Ambiguous terminology/Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is the histology coded if an FNA reveals high grade B-cell lymphoma, compatible with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, and the treating physician states this is diffuse large B-cell lymphoma? See Discussion.
Ambiguous Terminology/Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: What is the histology code if the final diagnosis is "non-Hodgkin lymphoma NOS," but after further genetic and immunohistochemistry studies were performed the pathology report diagnosis COMMENT section stated the immunohistochemistry findings were "compatible with follicular lymphoma"? See Discussion
Ambiguous terminology/Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Should a case be accessioned as MDS, NOS when a consult uses ambiguous terminology (e.g., probable MDS) to describe the disease process and the bone marrow does not confirm the consult diagnosis? See Discussion.
Ambiguous terminology/Reportability--Kidney: Is a case reportable if a biopsy diagnosis of "suggestive of oncocytoma, malignant neoplasm cannot be excluded" follows a CT scan that was read as "suspicious for carcinoma"? See Discussion.
Ambiguous Terminology/Reportability: How should the expressions "suspicious for but not diagnostic of" and "suspicious for the possibility of early invasive adenocarcinoma" be interpreted for reportability? Would the interpretation be different depending on the primary site?
Ambiguous Terminology: How is this field to be coded when there is a "conclusive term" exactly 60 days following the initial diagnosis? See Discussion.
Ambiguous terminology: Is the phrase "malignancy is highly considered" reportable given that the phrase "considered to be malignant" is reportable per SINQ 20061094?
Ambiguous Terminology: Should SEER's lists of ambiguous terminology be modified to reflect how pathologists and radiologists actually use these terms? See discussion.
An official website of the United States government
Home