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: 10/07/2026 02:01 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Cancer Site Category Data Item Category Year
20240021

Solid Tumor Rules/Reportability/Histology--Digestive Sites: Is a diagnosis of “high grade dysplasia” (not specified to be squamous or glandular) reportable for esophagus, stomach, and small intestine for cases diagnosed beginning in 2024? If so, how should histology be coded? See Discussion.

SEER Program Coding and Staging Manual indicates high grade dysplasia of esophagus, stomach, and small intestine are reportable. The ICD-O-3.2 does not include “high grade dysplasia” as equivalent to “high grade squamous dysplasia.”

If reportable, would high grade dysplasia (NOS) that originates in the stomach and small intestine default to 8148/2, while esophageal high grade dysplasia (NOS) default to 8077/2?

Report these high grade dysplasia of the following organs as stated below.

Stomach: Assign code 8148/2 glandular intraepithelial neoplasia, high grade using the Other Sites Solid Tumor Rules, Table 6: Stomach Histologies and as described in the WHO Classification of Digestive Tumors, 5th edition.

Small intestine and Esophagus: Assign code 8148/2 glandular intraepithelial neoplasia, high grade, using the Other Sites Solid Tumor Rules, Other Sites Histology Rules, Rule H4/H26. The following note is listed for both of these rules.

Note: This list may not include all reportable neoplasms for 8148/2. See SEER Program Coding and Staging Manual or STORE manual for reportable neoplasms

The Other Sites Solid Tumor Rules, Table 5: Esophagus Histologies and Table 7: Small Intestine and Ampulla of Vater Histologies will be updated to reflect this code as time permits.

 Esophagus, Small intestine Histology 2024
20000844 EOD-Pathologic Review of Number of Regional Lymph Nodes Positive and Examined--Colon: What codes are used to represent these fields when the pathology from a colon cancer resection describes 2/16 positive pericolonic lymph nodes and a "metastatic nodule in the pericolonic fat"?

For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:

Code the Number of Regional Lymph Nodes Positive field to 03 and the Number of Regional Lymph Nodes Examined field to 17. Each grossly detectable nodule in the pericolonic fat is counted as one regional lymph node.

 Colon, Lymph nodes N/A 2000
20020018 EOD-Lymph Nodes/EOD-Pathologic Review of Number of Regional Lymph Nodes Positive and Examined--Cervix: What codes are used to represent these fields for a cervix primary when the only information on lymph nodes is a CT of the pelvis showing "pelvic adenopathy" (no surgery was done)? Code the EOD-Lymph Nodes field to 9 [unknown]. Code the Pathologic Review of Number of Regional Lymph Nodes Positive field to 98 [No nodes examined] and the Lymph Nodes Examined to 00 [No nodes examined] because there was no resection of the primary organs. Adenopathy, NOS, per SEER guidelines, is not coded as lymph node involvement Cervix Uteri, Lymph nodes N/A 2002
20230078

Primary Site/Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms--CLL/SLL: Should the primary site be coded C421 (bone marrow) for a diagnosis of chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) when the managing physician provides a Rai stage? See Discussion.

The patient has adenopathy and a lymph node biopsy proved CLL/SLL. The patient underwent a peripheral blood smear, but the final diagnosis only indicated there is an abnormal CLL panel, positive for monoallelic or biallelic deletion of 13q. The pathologist noted a CLL related clone was detected, but there was no definitive diagnosis of CLL on the peripheral blood. No bone marrow biopsy was performed. However, the managing physician noted this was Rai Stage I CLL/SLL with adenopathy in the neck.

The SSDI Manual notes, “Rai stage is only applicable for CLL, in which the bone marrow and/or peripheral blood are involved (primary site C421 for bone marrow, see Hematopoietic Manual, Module 3: PH 5, 6).” Should primary site default to C421 if the physician provides a Rai Stage in the absence of definitive peripheral blood or bone marrow involvement documented in the medical record?

Assign primary site C421.

The Site-Specific Data item (SSDI) Manual, Rai Classification section, states: Per confirmation from medical oncologists, Rai stage is only recorded for patients who have bone marrow and/or peripheral blood involvement. Per the Hematopoietic Rules, primary site would be C421 (See Hematopoietic Manual, Module 3: Rules PH 5, 6). A new code has been added to the 5 SSDIs (code 5) to use when primary site is not C421.

 CLL/SLL, Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms Primary site 2023
20041058 Primary Site/Sarcoma--Breast: Is the primary site coded to C504 [upper-outer quadrant of breast] or C493 [ Connective, subcutaneous and other soft tissue of thorax ] for a tumor described as a "high grade soft tissue sarcoma present in the upper outer quadrant of breast"? If the sarcoma is primary in the breast, code the primary site to C504 [upper-outer quadrant of breast]. C500 - C509 includes soft tissue of breast. Breast, Sarcoma Primary site 2004
20160049

Grade/Sarcoma--Breast: Is the correct grade for high grade angiosarcoma of the breast a code 3 or 4? The breast usually uses a three grade system but sarcoma is not a typical histologic type of the breast.

Assign grade code 4 using the sarcoma table. Nottingham or Bloom-Richardson (BR) Score/Grade does not apply to angiosarcomas. This is a good question and points out needed clarification of the grade rules.

Breast, Sarcoma N/A 2016
20031132 EOD-Lymph Nodes--Breast: Are micrometastases in the lymph nodes, found only on immunohistochemical staining, coded as positive lymph nodes?

For cases diagnosed 1998-2003: Do not code as positive lymph nodes that have micrometastases diagnosed ONLY on immunohistochemistry. By traditional diagnostic methods, these are still negative lymph nodes.

Summary Stage and EOD ignore the IHC positive micrometastases for cases diagnosed through 2003. The collaborative staging system that begins with 2004 cases and is based on the sixth edition of TNM addresses this issue.

 Breast, Lymph nodes N/A 2003
20091049 P/H Rules/Multiple Primaries--Lung/Breast: Can we assume that a current tissue specimen is a recurrence of previous primary if a pathologist states that he has compared the current specimen with the slides from the prior tumor and concludes that the current tumor is "similar" to a previous tumor? See Discussion.

The MP/H rule general information section states that we do not accession a second primary unless a pathologist compares the current tumor to the original tumor and states that the current tumor is a recurrence of cancer from the previous primary. In our experience it is rare that a pathologist speaks so bluntly. They frequently hedge somewhat.

Are the following statements worded strongly enough for us to make the assumption that the current tumor is a recurrence of patient's previous cancer?

Example 1: Pathologist states: Patient's prior lung tumor reviewed. The tumor in the current case (left lower lobe) shows similarities to some areas of the patient's prior left lower lobe tumor.

Example 2: Pathologist states: The focus of ductal carcinoma in the mastectomy specimen does resemble the carcinoma in the previous partial mastectomy specimen. (Slides reviewed).

All pathologists do not use words in the same way. Therefore, we will not provide a list of specific words to accept or not to accept in order to determine recurrence. For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, do not base your decision about recurrence on words such as "similar" or "resembles." If the pathologist believes two or more tumors are the same or believes one is a recurrence of another after comparison, accept it. When pathologists believe that two or more tumors are not the same or believe that one is not a recurrence of another, there is usually a strong statement indicating that opinion. Breast, Lung N/A 2009
20000484 EOD-Size of Primary Tumor--Breast/Cervix: When coding tumor size, when do you use 997 for breast cases and 000 versus 999 for breast and other primaries? See discussion.

Example 1: Ductal carcinoma found in axillary lymph nodes. No tumor found in breast on physical exam or by pathological exam of the breast, but physician states that the breast is definitely the primary site.

Example 2: Paget disease for breast carcinoma with no underlying tumor.

Example 3: Inspection of the cervix shows no visible tumor; biopsy of the cervix reveals CIN III or squamous cell carcinoma, either invasive or in situ.

For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:

Code the EOD-Size of Primary Tumor field as follows:

Example 1: Code to 000 [No mass, no tumor found, no Paget disease] when a tumor of a stated primary site is not found, but the tumor has metastasized.

Example 2: Code to 997 [Paget disease of nipple with no demonstrable tumor] if there is no underlying tumor and the patient presents with Paget of the breast.

Example 3: Code to 999 [Size not stated] when no size of tumor is given on the pathology report. Do not use 000 in the size field when a tumor is not visible on physical exam or by imaging, but tumor is found microscopically.

 Breast, Cervix Uteri N/A 2000
20031087 EOD-Extension--Lymphoma/Brain and CNS: How is this field coded for a primary brain lymphoma that is described as multi-focal? For cases diagnosed 1998-2003: Since brain is the only site involved in this example, assign code 11 [Localized involvement of a single extralymphatic organ or site]. Brain and CNS, Lymphoma N/A 2003