Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20061107 | Histology (Pre-2007)/Flag--Pancreas: How is histology coded given that 8046 [non-small cell carcinoma] of the pancreas is not on the SEER Site/Type validation listing? | For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Assign 8046 [non-small cell carcinoma] for "non-small cell carcinoma" of the pancreas. If necessary, override any site/type edits.
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. |
2006 | |
|
|
20031092 | Histology (Pre-2007)/Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007)--Breast: How is the histology of invasive small cell carcinoma of lobular histogenesis coded? Could high grade ductal carcinoma in situ, comedo type be a recurrence of ductal carcinoma diagnosed 18 years earlier? Is "invasive small cell carcinoma of lobular histogenesis, high grade ductal carcinoma in situ, comedo type" one or two primaries? See Description. |
A patient was diagnosed in 1984 with 1st breast primary, histology was ductal carcinoma, T1N0, LIQ left breast. In 2002 a mass was found on mammogram, MRM with axillary sampling performed. Histology was invasive small cell carcinoma of lobular histogenesis, high grade ductal carcinoma in situ, comedo type, nuclear grade 3/3, T2N1, UOQ left breast. Is the ductal carcinoma in situ recurrent disease from the 1st primary? Does it go with the lobular histogenesis, i.e., lobular carcinoma and DCIS histology code 8522/3 or is the ductal in situ a 3rd primary? | For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
According to our pathologist consultant: Invasive small cell carcinoma of lobular histogenesis appears to be an unusual histology for a breast primary. Code it as such 8041 [Small cell carcinoma, NOS]. The 2002 lesion is most likely a new primary since the previous lesion was 18 years ago, in a different quadrant, and invasive. A comedo DCIS would probably not be asymtomatic for 18 years; an unlikely "recurrence" of an earlier ducal carcinoma. Code "invasive small cell carcinoma of lobular histogenesis, high grade ductal carcinoma in situ, comedo type" as two primaries. Code the small cell as a separate primary (8041/3), and the DCIS separately (8501/2).
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. |
2003 |
|
|
20031170 | Terminology, NOS/Recurrence/Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007): Is the term "residual disease" equivalent to "recurrence"? See Description. | Example 1. Patient underwent excision and re-excision of lentigo maligna in 1998. Final path showed close but negative margins. In 1999 a biopsy of a brown patch (over the scar) in the same location was done. Pathology reported residual lentigo maligna. Is the 1999 melanoma a new primary because it was diagnosed more than two months after the first melanoma and there is no mention of recurrence? Or is the term "residual" another way of saying recurrence? Example 2. In 1999, patient underwent excisonal biopsy of intraductal carcinoma of the right breast, followed by radiation therapy. In 2000, mammogram showed calcifications in right breast. Biopsy was done with path showing residual ductal carcinoma in situ. There is no mention of recurrence. Is this one or two primaries? |
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
According to our pathologist consultant, "residual" disease indicates incomplete eradication of the original disease process. Residual means that the disease process was not completely removed/eradicated in the initial therapy. Therefore cells from the original primary were never completely removed or destroyed. In each example above, this is not a recurrence per se but rather progression of disease. Do not abstract the latter diagnosis as a new primary.
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. |
2003 |
|
|
20041037 | Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007)/Histology (Pre-2007)/Grade, Differentiation--Thyroid: How many primaries, with what histologies should be coded when a thyroidectomy reveals "anaplastic carcinoma" and "papillary carcinoma" occurring as two separate tumors? See Discussion. | Example: Thyroidectomy revealed anaplastic carcinoma of the thyroid with mets to lymph nodes. The path report stated that the thyroid specimen also contained a small papillary carcinoma. Differentiation for the papillary carcinoma was not stated. | For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Accession and code as two thyroid primaries: Anaplastic carcinoma [8021/34] Papillary carcinoma [8260/39]
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 |
|
|
20041042 | Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007)/Histology (Pre-2007)--Kidney: How many primaries, with what histology(ies) should be coded when nephrectomy pathology specimen shows separate tumors of "renal cell carcinoma [clear cell type]" and "renal cell carcinoma [granular cell type]"? | For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Abstract two primaries. This is an example of two tumors with different histologic types in the same site. The right kidney has two separate tumors.
8310/3 [renal cell carcinoma (clear cell type)] 8320/3 [renal cell carcinoma (granular cell type)]
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 | |
|
|
20061072 | Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007)/Histology (Pre-2007)--Brain and CNS: How many primaries should be abstracted and should the histology field(s) be coded to 9530/1 [Meningiomatosis, NOS] or 9530/0 [Meningioma, NOS] to represent a case that presents with MRI confirmed multiple meningiomas (e.g., left dura, right parasagittal region, and left frontal lobe)? | For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Abstract this case as two primaries, right and left cerebral meninges. Code the histology for both primaries to 9530/0 [Meningioma, NOS]. Use code 9530/1 [Meningiomatosis, NOS] only when the diagnosis is stated to be meningiomatosis, or multiple meningiomas.
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. |
2006 | |
|
|
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 | |
|
|
20031094 | Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007)/Histology (Pre-2007)--Breast: How many primaries are coded and what code(s) is/are used to represent the histology "invasive ductal carcinoma with extensive spindle metaplastic change [metaplastic carcinoma] with a second, separate, tumor "invasive ductal carcinoma, moderately differentiated with extensive associated DCIS"? See Description. | The comment on the pathology report states, "due to the associated DCIS this smaller lesion is felt to most likely represent a synchronous second primary." Is this two primaries, one coded 8575/33 and the other coded 8500/32 or is this a single primary with a combination code -- 8523/33? | For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Abstract as two breast primaries. Code to 8575/33 (metaplastic carcinoma) and 8500/32 (infiltrating duct carcinoma). There are two lesions with different histologic types. Do not use code 8523 to combine separate tumors with different histologies.
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. |
2003 |
|
|
20010096 | Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007)--Bladder: Should an invasive malignancy following an in situ malignancy by more than two months be a new primary? Why? See discussion. |
Example: An in situ bladder case was diagnosed and treated. Three months later another TURB diagnosed an invasive bladder carcinoma. Is the invasive case reportable to SEER as a new primary? |
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007: Yes. These are two primaries. In situ cancers are not included in SEER incidence rates. Incidence rates must correlate with mortality rates. 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. |
2001 |
|
|
20020020 | Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007)--Breast: When two breast tumors with two different histologies, such as duct and mucinous are diagnosed in the same breast at the same time, are they reportable as two primaries? See discussion. |
Our rule is that multiple lesions of different histologic types are separate primaries. However, for separate tumors of duct and lobular, we report as a single primary. Since we now have a combination code for duct and other types of ca, do we report as a single primary or continue to report as separate primaries? |
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007: When there are two breast tumors, one mucinous, the other duct carcinoma, report as two primaries when the pathologist's opinion clearly states that there are separate primaries. If there is no such information from the pathologist, the two tumors must be separate with clear (negative) margins to be reported as two primaries. Otherwise, report as one primary. The ICD-O-3 combination codes are not intended to combine tumors of different histologic types. 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. |
2002 |
An official website of the United States government
