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: 01/03/2026 10:45 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20130147 Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: What the primary site for a diagnosis of Langerhans cell histiocytosis with multifocal multisystem involvement of the skin, chest, CNS and thyroid, but no evidence of involvement on a bone scan?

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

Code the primary site to C809 [unknown].

Langerhans Cell Histiocytosis (LCH) includes three major groups:

  • Unifocal: Slowly progressing disease, involves one organ.

  • Multifocal unisystem: Involves several organs in one system.

  • Multifocal multisystem: Involves several organs in two or more systems.

    • When the disease is both multifocal and multisystem, code the primary site to unknown [C809] because there is no way to identify the origin of the neoplasm in this situation.

    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
    		20130093 MP/H Rules/Histology--Lung: What histology code is used for an adenocarcinoma in situ/bronchioloalveolar carcinoma (BAC) of the lung? See Discussion.

    Classification of lung malignancies has undergone a change. The bronchioloalveolar carcinoma histology is being replaced by adenocarcinoma in situ and minimally invasive adenocarcinoma, using an evaluation of lepidic growth pattern in the tumor.

    The final diagnosis is "adenocarcinoma in situ/BAC" and the comment states, "The findings in the current biopsy are most compatible with low grade malignant lesions which, in this sample, shows features of adenocarcinoma in situ (former bronchioloalveolar adenocarcinoma), given the proliferation of pneumocytes is limited to the alveolar lining with no evidence of invasion. However, classification of the lesion depends, per reference guidelines (Travis et al. J THOR ONCOL 2011 6,(2):244-275), on its size and its overall histologic features, to rule out the presence of an invasive component and therefore can only be performed upon examination of it in its entirety, upon resection." The radiation oncologist staged this T1N0M0, stage 1 BAC.

    Code the histology to 8140/2 [adenocarcinoma in situ, NOS].

    The comment for this case is consistent with information from the CAP protocol, which says, "The diagnosis of bronchioloalveolar carcinoma requires exclusion of stromal, vascular, and pleural invasiona requirement that demands the tumor be evaluated histologically in its entirety. It is therefore recommended that a definitive diagnosis of bronchioloalveolar adenocarcinoma not be made on specimens in which the tumor is incompletely represented."

    This tumor was not completely resected. Therefore, code to adenocarcinoma in situ based on the information provided.

    		2013
    		20130170

    MP/H Rules/Histology--Breast: What is the histology code for "invasive carcinoma of the breast, no special type" as the final diagnosis on a pathology report? See Discussion.

    Recently pathology reports for breast primaries are no longer listing invasive ductal carcinoma as the histology on many cases if the treating physician calls the cancer an invasive ductal carcinoma. The pathology report (final diagnosis and synopsis) state this is invasive carcinoma, no special type.

    Upon inquiry to the pathology department, the response received stated, In 2012, the WHO got rid of ductal carcinoma as a specific type. So what would have been called Invasive ductal carcinoma, Not Otherwise Specified (NOS), is now being called Invasive carcinoma, No Special Type (NST). In the new WHO classification, lobular, tubular, cribriform, mucinous, etc. are the special types. But ductal is gone.

    Is this a change in terminology? Should these cases be coded as 8500/3 [ductal carcinoma, NOS] or 8010/3 [carcinoma, NOS]?

    Code the histology to ductal carcinoma, NOS [8500/3] for a pathology report with a final diagnosis of "invasive carcinoma, no special type." Do not code the histology to carcinoma, NOS [8010/3].

    The 4th Edition of the WHO Classification of Tumors of the Breast refers to invasive ductal carcinoma as invasive carcinoma, no special type. The ICD-O-3 code remains the same as invasive duct carcinoma [8500/3]. The next revision to the MP/H Solid Tumor Rules will clarify this issue.

    		2013
    		20130189

    Reportability--Brain and CNS: Are the terms 'mass' and 'lesion' reportable terms for accessioning brain and CNS primaries? See Discussion.

    With respect to reportability, the SEER Manual mentions 'tumor' and 'neoplasm,' but not 'mass' or 'lesion.' The SEER MP/H Manual states tumor, mass, lesion and neoplasm are equivalent terms for determining multiple primaries, but does this apply to reportability? If not, what is the distinction?

    'Mass' and 'lesion' are not reportable terms for benign/borderline brain and CNS tumors.

    Reportable terms for benign/borderline brain and CNS primaries are 'tumor' and 'neoplasm.' These terms appear in the ICD-O-3. 'Lesion' and 'mass' do not appear in the ICD-O-3. Do not use the MP/H Manual to determine reportability; page 2 of the SEER Manual is the correct source for reportability instructions.

    		 2013
    		20130200 Primary Site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: What is the primary site for a diffuse large B-cell lymphoma involving the testicles, stomach, rectum and bone marrow, when no lymph nodes are involved?

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

    Per PH27, code the primary site to C809 [unknown]. Rule PH27 states one is to code the primary site to unknown [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 there is multiple organ involvement without any nodal involvement.

    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
    		20130080 Primary site/Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How are the primary site and histology coded when a right neck mass and spinal mass both show B-cell lymphoma, favor Burkitt lymphoma? See Discussion.

    2/5/11 Right neck swelling. Biopsy of mass B-cell lymphoma, favor Burkitt lymphoma.

    7/5/11 Hemi-laminectomy, L2-L5 spinal mass: Malignant lymphoma, B-cell phenotype, favor Burkitt lymphoma.

    Should the primary site be C779? Is the correct histology Burkitt lymphoma [9687/3] or malignant lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell [9680/3]?

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

    Code the primary site to C779 [lymph nodes] per Rule PH22 and the histology to 9591/3 [B-cell lymphoma, NOS].

    Code the primary site to C779 [lymph nodes, NOS] when lymphoma is present in an organ and lymph nodes that are not regional for that organ and the origin cannot be determined even after consulting the physician. The patient has involvement of a lumbar spine mass and cervical lymph nodes. Cervical lymph nodes are not regional to the lumbar area of the spine.

    Do not use ambiguous terminology to code histology for hematopoietic neoplasms. "Favor" is ambiguous terminology. Therefore, the histology must be coded to B-cell lymphoma and not to diagnosis which is "favored" (Burkitt lymphoma). Remember that ambiguous terminology is only used to determine case reportability, not to code histology for hematopoietic 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
    		20130182 Primary site--Head and Neck: How is primary site coded if a floor of mouth biopsy reveals microinvasive squamous cell carcinoma but the definitive resection of the tongue and floor of mouth unifocal lesion reveals only in situ squamous cell cancer? See Discussion.

    Patient with overlapping lesion of tongue and floor of mouth. Initial biopsy of floor of mouth reveals microinvasive squamous cell cancer. Definitive resection reveals in situ squamous cell cancer. Pathology report states unifocal tumor. The tumor site on pathology report is documented as involving the tongue and floor of mouth.

    Should the primary site be coded to floor of mouth because it is the site of invasive disease? Or is primary site C148 [overlapping sites of lip, oral cavity and pharynx] because invasion should not be used to determine primary site?

    		Code the primary site to C068 [overlapping lesion of other and unspecified parts of the mouth]. Based on the information provided, this is a tumor described as a "book-leaf" lesion a lesion that overlaps the floor of the mouth and the underside of the tongue. 2013
    		20130033

    Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is the histology coded for a low grade B-cell lymphoma with plasmacytic differentiation?

    This answer has been corrected. Previous answer is shown below under "History."

    Assign 9591/3 for this case.

    See also SINQ 20190070.

    		 2013
    		20130140 Reportability/Ambiguous terminology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is a peripheral blood sample with an immunophenotype that is "characteristic of B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia" reportable?

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

    This is a reportable diagnosis of chronic lymphocytic leukemia [9823/3]. The physician is using the terms "characteristic of" in the same manner as he/she would use the terms "diagnostic of."

    This case fits with the usual diagnosis of CLL. The peripheral blood is diagnostic for leukemias. There was a specific leukemia noted, B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia. CLL (B-cell is the phenotype) is usually diagnosed incidentally by a peripheral smear because it is asymptomatic. However, we recommend looking for further work-up, such as a bone marrow biopsy.

    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
    		20130062 Date of diagnosis--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Should the diagnosis date be coded to the date of the flow cytometry on the peripheral blood or the date of the bone marrow biopsy for a diagnosis of chronic lymphocytic leukemia/low grade B-cell lymphoma? See Discussion. Is a flow cytometry on peripheral blood alone diagnostic of a hematopoietic malignancy (CLL)? If not, when the diagnosis is verified by a subsequent histologic diagnosis (bone marrow biopsy) would the diagnosis date be the date of the peripheral blood flow cytometry or the date of the bone marrow biopsy? The Class of Case depends on this diagnosis date.

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

    Code the diagnosis date to the date of the peripheral blood flow cytometry because this is a procedure used to diagnose CLL. Per both the Abstractor Notes and the Definitive Diagnostic Methods sections in the Heme DB, CLL is diagnosed by flow cytometry (immunophenotyping).

    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