SEER Inquiry System - Search

Do not report congenital mesoblastic nephroma (8960/1). Congenital mesoblastic mephromas are low-grade fibroblastic neoplasms of the infantile renal sinus according to WHO Classification of Tumors of the Urinary System and Male Genital Organs. The WHO classification is the standard used to determine behavior and histology for entities not listed in ICD-O-3.

The leukemia cutis is secondary to leukemia that is already present. This is multiple disease processes going on at the same time. Look for more information on this case. Is there any previous diagnosis of MDS, leukemia, or some other disease that would result in a treatment related AML?

If no further information can be found, abstract one primary with 9920/3.

Colloid cyst at the foramen of Monro is not reportable. Colloid cysts are endodermal congenital malformations and do not have an ICD-O-3 code. See the Glossary for Registrars, http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/glossary/view/542eeea1102c1d14697ef8ab/?q=colloid

Abstract one primary per Rule M7. Follow the Lung Solid Tumor Rules to determine the number of primaries. The AJCC TNM manual is used for staging. Do not apply AJCC instructions to determine the number of primaries.

Assign code 8 for Neoadjuvant Therapy--Clinical Response and assign a code 9 for Neoadjuvant Therapy--Treatment Effect when the treatment is still in progress. Revise these codes after the treatment has been completed.

We will update the manual to include these instructions.

Code as one primary (9920/3). This case does not fit the rules very well, since it is a treatment-related neoplasm and involves a transformation of MDS to AML during the clinical workup. Per the abstractor notes for 9920/3, code 9920/3 when the physician comments that the neoplasm is treatment related. This can be for the MDS or the AML. Use text fields to document that it was first referred to as MDS and then transformed to AML. If you followed the rules strictly and coded this as two primaries (the MDS and AML), you would lose the information that this was treatment related, which is more important.

For reportability, interpret "suspicious for but not diagnostic of" as NOT diagnostic of cancer.

The phrase "suspicious for the possibility of early invasive adenocarcinoma" may indicate that the case is in situ. If no further information is available, this is not reportable.

The site of the cancer diagnosis does not change the interpretation.

Abstract four primaries, 1993 renal pelvis, 1994 bladder, 2013 bladder, and 2015 bladder.

The 1993 renal pelvis diagnosis and the 1994 bladder diagnosis are separate primaries based on the rules in effect at that time (See pages 7-11, http://seer.cancer.gov/archive/manuals/historic/codeman_1992.pdf )

For the remaining diagnoses, the 2007 MP/H rules apply. The 2013 bladder diagnosis is a new primary per rule M7. The 2014 bladder diagnosis is not a new primary per rule M6. The 2015 bladder diagnosis is a new primary per rule M5.

Since the first diagnosis is in situ, and the later diagnosis is invasive, the 2019 diagnosis is a new primary even though it may be the same non-treated tumor.

For cases diagnosed 2018 and later, abstract multiple primaries according to the 2018 Breast Solid Tumor Rules, Rule M17 that states

Abstract multiple primaries when an invasive tumor occurs more than 60 days after an in situ tumor in the same breast.

Note 1: The rules are hierarchical. Only use this rule when none of the previous rules apply.

Note 2: Abstract both the invasive and in situ tumors.

Note 3: Abstract as multiple primaries even if physician states the invasive tumor is disease recurrence or progression.

Note 4: This rule is based on long-term epidemiologic studies of recurrence intervals. The specialty medical experts (SMEs) reviewed and approved these rules. Many of the SMEs were also authors, co-authors, or editors of the AJCC Staging Manual.