Reportability/AmbiguousTerminology: Because there is a caveat in the SEER PCM, 3rd edition to ignore adverbs such as "strongly" when assessing reportability, should a term such as "likely" cancerous be reportable given than the expression "most likely" cancerous is reportable?
"Likely cancerous" is NOT reportable.
The CoC, NPCR and SEER have agreed to a strict interpretation of the ambiguous terms list. Terms that do not appear on the list are not diagnostic of cancer.
CS Lymph Nodes/CS Site Specific Factor--Breast: When there are no lymph nodes removed and none palpable for an inflammatory breast cancer and the physician stages the case Nx, is the CS Lymph Node field code to 00 [None, no regional lymph nodes involved] or 99 [Unknown, not stated] and would SSF 4 and 5 be coded to 000 [Regional lymph nodes negative...] or 888 [Not applicable]?
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 CS Lymph Nodes 00 [clinically negative]. See note 3 for CS Lymph Nodes.
2004 SEER Manual Errata/Grade--Breast: Are the codes on page 94 of the SEER manual's Breast Grading Conversion Table requiring conversion of nuclear grades 1/3 and 1/2 to code 1, 2/3 to code 2, and 2/2 and 3/3 to code 3 correct or are the codes on page C-473 in the Three-Grade System (Nuclear Grade) for breast correct that requires conversion of the same examples to codes 2, 3, and 4 respectively?
On page C-473: Delete the section titled "Three-Grade System (Nuclear Grade)" and delete the table. Use the tables on pages 94 and C-472 to code grade for breast cancer. This correction will be made in the next errata.
CS Eval--All Sites: If any of the CS fields (TS/Extension, LN, or Mets) are based on the TNM and there is no text documenting the basis for the evaluation, are the evaluation fields coded to 0 instead of 1?
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.
Assign code 0 [No surgical resection done...based on physical exam...or other non-invasive clinical evidence] to the corresponding eval fields when CS Extension, Lymph Nodes or Mets at Diagnosis are coded based only on the TNM and no further information is available.
Chemotherapy/Radiation Therapy--Lymphoma: How is treatment coded when Rituxan is given in combination with the monoclonal antibody Zevalin conjugated to 90-Yttrium or the monoclonal antibody Bexxar conjugated to 131-Iodine in the treatment of NHL?
Code Rituxan as chemotherapy. Code 90-Yttrium as radioisotope. Code 131-Iodine as radioisotope when given with Rituxan as treatment for lymphoma.
Zevalin is a monoclonal antibody conjugated to Yttrium 90. Bexxar is a monoclonal antibody conjugated to Iodine 131. In both drugs, the monoclonal antibody is only the delivery agent for the radioisotope. Both drugs should be coded as radioisotopes. The one-two-three punch of Rituxan and zevalin followed by Rituxan and Bexxar should be coded as chemotherapy plus radioisotopes. Zevalin is also used by itself for people who have not responded to Rituxan.
Primary Site--Bladder: What subsite is used for fundus of the bladder?
As of November 2005, Code fundus of bladder to C678 [overlapping lesion of bladder]. Opinions vary regarding the definition of bladder "fundus." However, according to our pathologist consultant, fundus includes posterior, anterior and lateral walls and dome. Fundus does not include the trigone.
A correction to page C-595 of the 2004 SEER manual will be included in the next errata.
Primary Site/Histology (Pre-2007)--Rectum: How are rectal biopsies with the histology of "poorly differentiated carcinoma with mixed basaloid and squamous features" coded if, per the SEER site/histology validation table, the histology 8094/3 [basosquamous carcinoma] histology cannot be coded to the rectum for the primary site?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Code primary site C209 [rectum] and histology 8094/3 [basosquamous carcinoma]. As of 6/9/2003, this is no longer an impossible site/histology combination.
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.
Histology--Lymphoma: How is "histiomonocytic lymphoma" coded?
For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:Assign code 9755 [Histiocytic sarcoma; True histiocytic lymphoma]. "Histiomonocytic" is not standard terminology, according to our expert consultant. However, 9755 is the best code to assign.
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.
Priorities/CS Extension--Lung: In the absence of a physician TNM, is there a hierarchy associated with coding extension when multiple imaging studies demonstrate different degrees of extension? See Discussion.
CT of the lung showing primary lesion and other nodules in another lobe or contralateral lung, subpleural nodules, etc. The PET scan did not show activity for the other nodules. What is our "hierarchy" for imaging studies when there is no physician staging?
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.
There is no hierarchy among the various imaging studies. Assign CS extension based on the report documenting the greatest extension.
An official website of the United States government
Home