Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Cancer Site Category | Data Item Category | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20190026 | Solid Tumor Rules (2018)/Multiple primaries--Bladder: Does Rule M11 in the 04/2019 Solid Tumor Rules Urinary update apply to synchronous/simultaneous tumors only or to multiple tumors with any timing? See Discussion. |
Rule M11 states: Abstract a single primary when there are urothelial carcinomas in multiple urinary organs, but neither the Rule nor the Notes describe the timing of these multiple urinary organ carcinomas. Timing requirements for other rules are clearly stated. Does Rule M11 have a timing requirement or is it intended to apply to all urothelial carcinoma tumors regardless of timing (and not already qualifying for application of a previous M rule)? |
The revised Urinary Solid Tumor Rules 2018 Rule M11, updated April 2019, removed the requirement of synchronous. This applies to urothelial carcinoma (8120) and its corresponding subtypes, regardless of behavior, that occur in more than one urinary site in a patient's lifetime. See change log for the April 2019 update to urinary rules.This is the same M/PH rule for multiple sites. Timing does not factor in to this rule. |
Bladder | N/A | 2019 |
|
|
20130077 | Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasm: What is the histology code if a myeloproliferative disorder is reportable should a physician suspect this diagnosis and treats the patient? See Discussion. | Physician suspects patient has a myeloproliferative disorder and treats her with a phlebotomy and Hydrea. Patient receives Hydrea during an inpatient stay, but does not see the Heme/Onc again. The patient is subsequently only seen by a Palliative Medicine physician who also states she has an underlying myeloproliferative disorder. The patient died while an inpatient. | For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.
This is a reportable diagnosis and should be accessioned with the histology coded to 9975/3 [myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasm, unclassifiable].
The term is a reportable ambiguous term per the Hematopoietic Coding Manual (Case Reportability Instructions, Rule 4). Also, the patient was treated for a myeloproliferative disorder, making this a reportable clinical diagnosis per the SEER Manual (Reportability, Pg 4, Exception 1).
Myeloproliferative disorder is synonymous with myeloproliferative disease. Myeloproliferative disease is listed as an alternate name for myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasm, unclassifiable.
SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx. |
Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms | N/A | 2013 |
|
|
20240075 | 2024 SEER Manual/Reportability--Breast: Is "lobular intraepithelial neoplasia" (LIN) a glandular intraepithelial neoplasia? If so, is lobular neoplasia II (LN II)/LIN II non-reportable, similar to PanIN II - SINQ 20240026? See Discussion. |
The Reportable Diagnosis List indicates "Lobular neoplasia grade II (LN II)/lobular intraepithelial neoplasia grade II (LIN II) breast (C500-C509)" is reportable. The ICD-O-3.2 lists “Glandular intraepithelial neoplasia, grade II” and “Glandular intraepithelial neoplasia, low grade” as histology code 8148 with behavior of /0 (benign). |
Report LN II and LN III along with LIN II and LIN III and assign code 8520/2. WHO Classification of Breast Tumors, 5th edition, lists lobular neoplasia as acceptable, related terminology for lobular carcinoma in situ. |
Breast | N/A | 2024 |
|
|
20240035 | Solid Tumor Rules--Urinary: The example used in Rule M15 of the Urinary Solid Tumor Rules refers to the same row in Table 3. Should the example say Table 2 since Table 3 is non-reportable urinary tumors. See Discussion. |
Rule M15 Abstract a single primary when synchronous, separate/non-contiguous tumors are on the same row in Table 2 in the Equivalent Terms and Definitions. Note: The same row means the tumors are • The same histology (same four-digit ICD-O code) OR • One is the preferred term (column 1) and the other is a synonym for the preferred term (column 2) OR • A NOS (column 1/column 2) and the other is a subtype/variant of that NOS (column 3) OR • A NOS histology in column 3 with an indented subtype/variant Example: TURBT shows invasive papillary urothelial carcinoma 8130/3 and CIS/in situ urothelial carcinoma 8120/2. Abstract a single primary. Papillary urothelial carcinoma and urothelial carcinoma are on the same row in Table 3. |
The example used in Rule M15 of the Urinary Solid Tumor Rules should refer to Table 2. We will update this in the next revision of the Rules. |
Bladder | N/A | 2024 |
|
|
20031179 | EOD-Extension--Stomach: How is this field coded for a stomach primary that has metastases to "Sister Mary Joseph's Nodes?" | For cases diagnosed 1998-2003: For a stomach primary, code extension to 70 [Abdominal wall]. Sister Mary Joseph's nodule is a cutaneous umbilical metastasis most commonly from an intra-abdominal primary. This rare form of cutaneous umbilical metastasis results from spread of tumor within the falciform ligament. The umbilicus is part of the abdominal wall. |
Stomach | N/A | 2003 | |
|
|
20190030 | Summary Stage 2018/Extension--Prostate: Can imaging be used to code SEER Summary Stage 2018? MRI shows tumor involved the seminal vesicles and the patient did not have surgery. AJCC does not use imaging to clinically TNM stage a prostate case. |
Note 5 was changed in Version 2.0. Per Note 5 of the 2018 SEER Summary Stage Prostate chapter: Imaging is not used to determine the clinical extension. If a physician incorporates imaging findings into their evaluation (including the clinical T category), do not use this information. This note was changed in Version 2.0 (2021 changes) to be in line with how AJCC stages; therefore, AJCC and Summary Stage agree. |
Prostate | N/A | 2019 | |
|
|
20100079 | Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Does the fact that the Hematopoietic Database states the ICD-O-3 code 9970/1 [Lymphoproliferative disorder/disease, NOS] mean that the ICD-O-3 books should be updated to indicate that as of 2010 the code 9970/1 [Lymphoproliferative disorder/disease, NOS] is no longer applicable? | For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.
Lymphoproliferative disorder/disease, NOS [9970/1] is not a reportable neoplasm. There are also new codes that define lymphoproliferative disorder/disease more specifically. If you do a "smart search" and enter only the word "lymphoproliferative" into the Heme DB, you will get a listing of all of the reportable and non-reportable terms. That enables you to look at your record and compare the words in the Heme DB to those in the record you are reviewing.
SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx. |
Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms | N/A | 2010 | |
|
|
20031103 | Reportability--Ovary: Is a Stage IIIC serous borderline tumor (micropapillary type) of the ovary diagnosed in 2003 reportable? |
Serous borderline tumor of the ovary diagnosed in 2003 is not reportable to SEER. The behavior code is /1 in ICD-O-3. The high stage does not make this borderline tumor reportable. | Ovary | N/A | 2003 | |
|
|
20021206 | EOD-Extension--Breast: The SEER coding scheme classifies the in situ portion as less than 25% [code 14] or equal to or greater than 25% [code 15]. How do you code a pathologist's statement of "less than or equal to 25%"? See discussion. | "insitu ca constitutes less than or equal to 25% of the total mass." | For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
Code the EOD-Extension field to 14 [invasive and in situ components present, size of entire tumor coded in Tumor Size AND in situ described as minimal (less than 25%)]. The pathologist did not use a code as defined by SEER. For cases described as "less than or equal to 25%", choose the lower of the two EOD code choices. |
Breast | N/A | 2002 |
|
|
20180047 | Reportability--Kidney: Is a hybrid oncocytic tumor reportable? See Discussion. |
10/27/2017 partial nephrectomy final path diagnosis: renal oncocytic neoplasm, favor hybrid oncocytic tumor. Comment: |
Do not report renal HTOC. According to our expert pathologist consultant, "the genetic studies seem to indicate that the chromosomal changes of chromophobe renal carcinoma are not found in the hybrid tumors." |
Kidney, renal pelvis | N/A | 2018 |
An official website of the United States government
