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: 12/23/2025 23:07 PM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20041089

Reportablility--Breast: Is lobular neoplasia, grade 2 reportable? See Discussion.

Path report reads: Lobular neoplasia, grade 2.

According to the AFIP nomenclature for DCIS (taken from the WHO terminology), this would be the equivalent of LCIS. But nowhere can I find this specifically applies to lobular in the same way that ductal neoplasia is treated.

According to the editors of ICD-O-3, lobular neoplasia grade 2 is not equivalent to LCIS. It is not a reportable term. Lobular neoplasia and lobular intraepithelial neoplasia are equivalent terms having a three grade system. Only LN/LIN grade 3 would be reportable since those terms are analogous to ductal intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3.

2004
20041093 Reportability: When a biopsy is suspicious for cancer and re-biopsy is negative, is reportability based on the clinician's judgement (cancer vs NED)? If the re-biopsy was done because the first biopsy was inconclusive, do not report this case. If the re-biopsy was more complete, or performed in an attempt to gain a wider margin, this case is reportable based on the first biopsy. 2004
20041046

CS Tumor Size--Breast: When the diagnosis is inflammatory carcinoma of the breast, must the CS tumor size always be 998? See Discussion.

I have no specific example of a situation; I am writing an edit check and wondering if there would be any exceptions to this rule.

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.No. For inflammatory carcinoma, code the size of the tumor in CS tumor size. Use code 998 [diffuse] when the tumor is stated to be "diffuse."

Page 27 in Part I of the CS manual will be corrected to define code 998 for breast as only "diffuse." The errata should be distributed in July 2004.

 2004
20041082 Date of Diagnosis: When a 4/04 clinical impression indicates the appearance of a carcinoma that is contradicted by a negative 4/04 biopsy but is confirmed by a 5/04 resection, should the diagnosis date be coded to April or May? See Discussion.

4/04 colonscopy: irregular fungating mass that has appearance of carcinoma. 4/04 Bx: high grade dysplasia. 5/04: LAR. 5/04 Path: 3.2 X 2.5 cm mass wd adenoca with invasion of muscularis propria.

Should the diagnosis date be 4/04 based on the clinical impression during the colonoscopy OR 5/04 since the path for the bx was negative?

 The date of diagnosis for the example above is 05/04 -- the date of the pathology report confirming malignacy. The biopsy in 04/04 negated the 04/04 clinical statement. 2004
20041009 Diagnostic Confirmation--Lymphoma: Can lymphoma be diagnosed clinically? See Description.

Example 1: Patient with B symptoms. Physical exam reveals large neck mass. Physician impression is lymphoma.

Example 2: CT scans show lymphadenopathy consistent with lymphoma.

In both cases, patient does not return for biopsies.

Yes, lymphoma can be accessioned based on a clinical diagnosis.

Code Diagnostic Confirmation in Example 1 as 8 [Clinical diagnosis only].

Code Diagnostic Confirmation in Example 2 as 7 [Radiography and other imaging techniques without microscopic confirmation].

 2004
20041047 Multiple primaries (Pre-2007)/EOD-Extension--Fallopian Tube: How many primaries are coded when endometrioid adenocarcinoma involves bilateral fallopian tubes? See Discussion. The pathologist states "because of the intimate association with the luminal line of the fallopian tube it is felt that this represents synchronous primaries rather than mets." The SEER Code Manual only lists ovary, retinoblastomas, and Wilms Tumors under the bilateral code stated to be a single primary.

For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:

Complete two abstracts, one for left fallopian tube and one for right fallopian tube. This case has been determined to be two primaries by the pathologist. Bilateral involvement of paired sites (other than ovary, retinoblastoma and Wilms tumor) with the same histology within two months requires a determination of whether there are one or two primaries. The pathologist in the case above has made this determination.

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.

 2004
20041064 CS Tumor Size/CS Extension/CS TS/Ext-Eval--Breast: How do you code these fields when the tumor size and extension differ pre and post treatment with neoadjuvant Arimidex? See Discussion. Clinically on PE 3 cm mass attached to skin with dimpling and erythema overlying the mass. Ultrasound: 2-3 cm breast mass with overlying skin thickened by US evaluation, suggesting dermal invasion. Neoadjuvant Arimidex followed by MRM. Path: 4.5 cm ductal carcinoma (no DCIS), no invasion of skin.

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.Record the larger tumor size and the farthest extension documented.

Code CS Tumor Size/Extension Evaluation to 6 [Surgical resection performed, WITH pre-surgical systemic treatment...; tumor size/extension based on pathologic evidence].

Code CS Tumor Size for the example to 045 [4.5 cm].

Code CS Extension to 20 [Local skin involvement ...] based on clinical description provided.

 2004
20041063 Primary Site/Histology (Pre-2007)--Mediastinum: How do we code these fields for a case described as a "neuroendocrine carcinoma" of the "anterior mediastinum" without failing the SEER "impossible" site/histology combination edit? See Discussion. Two different facilities state that the patient has "neuroendocrine carcinoma of the anterior mediastinum." This coded combination failed SEER edit (SEERIF38). We can not correct it because that edit flag does not appear on our system. Both facilities indicate that the mediastinum is the primary. In addition, there is text to support both the histology and primary site codes.

For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:

The combination of C381 [anterior mediastinum] and 8246 [neuroendocrine carcinoma] will be removed from the list of "impossible" site/histology combinations. There are rare cases of neuroendocrine carcinoma of the anterior mediastinum. As illustrated in the discussion, verify that the primary site is anterior mediastinum, the histology is neuroendocrine ca, and document those findings in the text.

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.

 2004
20041011 EOD-Clinical Extension--Prostate: Should this field be coded to 15 [Tumor identified by needle biopsy for elevated PSA] or 30 [Localized, NOS] when the only information is from a biopsy positive pathology report that includes the clinical history of "PSA elevated, DRE negative," with no mention of an ultrasound being performed?

For cases diagnosed 1998-2003: For this scenario, assign code 15 if an ultrasound was not performed, performed and negative, or when it is unknown whether or not an ultrasound was performed. Assign code 30 only if an ultrasound was performed and there is no documentation stating that it was negative or positive.

Please refer to the Prostate EOD Coding Guidelines for all of the instructions pertaining to the coding of prostate EOD.

 2004
20041001

Histology (Pre-2007)--Pancreas: Should pancreatic neoplasia III (PanIN III) be coded to 8010/2 [carcinoma in situ, NOS] or 8500/2 [Ductal carcinoma in situ]? See Description.

There is no specific morphology code for PanIN-III in the ICD-O-3. In the chapter for exocrine pancreas found in the sixth edition of AJCC cancer staging manual, pg 160, reference is made to PanIN-III and its inclusion with carcinoma in situ.

For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:

Code PanIN-III (pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia III) as 8500/2 [Ductal carcinoma in situ, includes DIN 3: Ductal intraepithelial neoplasia 3]. PanIN-III is a synonym for carcinoma in situ according to the WHO classification of Tumors and the College of American Pathologists' Protocol for exocrine pancreas. Do not code PanIN-I or PanIN-II as cancer.

For tumors diagnosed 2007 or later, see SINQ 20110081 and 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.

2004