Seq no-central--Brain and CNS: How should subsequent tumors be sequenced when the patient has a history of a brain tumor, with no information on the behavior of the brain tumor? According to the sequencing rules, it appears some assumption must be made regarding the behavior of the brain tumor.
Sequence the brain tumor in the 60-87 series when you do not know the behavior. If you have reason to believe the brain tumor was malignant, sequence it in the 00-59 series.
Race: How is race coded for a patient who self-reports as white? In the Family History portion of the genetics consult, it states the maternal family is of mixed European and Cherokee descent; the paternal side is of mixed German/mixed European descent. Is race coded as Race 1: 03-American Indian and Race 2: 01-White, or as 01-White according to self-report by the patient?
Self-reported information is the highest priority for coding race. That is because the race information for the U.S. population comes from census data and that information is self-reported. For national cancer statistics, in order for the numerator (cancer cases) and the denominator (population) to be comparable, use self-reported race information whenever it is available. We will add this clarification to the SEER manual.
EOD-Clinical Extension--Liver: How do the segments of the liver described by AJCC Manual correspond to the lobes of the liver described by the SEER EOD Manual? See Description.
CT described hepatocellular ca involvement of the liver with nodules identified in segments 5 and 7. Would EOD-extension be coded to 30 [multiple tumors (one lobe)]?
Segments 2, 3, and 4 correspond to the left lobe of the liver. Segments 5, 6, 7 and 8 correspond to the right lobe of the liver. Segment 1 is the caudate lobe, which has completely different drainage and vascularization, is separate from the larger right and left lobes.
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003: Since segments 5 and 7 are both in the right lobe, assign EOD-extension code 30 for the case above, unless there is mention of vascular invasion. Be sure to record the size of the largest primary tumor.
Tumor size and vascular invasion are the most important factors for AJCC 6th edition staging.
Primary site--Breast: how is subsite coded for a breast cancer when it is described as central portion between 1-3:00 or central portion at 12:00?
See the SEER coding guidelines for breast, https://seer.cancer.gov/manuals/2018/AppendixC/Coding_Guidelines_Breast_2018.pdf Generally, codes C502 - C505 are preferred over C501. C501 would be preferred over C508. Apply these general guidelines when there is no other way to determine the subsite using the available medical documentation.
Table 1, Primary Site codes, in the breast solid tumor rules also provide helpful information for coding site.
Primary site--Head & Neck: When there is invasive in one subsite and in situ in another, do you code the subsite with the invasive only? Would the correct site be C320, C328, or C329? See discussion.
LARYNGOSCOPY - ENDOLARYNGEAL EXAM WAS GROSSLY UNREMARKABLE EXCEPT THAT SHE APPEARS TO HAVE A T1A SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA OF THE RIGHT TRUE VOCAL FOLD. IT EXTENDS FROM ALMOST THE ANTERIOR COMMISSURE ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE VOCAL PROCESS AND IS EXOPHYTIC IN NATURE. IT DOES NOT EXTEND INTO THE VENTRICLE OR ONTO THE FALSE VOCAL FOLD. NO SUBGLOTTIC EXTENSION IS SEEN. A. RIGHT POSTERIOR FALSE VOCAL CORD FOLD, BIOPSY: SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA IN SITU. B. RIGHT POSTERIOR TRUE VOCAL CORD FOLD, BIOPSY: SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA, SUSPICIOUS FOR INVASION. C. RIGHT MID TRUE VOCAL CORD, BIOPSY: SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA, SUSPICIOUS FOR INVASION. D. RIGHT ANTERIOR TRUE VOCAL FOLD, BIOPSY: INVASIVE AND IN SITU SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA, MODERATELY DIFFERENTIATED.
Grade, Differentiation--Bladder: If the only indication of grade for a bladder primary is "grade 2, NOS," and we do not know the grading system being used by the pathologist, is the numeric grade 2 coded?
See the General Coding Rules on page 92 of the 2004 SEER Manual for instructions about coding grade.
If the only information available is "Grade 2," assign code 2 [Grade II].
Grade--Appendix: What is the code and term to use for the grade/differentiation field for well differentiated, Grade 2 neuroendocrine tumor (NET)? See Discussion.
Diagnosis: Fragmented appendix with: Goblet cell carcinoid tumor (typical goblet cell carcinoid): WELL DIFFERENTIATED neuroendocrine tumor; INTERMEDIATE GRADE (GRADE 2 NET). Size 3.5 cm according to surgical pathology report. Tumor infiltrates through appendiceal wall to subserosa. Tumor is present in what appears to be the wall of the appendix near the perforation site or in hemorrhagic tissue on the surface of the appendix. MAXIMUM MITOTIC RATE IS TWO (2) FIGURES PER 10 HIGH POWER fields (2/10hpf). (4/10 hpf according to report).
WD indicates a 3- grade system (code 1 for WD) Intermediate grade indicates a 3- grade system (code grade 3 for intermediate grade), Grade 2 indicates a 2- grade system (code 2 for grade 2). Please advise.
See SINQ 20160023 for NET grade coding instructions. Coding grade for NETs is slightly different from coding grade for other solid tumors.
Since this diagnosis includes "Well differentiated" and "Grade 2," assign grade code 2, the higher grade. According to our expert pathologist consultant, "intermediate" fits best with grade 2.
Primary Site--Unknown & Ill-defined Site: What is the primary site code for multiple malignant rhabdoid tumors (extra renal) in a newborn infant?
Search for additional information on the location of the primary in this case. A tissue specimen (biopsy) is required for a diagnosis of rhabdoid. Additionaly, there should be scans describing any tumors located in sites other than the biopsy site. If the biopsy site is not assumed to be a metastatic site and is the only location of tumor, code the site of the biopsy as the primary site.
If it is not possible to obtain further information for this case, code the primary site C809 [Unknown primary site].
According to our pathologist consultant, extra-renal rhabdoid tumors have been described in organ sites (liver, GI tract, thyroid, CNS, skin, to name a few) as well as in the soft tissue. Many of the organ site tumors are multiple/multifocal, so multiple tumors in one organ do not necessarily imply metastatic disease and therefore unknown primary site.
Reportability--Brain and CNS: Does a neurofibroma actually arise in peripheral nerve roots like a schwannoma even if it is referred to as a "C6-T1 intradural spinal cord tumor" and is therefore not reportable?
Schwannomas and neurofibromas of the peripheral nerves are not reportable. Schwannomas of the nerve root or spinal dura are reportable.
Reportability--Corpus uteri: Is smooth muscle tumor with uncertain malignant potential (STUMP) reportable? See Discussion.
Spindled cell lesion of smooth muscle origin (desmin and SMA are positive, CD34, S100, pancytokeratin, Pax8, MDM2 and CDK4 are negative). Many of the cells have hyperchromatic, bizarre-shaped nuclei. Mitotic activity is inconspicuous. There are no areas of necrosis. The overall findings in this biopsy is best classified as a "STUMP"; however, a leiomyosarcoma cannot be excluded.
STUMP (smooth muscle tumor of uncertain malignant potential) is not reportable. According to the WHO classification of uterine corpus tumors, the behavior code for STUMP is /1.
An official website of the United States government
Home