Grade, Differentiation: How is grade coded for cases using the FNCLCC (Federation Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre Ie Cancer) system? See Discussion.
Is FNCLCC a recognized system in the United States? Tongue was the primary site for the case we saw that used FNCLCC.
Do not code the data item Grade based on the FNCLCC grade. You may record the FNCLCC grade in a text field.
Primary Site: For malignant gastrointestinal tumors (GISTs), how should the primary site be coded and which Collaborative Stage and TNM staging schemes should be used for disease found in the stomach, small intestine or other locations?
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 primary site to the location where the GIST originated. If the primary site cannot be determined, assign code C809 [Unknown primary site].
GIST of gastrointestinal hollow viscera cannot be staged in TNM.
In Collaborative Staging, use the stomach scheme for GIST of the stomach. Use the small intestine scheme for GIST of the small intestine. For GIST of other primary sites, use the CS scheme for the specific site.
MP/H Rules--Breast: Is inflammatory breast cancer always one primary per lifetime? Or is a subsequent inflammatory breast cancer a second primary if diagnosed more than five years later?
For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, a diagnosis of inflammatory breast cancer more than five years after a previous diagnosis of inflammatory breast cancer is a separate (new) primary. See rule M5 in the Breast Multiple Primary Rules.
CS Extension/CS Mets at Dx--Wilm's Tumor: Is the fact that a Wilm's tumor case is bilateral captured in the CS Extension field or is the CS Mets at Dx field coded to 40?
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 laterality as bilateral, code the greatest extension from either side in CS extension.
Code CS Mets at diagnosis 00 [None] UNLESS true distant metastases were identified.
CS Site Specific Factor 6--Breast: Should we assume that the invasive portion of the tumor is being referred to when a pathologist provides only a single tumor size but includes both invasive and in situ descriptors when discussing the size of that tumor? See Discussion.
There seems to be subtle variations in wording and punctuation in these cases. Would these three examples be coded the same way?
Examples:
"invasive ductal carcinoma 2.0 cm, DCIS present"
"2 cm invasive ductal carcinoma with DCIS present"
"invasive ductal carcinoma 2.0 cm. DCIS present"
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 SSF6 050 [invasive and insitu components present, entire size coded in CS TS, size of invasive not stated, proportion invasive and insitu not known] when the size of the invasive portion is not provided and clarification is not available.
If possible, obtain clarification from the pathologist for phrases like these and document in a text field. For example, a pathologist may confirm that when he/she states "invasive ductal carcinoma 2.0 cm, DCIS present" the size of the invasive portion is 2 cm. If so, code CS tumor size 020 and SSF6 020 and explain in a text field.
Histology--Head & Neck: How do you code histology for a myofibroblastic sarcoma of the soft tissue of the head and neck?
Assign code 8825/3 [Myofibroblastoma, malignant]. According to the WHO Classification of Soft Tissue Tumors, "Low grade myofibroblastic sarcoma represents a distinct atypical myofibroblastic tumor often with fibromatosis-like features and predilection for the head and neck." Also called myofibrosarcoma.
MP/H Rules--Brain and CNS: Are stigmata of neurofibromatosis in the brain reportable neurofibromatosis lesions? See Discussion.
Reference: SINQ 20051108; SINQ 20061018 Three year old patient with history of neurofibromatosis 1. 3/05 MRI of the brain showed right optic nerve glioma. It also showed heterogeneous high t2 signal in the middle cerebellar peduncles and near the genu of the internal capsules bilaterally are stigmata of neurofibromatosis type I. 3/08 MRI showed new mass suspicious for glioma in the hypothalamus. Clinical diagnosis is benign glioma secondary to diagnosis of neurofibromatosis. How many primaries are to be accessioned for this patient? Should the matrix principle be invoked for the second glioma? Should the behavior code for the glioma be 0?
For cases diagnosed 2007 through 2017
Accession NF (9540/1) when there is CNS tumor -- a glioma or some other intracranial/intraspinal tumor. Stigmata of NF are reportable when the stigmata themselves are reportable tumors. For example, glioma, or another intracranial/intraspinal tumor. Do not report sitgmata that are only termed "stigmata seen on MRI," for example, without other reportable terminology.
Do NOT accession NF (9540/1) when there is only peripheral nerve/nervous system involvement.
Accession the neurofibromatosis itself only once per patient. Accession any initial neoplasm in the CNS separately. Abstract and code any subsequent CNS neoplasms according to the multiple primary brain rules.
Accession three primaries for the case described above.
Neurofibromatosis (C729 9540/1)
Optic nerve glioma (C723 9421/3)--> see below.
Hypothalamus glioma (C710 9380/0)
--> Optic nerve gliomas associated with NF are pilocytic astrocytomas. Code pilocytic astrocytoma as 9421/3 in North America.
For cases diagnosed 2018 or later
See the 2018 Solid Tumor Rules for Non-Malignant CNS tumors.
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.
Ambiguous terminology: Is the phrase "malignancy is highly considered" reportable given that the phrase "considered to be malignant" is reportable per SINQ 20061094?
"Malignancy is highly considered" is not a reportable ambiguous term.
Diagnoses qualified by the phrase "considered to be malignant" are reportable because this phrase is interpreted as "This diagnosis is malignant."
An official website of the United States government
Home