CS Extension/Ambiguous terminology--Pancreas: Should an exception be made for "abuts" or "encased/encasing" regarding CS pancreas extension? See Discussion.
According to the CS Manual regarding ambiguous terminology, we do not accept "abuts" or "encased/encasing" as involvement. According to the March/April 2008 issue of "CA, A Cancer Journal for Clinicians", vol 58, number 2, an article concerning Pancreas staging by M.D. Anderson researchers/clinicians recommends defining unresectable involvement of the celiac axis/mesenteric artery with the terms "abutment" as involvement of 180 degrees or less of the circumference of the vessel, and "encasement" as more than 180 degree involvement. A large comprehensive cancer center in our area has already adopted these guidelines.
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.Follow the current CS instructions regarding ambiguous terminology. "Abuts" and "encased/encasing" are not involvement.
The American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer provided the following in response to this question: This concept can be considered for CS version 2, but it would need to be made in conjunction with acceptance of that same theory in AJCC 7th Edition so that the stage can be derived. Many times what can be defined and accepted in a closed environment of a single institution research project cannot be duplicated and accepted across the nation and in every community facility. Would pathologists specify the > or < 180 degree involvement in every pathology report? It would also have to be reviewed to see if this idea has been accepted by the larger oncology community, or just the idea of a single institution.
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 Extension: How is CS Ext coded for the following?
Rretroperitoneal primary
Cystic mucinous tumor with intraepithelial carcinoma
There is no CS Extension code for intraepithelial ca in the retroperitoneal scheme.
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.According to the American College of Surgeons I & R system, assign code 10 [confined to site of origin] for intraepithelial carcinoma of the retroperitoneum.
CS Lymph Nodes--Ovary: Are positive lymph nodes removed from "colon tissue" during a modified posterior pelvic debulking regional or distant? If regional, what is the appropriate CS LN code?
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.Pericolonic lymph nodes are "regional" lymph nodes for an ovarian primary. If you do not have enough information to assign codes 12-30, assign code 50 [Regional lymph nodes, NOS].
CS Lymph Nodes/CS Mets at DX--Ovary: How are the following lymph node regions/chains coded in the Collaborative Stage schema for ovary?
1. pericolonic
2. pelvic, NOS
3. mesenteric, NOS
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.Revised 7-17-09
Assign CS Lymph Nodes code 10 for involvement of pelvic lymph nodes, NOS.
Code involvement of pericolonic nodes or mesenteric nodes, NOS in CS lymph nodes.
CS Lymph Nodes/Reg LN Pos/Exam: Is a final pathologic diagnosis of "Level 8 lymph node: Fibroadipose tissue containing a minute lymphoid aggregate, negative for malignancy" a lymph node for the purpose of coding these fields?
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. "Fibroadipose tissue containing minute lymphoid aggregate" qualifies as a lymph node. Include in count as one lymph node examined in the example above assuming this is regional to the primary site.
CS Site Specific Factor 6--Breast: If the tumor size for the breast is unknown, and it is unknown whether the tumor is mixed in situ and invasive or "pure", how is SSF6 to be coded? See Discussion.
The definition for SSF6 for breast changed from "Unknown if invasive and in situ components present, unknown if tumor size represents mixed tumor or a pure tumor" to an added clarification of "Clinical tumor size coded." Since the clinical tumor size is NOT coded, this does not fit.
The definition for 060 is "Invasive and in situ components present, unknown size of tumor (CS Tumor Size coded 999). Since it is unknown if the tumor is mixed, this definition does not fit either.
It seems that the revised (April 2005) definition for 888 has left a situation that cannot be coded.
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.SSF 6 should be coded 888 in this case. SEER will make the CS task force aware of this situation.
CS Site Specific Factor--Breast: If the tumor is described as being a 1 cm poorly differentiated pleomorphic lobular carcinoma with scattered LCIS in breast tissue, for SSF6, do we use the breast tumor or all of the breast tissue removed when coding SSF6?
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.
Site Specific Factor 6 in the breast scheme describes the relationship of invasive and in situ tumor in the tumor size coded. Code SSF6 for the same tumor used to code tumor size.
For this example, code SSF6 for the 1 cm tumor. In this case, the entire tumor is reported as invasive; use code 000 [Entire tumor reported as invasive].
CS Site Specific Factor--Breast: What estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor (ER/PR) values should be coded in a case with two separate tumors (1 ductal, 1 lobular) diagnosed simultaneously in the same breast (single primary) with differing ER/PR values for each tumor? One is ER/PR positive; the other is ER/PR negative.
In cases where ER (or PR) is reported on more than one tumor specimen, record the highest value. If any sample is positive, record as positive.
Guidance on Collaborative Stage (CS) site-specific factors (SSFs) in the breast schema can be found in the SEER Registrar Staging Assistant (SEER*RSA): SSF1-Estrogen Receptor (ER) Assay and SSF2-Progesterone Receptor (PR) Assay.
CS Site Specific Factor--Prostate: Can autopsy results also be used when coding SSF3, pathologic extension, given that the instructions only address the use of prostatectomy findings when coding this field?
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.
If the prostate cancer was diagnosed on autopsy, or the autopsy was performed within the staging timeframe (See 2004 SEER Manual, page 112), code SSF3 using the autopsy information.
An official website of the United States government
Home