including paired sites (e.g., breast, lung)?

Laterality coding for lymphomas is based on the primary site not histology. Laterality describes the side of a paired organ or side of the body on which the reportable tumor originated. Determine whether laterality should be coded for each primary.

Laterality coding instructions are located in the SEER Program Coding and Staging Manual. See pages 68-70 in the 2013 manual,

http://www.seer.cancer.gov/manuals/2013/SPCSM_2013_maindoc.pdf.

 2013
20130182 Primary site--Head and Neck: How is primary site coded if a floor of mouth biopsy reveals microinvasive squamous cell carcinoma but the definitive resection of the tongue and floor of mouth unifocal lesion reveals only in situ squamous cell cancer? See Discussion.

Patient with overlapping lesion of tongue and floor of mouth. Initial biopsy of floor of mouth reveals microinvasive squamous cell cancer. Definitive resection reveals in situ squamous cell cancer. Pathology report states unifocal tumor. The tumor site on pathology report is documented as involving the tongue and floor of mouth.

Should the primary site be coded to floor of mouth because it is the site of invasive disease? Or is primary site C148 [overlapping sites of lip, oral cavity and pharynx] because invasion should not be used to determine primary site?

Code the primary site to C068 [overlapping lesion of other and unspecified parts of the mouth]. Based on the information provided, this is a tumor described as a "book-leaf" lesion a lesion that overlaps the floor of the mouth and the underside of the tongue. 2013
20130021 Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: When will the follicular lymphoma, grade 1 code [9695/3] ever be used? See Discussion. The Abstractor Notes currently do not explain the histologic classification of follicular lymphoma [FL]. Frequently, FL grade 1 and 2 are not being separated and are described as "low grade" or "grade 1-2" in the pathology final diagnosis. The correct histology code would be 9691/3 [FL, grade 2] for these cases. Apparently, per the 2008 WHO Classification, grade 1 and grade 2 are being grouped together as grade 1-2 due to the minimal difference in patient outcome. If these histologies are grouped together, will histology code 9695/3 [FL, grade 1] ever be used? Should the Heme Database explain the classifications of follicular lymphoma grade 1, 2, and 3?

When the latest WHO classification for heme neoplasms was written in 2008, there was a lot of controversy about whether or not the FL grading system was useful or not. A number of papers have been written stating that grades 1 and 2 do not have a statistically different survival or transformation rate. Given that the controversy had not been settled by those in the clinical world, the WHO recommended analyzing grades 1 and 2 together. They did not, however, remove either grade 1 or 2 from their classification. When the WHO intend to change their classification (have both grades classified under one histology number), they omit one code from their book (make it obsolete) and change the definition for the other code. The 2008 WHO book did not make either ICD-O-3 code obsolete. Therefore, we continue to collect the cases as designated by the pathologist. If the controversy is settled before the next WHO classification, you may see changes in the codes.

Additionally, since the 2008 WHO book was written, there have been some clinical papers challenging the designation of grade 3. They contend that grade 3 can be mistaken for low-grade.

The grades for follicular lymphoma are based on the number of centroblasts per high powered field (HPF). The number of centroblasts for grade 1 is 0-5; for grade 2 is 6-15, for grade 3a and 3b is >15 centroblasts. 3a has centrocytes and 3b has no centrocytes.

2013
20130096 Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is the primary site coded for a mantle cell lymphoma found in the sigmoid colon on colonoscopy with biopsy?

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

Code the primary site to the sigmoid colon [C187] per Rule PH24. Code the primary site to the organ when lymphoma is present only in an organ. Based on the information provided, the lymphoma is present only in the sigmoid colon.

SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx.

2013
20130118 Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is the primary site coded for a diagnosis of Langerhans cell histiocytosis with extensive bony metastatic disease and lymphadenopathy? See Discussion. Patient was diagnosed with LCH on a biopsy of the right femur. Imaging showed extensive bony metastatic disease, extensive infiltrative perinephritis, encasement of both kidneys, renal hilar, retroperitoneal and periaortic lymphadenopathy. The right femur biopsy pathology report did not state this was metastatic.

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

Code the primary site to C419 [bone, NOS] per Rule PH30.

This patient has widely metastatic disease. Per Rule PH30, one needs to reference the Heme DB to determine the primary site and histology for this case. Per the Abstractor Notes section, Langerhans cell histiocytosis arises in the bone and many times can involve multiple bones, along with other organs and lymph nodes. Although the right femur was biopsied, this does not prove that the primary site is the femur [C402] because the patient has what was described as extensive bony metastatic disease.

SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx.

2013
20130176

Reportability--Ovary: Is an adult granulosa cell tumor of the right adnexa reportable if the left adnexa, diaphragm and paratubal tissue are reported to be consistent with metastasis? See discussion.

Per the pathology report: Right adnexa: adult granulosa cell tumor. Left adnexa: Foci of metastatic granulosa cell tumor in paratubal tissue. Diaphragm smears: consistent with metastatic granulosa cell tumor. Comment: The morphology and immunoprofile of the cellular aggregates in the paratubal soft tissue are consistent with metastatic granulosa cell tumor.

Based on the information provided, this case of adult granulosa cell tumor is malignant and reportable. According to our expert pathologist consultant, "though granulosa cell tumor NOS/ adult NOS is 8620/1, the presence of peritoneal implants or metastases, and/or lymph node metastases indicates the tumor is malignant, and it should be coded /3."

Note that the presence of implants or metastases does not indicate malignancy in the case of low malignant potential ovarian epithelial tumors. Our path expert explains "in contrast, by convention the behavior of borderline/LMP ovarian epithelial tumors is determined by the ovarian primary, and is /1, even though there may be peritoneal implants/metastases, or metastatic disease in lymph nodes. The treatment may vary in these circumstances, but to my knowledge the decision as to the tumor designation remains based on the primary tumor."

2013
20130081 Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned when a patient is clinically stated to have Stage III follicular lymphoma following a diagnosis suspicious for B-cell lymphoma and is subsequently diagnosed with large B-cell lymphoma? See Discussion.

01/27/2012 R neck mass FNA: Suspicious for B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

02/17/2012 Cervical node bx: In situ involvement by follicular-like B-cells of uncertain significance +CD10. Two other cervical biopsies show infarcted, extensively necrotic lymphoid tissue highly suspicious for B-cell lymphoma.

03/20/2012 Bone marrow: Low grade B-cell lymphoproliferative disorder with plasmacytic differential.

04/18/2012 Medical Oncology treats patient for Stage III follicular lymphoma.

10/16/2012 Cervical LN core bx: CD10+ large B-cell lymphoma.

Should Rule M4 (single primary) and Module 6, Rule PH11 apply to this case?

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

This case should be accessioned as two primaries: follicular lymphoma [9690/3] diagnosed 02/17/2012 and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [9680/3] diagnosed 10/16/2012 per Rule M10. This patient was diagnosed with a chronic neoplasm (follicular lymphoma) followed greater than 21 days later by an acute neoplasm (DLBCL).

The follicular lymphoma was initially diagnosed on 02/17/2012. The cervical node biopsies were "highly suspicious for B-cell lymphoma" [9591/3]. While "suspicious" is a reportable ambiguous term used to accession cases, suspicious cytologies are not SEER reportable and, therefore, the diagnosis date cannot be 01/27/2012. The histology of the first primary would be updated to 9690/3 [follicular lymphoma] based on the Medical Oncology note on 04/18/2012 that confirmed the histology was follicular lymphoma and the patient was being treated for such.

The diagnosis of DLBCL was made 8 months later. Rule M4 cannot apply to this case because the follicular lymphoma and DLBCL were not diagnosed simultaneously. Rule M4 only applies when the two non-Hodgkin lymphomas are diagnosed simultaneously AND in the same location.

SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx.

2013
20130031

Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned when a plasmacytoma of the intervertebral disc is diagnosed in 2010 followed by a diagnosis of immature plasma cell myeloma by a right hip biopsy in 2011? See Discussion.

The patient was diagnosed with intervertebral disc plasmacytoma and had radiation therapy to the pelvic bones in 2010. In 2011 (more than 21 days later) a right hip biopsy revealed immature plasma cell myeloma. There is clinical documentation that this is progression into myeloma. Per the Heme DB (Primary Site(s) and Definition sections) and Rule PH30, in the Heme Manual, the primary site is coded to C421 [bone marrow] and the histology is coded 9732/3 [plasma cell myeloma] when there is a clinical diagnosis of multiple myeloma and/or there is no documentation of a bone marrow biopsy or the results are unknown. This patient did have a bone marrow biopsy that indicates there are an increased plasma cells present; plasma cells represent less than 10%. The skeletal survey and bone scan did not reveal any further lesions.

Is this progression of disease because there is only one lesion in the right hip 8 months after the diagnosis of plasmacytoma? Or is this a second primary based on the right hip biopsy that showed plasma cell myeloma and the physician's documentation of disease progression? Plasmacytomas are usually single lesions. Would this disease process have multiple lesions if they are diagnosed at different times?

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

This case is accessioned as two primaries: Plasmacytoma diagnosed in 2010 and plasma cell myeloma diagnosed in 2011 per Rule M10. The patient has a diagnosis of a solitary plasmacytoma (chronic neoplasm) followed by a diagnosis of plasma cell myeloma (acute neoplasm) diagnosed greater than 21 days later.

The physician is calling this a progression to plasma cell myeloma even though the bone marrow has less than 10% plasma cells, take this statement as progression or a clinical diagnosis of plasma cell myeloma.

SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx.

 2013