Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20051040 | Primary Site--Sarcoma: What is the correct topography code for a partial lung lobectomy with pathology diagnosis of "pulmonary sarcoma with smooth muscle differentiation"? See Discussion. | Operative report: palpable 2x2cm mass in the mediastinal surface of the rt middle lobe and the contiguous upper lobe together.
Path comment after partial lung lobectomy: In all likelihood this is a malignant process occurring in smooth muscle changes surrounding vessels within the lung versus an undifferentiated epithelial tumor.
ADDENDUM DX: low grade pulmonary sarcoma with smooth muscle differentiation.
Consultant's report concurs with that of the original pathologist's report of malignant neoplasm compatible with smooth muscle origin. |
This case is unique. Assign topography code C493 [Connective, subcutaneous and other soft tissue of thorax]. Based on the information provided, this sarcoma has smooth muscle differentiation and originated in the muscle. Code the primary site to muscle. | 2005 |
|
|
20051006 | Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007)/Histology (Pre-2007)--Thyroid: How is histology coded for the tumor(s) that exist when the thyroidectomy addendum diagnosis is "Morphologic and IHC evaluations reveal two tumors: papillary thyroid carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma." See Discussion. | The original final diagnosis after a thyroidectomy is "papillary carcinoma of the thyroid with an adjacent invasive squamous cell carcinoma, moderately differentiated." Per the additional addendum comment: "The findings can be interpreted in one of 2 different ways. Either there is a collision tumor of papillary thyroid and squamous cell carcinoma (with the squamous cell ca originating at a site other than the thyroid gland.) Or, less likely, there is a malignant squamous differentiation in the papillary thyroid carcinoma." A university hospital consultation report states the diagnosis as: "Spindle cell squamous cell carcinoma arising in association and from papillary carcinoma, predominantly tall cell variant..." Is this 2 thyroid primaries: 8344/3 [papillary carcinoma, tall cell] and 8074/3 [squamous cell carcinoma, spindle cell]? | For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Our pathologist consultant agrees with the consultant's diagnosis. Therefore, abstract this as one primary of the thyroid. Code the histology as 8344 [Papillary tall cell]. This is the most appropriate histology code available for this complex case.
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. |
2005 |
|
|
20051101 | CS Extension--Cervix: How are "positive pelvic washings" coded for a cervical primary? | 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 CS Steering Committee, positive pelvic washings for primary cervical cancer are not part of the staging criteria in the collaborative staging system (nor in TNM and FIGO). Document positive pelvic washings in a text field. The CS steering committee will add a statement to CS extension to clarify this for cervix uteri. |
2005 | |
|
|
20051002 | CS Tumor Size/CS Site Specific Factor 6--Breast: How are these fields coded for a tumor stated to have only in situ disease in the breast with bone metastasis identified on scan? See Discussion. | 4/20/04 Quadrantectomy: "Tumor involves a significant portion of the biopsy and is estimated at 10 cm in greatest dimension." The only other mention of size is from imaging studies which is 3.5 cm. The histology is "high grade ductal carcinoma with comedo necrosis. No invasive carcinoma identified." Bone scan on 4/20/04 shows "widespread metastatic disease to bone." By rule the behavior code for this case is changed to malignant. | 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 tumor size as 100 [10 cm]. Size from pathology or operative report is preferred over size from imaging.
Code SSF6 as 050 [Invasive and in situ components present, size of entire tumor coded in CS Tumor Size because size of invasive component not stated and proportions of in situ and invasive not known.]
There is invasive tumor present (as proven by the bone metastasis), but the size and proportion of the invasive component is unknown.
Please note: Extension must be coded at least to 10 [Confined to the breast tissue and fat including nipple and areola; Localized, NOS] in this case. Do not assign extension code 00 [in situ]. |
2005 |
|
|
20051058 | 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. |
2005 | |
|
|
20051048 | Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007)/Recurrence--Cervix: How many primaries should be abstracted if a patient had a diagnosis in 1998 of adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix treated with a total hysterectomy and a July 2004 vaginal mass biopsy with a diagnosis of invasive adenocarcinoma that is consistent with an endocervical primary? | For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Abstract the July 2004 diagnosis as a new endocervical primary. Abstract an invasive cancer in the same site more than two months after an in situ cancer as a new primary. Residual cervical tissue is present following a hysterectomy.
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. |
2005 | |
|
|
20051109 | CS Site Specific Factor/Terminology--Breast: Does the term "focal areas" of in situ carcinoma qualify as "minimal" in situ component when coding SSF6 field (assessment of the invasive and in situ components present) in the CS breast 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. Yes, the term "focal areas" of in situ carcinoma describes a minimal in situ component. |
2005 | |
|
|
20051120 | CS Eval--Colon: Should 1 [No surgical resection done...] or 3 [Surgical resection performed...] be used to correctly reflect this field when a surgical observation is "adherent to duodenum" but the extension per the pathology is stated to be to the "subserosal tissue"? See Discussion. | 7/2/04 Op Findings 5 cm mass in mid transverse colon involving also the right colon; mass was adherent to duodenum without obvious invasion. 7/2/04 Path: Rt & Transverse Colon: 6x5 cm mass, micro: MD Adenoca with invasion of subserosal tissue; margins neg. 17/17 colic LNs negative. | 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.For the case described above, code extension as 46 [Adherent to other organ...no microscopic tumor found in adhesion]. Code CS TS/Ext eval as 3 [Surgical resection performed...]. Surgery was performed for this case. The fact that the adherence to the duodenum was proven not to be tumor involvement should be coded as 3 in CS TS/Ext Eval. By using eval code 3, the case will map to a pathologic T indicating that the patient had resective surgery. Eval code 1 would map to a clinical T, incorrect for this case. |
2005 |
|
|
20051145 | 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. |
2005 |
|
|
20051044 | CS Reg LN Pos/Exam--Colon: For a patient with both a prostate and colon primary, if the pathology report indicates that 2 of the 3 regional lymph nodes to the colon are positive for a prostate malignancy, how should these fields be coded for the colon primary? | 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.For the colon primary, code Reg LN Pos 00 [all nodes negative]. Code Reg LN Exam 03 [three nodes examined]. Three lymph nodes were examined and found to be negative for metastatic colon cancer. |
2005 |
An official website of the United States government
