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: 09/19/2025 01:01 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20130027

Reportability--Are well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors and grade 1 neuroendocrine tumors of the appendix now reportable? See Discussion.

The terminology for carcinoid tumors has changed. The current terminology used is "neuroendocrine tumor." Are well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors of the appendix non-reportable because carcinoid, NOS of the appendix has a borderline behavior code [8240/1]? When the histology/behavior codes for the term "well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor" became 8240/3, did SEER intend this change to also apply to appendix primaries? If so, for which diagnosis year did this change go into effect?

Well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors and grade 1 neuroendocrine tumors of the appendix are reportable because these tumors have a morphology code 8240/3 per the WHO Classification of Tumors of the Digestive System. However, per the ICD-O-3, carcinoid tumors of the appendix have a behavior code of /1 [borderline].

The terminology of neuroendocrine tumors is evolving and current thinking at the international level is that carcinoid/WD NET of appendix is reportable. However, reportability in the United States is based on ICD-O-3. The histology code for "Carcinoid of appendix" is 8240/1; the histology code for a carcinoids of all other primary sites is 8240/3. Until the United States adopts the proposed changes for ICD-O-3, reportability of appendix cases is as follows:

  • Carcinoid
  • Well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor
  • Grade 1 neuroendocrine tumor
  • Well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor/carcinoid (Pathologist uses both terms in reporting the diagnosis and does not want to choose one diagnosis over the other.)
 2013
20130156 Other therapy--Heme and Lymphoid Neoplasms: Based on the hematopoietic manual instructions, is plasmapheresis coded as treatment for Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia? See Discussion.

A patient, who was diagnosed with Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia at another facility, presented to our facility for plasmapheresis on 12/27/2012. No other treatment was given.

How is the plasmapheresis coded for treatment?

Do not code plasmapheresis as treatment. It does not modify the neoplasm. 2013
20130168 Date of diagnosis--Heme and Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is the date of diagnosis coded to the date a bone marrow biopsy revealed "plasma cell neoplasm; plasma cells are < 10%" or the date a diagnosis of myeloma was noted in the Discharge Summary? See Discussion.

Bone marrow biopsy pathology states: Plasma Cell Neoplasm. The plasma cells are < 10%.

Subsequent to the bone marrow biopsy, the Discharge Summary indicated the patient has a diagnosis of myeloma, hypercalcemia and negative bone marrow surveys.

What date is used for the date of diagnosis?

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

Use the date of the Discharge Summary as the date of diagnosis. In this case, the date of diagnosis is the date the physician confirmed the diagnosis of myeloma using all information available.

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
20130044 Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned when a patient has a biopsy diagnosis of extraosseous plasmacytoma followed fourteen days later with a diagnosis of multiple myeloma on imaging? See Discussion.

On 2/3/12 the patient was diagnosed via biopsy with an extraosseous (extramedullary) plasmacytoma filling both nasal cavities. On 2/16/12 a metastatic workup was performed and showed a lucent lesion in calvarium of Rt frontal bone. 2/17/12 radiation oncology consult states, "I believe this is most likely consistent with multiple myeloma." Subsequently, the 3/1/12 CT of the left shoulder showed a 3.6 cm lytic lesion of humeral head with cortical breakthrough consistent with metastasis or myeloma.

Per the Heme DB, extramedullary plasmacytoma can transform to multiple myeloma. Does that make this multiple primaries with the histologies coded to 9734/3 and 9732/3?

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

This case should be accessioned as a single primary, multiple myeloma [9732/3] diagnosed on 2/3/12 per Rule M8. Abstract the acute neoplasm as a single primary when both a chronic and acute neoplasm are diagnosed simultaneously or within 21 days AND there is documentation of only one positive tissue biopsy.

This patient only had a tissue biopsy of the nasal cavity proving the chronic neoplasm (extraosseous plasmacytoma). The acute neoplasm (multiple myeloma) was diagnosed clinically based on the scans.

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
20130022

Reportability--Melanoma: Is "early" melanoma reportable? See Discussion.

Because "evolving" melanoma was never reportable, this issue only relates to "early" melanoma.

For cases diagnosed 2018 to 2020, early or evolving melanoma is not reportable.

Evolving melanoma (borderline evolving melanoma): Evolving melanoma are tumors of uncertain biologic behavior. Histological changes of borderline evolving melanoma are too subtle for a definitive diagnosis of melanoma in situ. The tumors may be described as "proliferation of atypical melanocytes confined to epidermal and adnexal epithelium," "atypical intraepidermal melanocytic proliferation, "atypical intraepidermal melanocytic hyperplasia"; or "severe melanocytic dysplasia." Not reportable.

Melanoma Solid Tumor Rules, 2018, page 3, https://seer.cancer.gov/tools/solidtumor/Melanoma_STM.pdf

 2013
20130085

Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned when a patient was treated in 1999 with Vidaza for myelodysplastic syndrome and had a recent biopsy that demonstrated a transformation to acute myeloid leukemia?

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

This case should be accessioned as a single primary, acute myeloid leukemia [9861/3].

MDS diagnosed prior to 1/1/2001 is not a reportable disease process. However, because MDS is currently a reportable disease process, it must be considered when trying to determine whether the AML represents a separate primary.

  • If the Heme DB indicates MDS and AML represent different (separate) disease processes, only one primary is reported (i.e., AML) because the 1999 diagnosed MDS is not reportable.
  • If the Heme DB indicates MDS and AML represent the same disease process, then no primaries are reported because MDS was not reportable in 1999.

Rule M2 does not apply to this case because more than one histology is mentioned in the scenario. According to the Heme DB, MDS can transform to AML. Rules M8-M13 apply to cases involving transformation. In this case, Rule M10 applies because the patient was diagnosed with a chronic neoplasm (myelodysplastic syndrome) followed greater than 21 days later by an acute neoplasm (AML).

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
20130088 Grade--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Should Grade be coded to 5 [T-cell] or 9 [cell type not determined, not stated, not applicable] for anaplastic large cell lymphoma, NOS [9714/3]? See Discussion.

Under the Grade section in the Heme DB for anaplastic large cell lymphoma, NOS it indicates the following:

"Grade - Code grade specified by pathologist. If no grade specified, code 9."

There is no reference in the Grade section that we should look at the Abstractor Notes or a specific Module in the Heme DB for additional information. However, in the Abstractor Notes section it states, "Grade is T-cell (5) unless pathologist specifically designates as a B-cell (see G2 rule)." These two statements are conflicting. Which is the correct grade?

Assign code 5 [T-cell] for anaplastic large cell lymphoma [9714/3] unless the pathologist specifies that the histology is a B-cell disease process. See Grade rule G2, Note 2.

In the Heme DB, there is a default value in the Grade field for histologies that do not have a grade specified. However, this particular histology does not default to code 9. There was an error in the Grade section of the 2010 and 2012 versions of Heme DB that has now been corrected in the latest release.

2013
20130206 Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: What rule applies to code a primary site for a peripheral blood diagnosis of marginal zone lymphoma that has a positive flow cytometry/FISH analysis when no biopsies are performed, scans show no evidence of disease, exam indicates no lymph nodes are palpable and the physician's clinical diagnosis "marginal zone lymphoma, unspecified site, stage 1"? See Discussion.

PE: No palpable lymph nodes.

PET scan: No spleen or lymph node uptake; no uptake anywhere in the body.

Peripheral blood and flow cytometry/FISH analysis diagnosis: Marginal zone lymphoma.

No bone marrow or biopsy of any lymph nodes done. Doctor states "marginal zone lymphoma, unspecified site, stage 1."

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

Per Rule PH27, code the primary site to C809 [unknown primary]. According to Rule PH27 one is to code the primary site to unknown primary site C809 when there is no evidence of lymphoma in lymph nodes AND the physician documents in the medical record that he/she suspects that the lymphoma originates in an organ(s) OR multiple organ involvement without any nodal involvement.

If further workup is done and a primary site is determined, update the primary site for this case.

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
20130097 Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Are either heparin-induced thrombocytopenia or heparin-induced thrombocytopenia that becomes refractory thrombocytopenia reportable?

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

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is not reportable.

If the diagnosis is changed to refractory thrombocytopenia, then this case is reportable.

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
20130086 Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned when a patient is diagnosed in 2008 with chronic myeloid leukemia, chronic phase and is subsequently diagnosed with both accelerated phase (2010) and blast crisis of CML (2012)? See Discussion.

Patient diagnosed in 1/2008 with CML, Chronic phase and had a complete remission following treatment.

In 3/2010 the patient was diagnosed with CML, Accelerated phase and again had a complete remission following treatment.

In 02/2012 the patient was diagnosed with CML, Blast crisis.

How do chronic and acute neoplasms (Rules M8 - M13) relate to histologies that are stated to have Chronic, Accelerated and Blast phases per the Heme DB? These histologies don't change, does this mean Rules M8 - M13 do not apply because there isn't a change in histology? How many primaries should be accessioned in this case?

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

This case is accessioned as a single primary, chronic myeloid leukemia, NOS [9863/3] diagnosed 01/2008 per Rule M2. The patient was diagnosed with CML, NOS [9863/3] in 2008 and again in 2010 and 2012. Abstract a single primary when there is a single histology.

CML, Chronic phase; CML, Accelerated phase; and CML, Blast phase (Blast crisis) are listed under the Alternate Names section for CML, NOS in the Heme DB.

Not all histologies have transformations. If a transformation is not listed in the Heme DB, Rules M8 - M13 do not apply.

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