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: 12/26/2025 00:29 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20130045 Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned if subsequent to a bone marrow biopsy diagnosis of acute myeloid leukemia there is an oncology consult note that indicates the pathology finding is suggestive of an underlying myelodysplastic syndrome? See Discussion

5/14/12 Bone marrow biopsy: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

5/21/12 Oncology consult: AML with 30-40% blasts and evidence of del(20q) and del(5q), is suggestive of an underlying myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). Hence the patient has secondary AML.

If these are two primaries, how are the diagnosis dates coded?

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 diagnosed on 5/14/12 as acute myeloid leukemia with myelodysplasia-related (e.g., del(5q)) changes [9895/3] per Rule M2. The patient was diagnosed with a single histology, acute myeloid leukemia with myelodysplasia-related changes per the submitted information.

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
20130058 Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is EBV-positive hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) reportable when diagnosed in a 5 year old child and resulted in death in less than two months?

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

Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) is not a reportable disease because it is not listed in the Heme DB.

Per our expert pathologist consultant, "HLH is a lymphocyte driven hemophagocytic syndrome which may be either genetically based or caused by over-activated lymphoid cells, often in response to a viral infection. It is an abnormal immune response and is not considered a malignant disease, and is, therefore, not reportable. It is not synonymous with EBV-positive T-cell lymphoproliferative disease of childhood (9724/3)."

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
20130201 Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are reported for a patient with a 6/5/12 RUL biopsy that is positive for MALT lymphoma and a 6/7/12 cervical lymph node biopsy that is positive for follicular lymphoma?

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

Per Rule M15, abstract two primaries for this case. According to M15, use the Heme DB Multiple Primaries Calculator to determine the number of primaries for all cases that do not meet the criteria of M1-M14. The result is two primaries, MALT lymphoma [9699/3] and follicular cell lymphoma [9690/3].

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
20130067 Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is histology coded for a pathology report final diagnosis of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (50%) and follicular lymphoma, 3A (50%)?

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

Code the histology to diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [9680/3] per Rule PH11.

Code the histology to 9680/3 [diffuse large B-cell lymphoma] when DLBCL and any other non-Hodgkin lymphoma (follicular lymphoma, grade 3 in this case) are present in the same anatomic location. DLBCL is coded because it is the more aggressive histology.

NOTE: This answer assumes these two histologies are present simultaneously in the same anatomic location. Per Rule M4, this is a single primary.

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
20130183

Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is a peripheral blood finding consistent with involvement by monoclonal, lambda-restricted mature B cell population with co-expression of CD5 and CD23 reportable if, immunophenotypically, the case is consistent with a chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma? See Discussion.

Peripheral blood: Final diagnosis: Leukocytosis absolute lymphocytosis monoclonal, lambda restricted B-cell population w/co-expression of CD5 and CD23 absolute increase in CD4=helper T cells. See comment.

Comment: Peripheral blood findings are consistent with involvement by monoclonal, lambda-restricted mature B cell population with co-expression of CD5 and CD23, which is immunophenotypically consistent with a chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma immunophenotype. However, the absolute monoclonal population is only 3.02k/ul.

According to WHO criteria, in the absence of extramedullary tissue involvement, the monoclonal lymphocyte population must be greater than or equal to 5.0 k/ul. Therefore, in the absence of clinical evidence of extramedullary tissue involvement, the diagnosis is most consistent with a monoclonal B cell lymphocytosis. Review of initial analysis reveals well-defined groups of cells within lymphocyte, monocyte and granulocyte gates as defined by CD45 and sid-scatter characteristics (%'s are listed). Overall, peripheral blood findings are consistent with involvement by monoclonal, lambada-restricted B cell population with a chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma immunophenotype.

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

This case is reportable. Code histology to 9823/3 [CLL/SLL].

Ambiguous terminology is used to accession cases (determine reportability) because it has been used for over 30 years to do so. Any deviation from using ambiguous terminology to determine case reportability would cause the reporting of incidence counts to vary. In this case, there was a reportable, ambiguous terminology diagnosis on peripheral blood that is "consistent with" involvement by chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) immunophenotype.

The ambiguous terminology "consistent with" in the flow cytometry report is acceptable to determine reportability. Given that it is the only reportable histology mentioned in the scenario, it is also used to code histology. The instruction "Do not code histology based on ambiguous terminology" is intended to be used when there is a reportable NOS histology and reportable more specific histology stated in the diagnosis. Ambiguous terminology cannot be used to report the more specific diagnosis in cases of Heme & Lymphoid neoplasms.

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
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
20130047 Date of diagnosis--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: What is the diagnosis date for a patient with a mild thrombocytosis diagnosed in 2008, that was subsequently treated with Anagrelide in 11/2010 following an increase in platelet count, and later in 3/2011 was found to have positive JAK2 study physician refers to as essential thrombocythemia? See Discussion. In 2008, patient diagnosed with mild thrombocytosis. The patient opted to be followed clinically with observation. In November 2010, a CBC showed an increased platelet count to 600,000. Anagrelide was started. The patient would never agree to a bone marrow biopsy. However, in 3/2011 a JAK2 study was performed and read as positive. Following the positive Jak2 study, physician stated the diagnosis was essential thrombocytosis and started the patient on a different drug.

Code the diagnosis date to 3/2011. It wasn't until 3/2011 that the physician documented a reportable diagnosis of essential thrombocytosis [9962/3].

Mild thrombocytosis is not reportable. Therefore, the case was not reportable in 2008. Although the patient was treated in 2010, there was no documentation of a reportable diagnosis.

2013
20140064

Reportability--Testis: Is a mature teratoma of the testis reportable? See discussion.

Mature teratoma is listed as a benign neoplasm (9080/0) in the ICD-O-3. SINQ 20120085 references a NAACCR Webinar that indicated pure mature teratomas of the testis in adults are reportable. We are not aware of any further documentation of this change in reportability. When did mature teratomas of the testis for adults become reportable? What is the defined age range for "adult"? The original SINQ question above lists the 2012 SEER Manual as a Reference, however, no clarification or mention of this change in reportability was found in that manual.

For testis, mature teratoma in an adult (post-puberty) is reportable because it is malignant (9080/3); however, mature teratoma in a child is benign (9080/0). The 2011 NAACCR webinar introduced this concept and it was documented in the 2012 SINQ question. You may use 2011 or 2012 as the date of this change. The next edition of the SEER manual will include reportability examples.

2014
20140059

Primary site--Bladder: What is the primary site for bladder tumor biopsy: invasive adenocarcinoma, enteric type favor urachal origin, stage III

Based on the information provided, code the primary site to urachus (C677). Primary adenocarcinoma of the bladder accounts for less than 1% of all bladder malignancies. Of these, 20–39% are urachal in origin.

2014
20140002 Reportability--Appendix: Is a pathologic final diagnosis of an appendix with "well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor (carcinoid)" reportable? See discussion. SINQ 20130027 states that "well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor" of the appendix is reportable (8240/3) while "carcinoid" tumors of the appendix are not reportable (8240/1). Please explain the difference between "well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor" of the appendix and a "carcinoid" of the appendix.

Well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor of the appendix is reportable. The difference is terminology. "Carcinoid" is listed in ICD-O-3 as a /1 for appendix making it non-reportable.

When both terms are used, ask for clarification from the pathologist. Failing that, accept the reportable terminology and report the case.

 2014