Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20160007 | Surgery of Primary Site--Breast: If the diagnosis is a single primary involving both breasts, do we code 41 Surgery Primary site with 1 in Surgery Other site, or code 76 Surgery Primary site with 0 in Surgery Other site? See discussion. |
In Appendix C- Breast (SEER Manual 2015) it states under the codes for TOTAL MASTECTOMY (Codes 40-49, 75): For single primaries only, code removal of involved contralateral breast under the data item Surgical Procedure/Other Site (NAACCR Item # 1294). [SEER Note: Example of single primary with removal of involved contralateral breast--Inflammatory carcinoma involving both breasts. Bilateral simple mastectomies. Code Surgery of Primary Site 41 and code Surgical Procedure of Other Site 1.] HOWEVER, underneath that it states code 76 is used for: 76 Bilateral mastectomy for a single tumor involving both breasts, as for bilateral inflammatory carcinoma. So |
Assign code 41 with 1 in surgery other site for simple mastectomy. Assign code 76 with 0 in surgery other site for a more extensive mastectomy. |
2016 |
|
|
20190017 | Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: The term indolent systemic mastocytosis is listed in the 2018 ICD-O-3 Histology Update table with borderline behavior (9741/1). However, smoldering systemic mastocytosis is listed in the Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Database (Heme DB) as an alternate name for histology 9741/3. Are smoldering systemic mastocytosis and indolent systemic mastocytosis synonymous? If so, should smoldering systemic mastocytosis also be removed from the Heme DB alternate names listing? See Discussion. |
In addition to the issue mentioned above, there is a SINQ answer that conflicts with the 2018 ICD-O-3 Histology Update table. SINQ 20130134 indicates indolent systemic mastocytosis is reportable for cases diagnosed 2010 and forward. There is no date restriction indicating the SINQ note applies only for cases diagnosed 2010-2017. Since indolent systemic mastocytosis was changed to borderline (9741/1) for diagnosis year 2018+, should the diagnosis year range be updated for this SINQ answer? |
Smoldering systemic mastocytosis is reportable, 9741/3. Indolent systemic mastocytosis is not reportable as of cases diagnosed 2018, 9741/1. Smoldering systemic mastocytosis and indolent systemic mastocytosis are not synonymous. Smoldering differs from indolent based on diagnostic criteria and burden of disease; indolent is low whereas smoldering is high burden of disease that can progress to aggressive systemic mastocytosis or mast cell leukemia. We will update SINQ 20130134. |
2019 |
|
|
20100025 | MP/H Rules/Primary site--Kidney, Renal Pelvis: Should the primary site be changed to C689 [Urinary system, NOS] for a primary renal pelvis tumor after additional tumors are found months later in different urinary sites (e.g., bladder or ureter) and the MP/H Rules indicate these are all the same primary? See Discussion. |
In a patient is diagnosed 1/29/08 with an invasive grade 3 of 3 papillary urothelial cell carcinoma arising in the depth of a calyx in mid portion of kidney, the primary site was coded C659 [Renal pelvis]. In 6/1/09 a TURBT showed three separate lesions on the right side of the bladder. The final diagnosis was high grade urothelial carcinoma in-situ with three tumors, the largest being 7mm. Per rule M8, the renal pelvis primary and subsequent bladder tumors are the same primary. Would the primary site be changed to C689 [Urinary system, NOS] when the bladder tumors were identified? Or is C689 only coded if more than one primary site is involved at diagnosis? |
For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, Rule M8 applies. This is a single primary. The primary site was coded to C659 in 2008. Do not change the primary site code. |
2010 |
|
|
20230007 | SEER Manual/Reportability--Appendix: Is low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm (LAMN) with peritoneal spread followed by evidence of extraperitoneal metastatic disease reportable prior to 2022? See Discussion. |
In 2021, the patient was diagnosed with a non-reportable appendiceal LAMN. Resection showed a tumor diffusely involving the appendix and perforating the visceral peritoneum, as well as extensive intraperitoneal metastasis. In 2023, a lung wedge resection revealed metastatic mucinous neoplasm involving lung parenchyma and pleura, consistent with metastasis of the known appendiceal primary. It is understood that intraperitoneal spread of an appendiceal LAMN does not make it reportable because the peritoneal disease is also non-invasive. Does extraperitoneal metastasis of an appendiceal LAMN diagnosed prior to 2022 make it invasive disease and therefore reportable? |
LAMN diagnosed prior to 1/1/2022 is not reportable even when it spreads or metastasizes according to our expert pathologist consultant. Spread of this neoplasm does not indicate malignancy. For this case to be reportable, the diagnosis must indicate “carcinoma” or “adenocarcinoma.” Pre-2022, LAMN is not reportable even when treated with surgery and chemotherapy. LAMN is reportable starting with cases diagnosed in 2022. |
2023 |
|
|
20210068 | Mets at Diagnosis Fields/Primary Site--Lymph Nodes: How are the Mets at Diagnosis fields coded when the metastatic adenocarcinoma involves only one lymph node area and the primary site is unknown? See Discussion. |
In 2018, patient has lymph node metastasis confined to left retroperitoneal area; core biopsy was done which showed metastatic adenocarcinoma, unknown primary site. There are no other sites of disease found. Should I code Mets at Diagnosis--Distant Lymph Node(s) as 1, and the others such as bone and lung as 0? |
In a situation like this with one area of metastatic involvement and an unknown primary, if there is no further information, we advise that the metastasis are "regional" until/unless proven otherwise. With this in mind, code the Mets at Diagnosis fields as 0, including the Mets at Diagnosis--Distant Lymph Node(s). This case should continue to be worked up to identify the primary site. If a primary site is identified later, update the abstract accordingly. In the meantime, use text fields to describe the situation. |
2021 |
|
|
20130035 | Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned and what rule applies when a subsequent diagnosis of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (95%) and follicular lymphoma, grade 3 (5%) is made following an original diagnosis of low grade CD-10 positive B-cell lymphoma, most consistent with low grade follicular lymphoma (FL) ? See Discussion. |
In 2011, patient presented with a large mesenteric mass, numerous other smaller mesenteric lymph nodes, moderate retroperitoneal and extensive iliac chain adenopathy greater on right; small inguinal nodes are also present mostly on right side and splenomegaly per the CT scan. Abdominal pelvic mass needle biopsies showed low grade CD-10 positive B-cell lymphoma, most consistent with low grade follicular lymphoma (FL). The patient was treated with R-CVP with unknown response. In June 2012, patient presented again for laparoscopy and lymph node biopsy for stated recurrence of lymphoma found on CT scan. A large mass was seen in mesentery of bowel. Abdominal mass biopsy showed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Abdominal mass #2 excisional biopsy showed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, 95%, and follicular lymphoma grade 3, 5%. The majority of the tumor is now DLBCL. |
For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph. This case should be accessioned as a single primary, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma diagnosed in 2011 per Rule M7. Note 4 for Rule M7 states to change the histology code on the original abstract to the more specific histology, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in this case. There is no time restriction for rule M7. Apply rule PH11 and code the histology as 9680/3 [DLBCL] when both DLBCL and follicular lymphoma are present in the same lymph node(s). Ambiguous terminology is not used to code a more specific histologic type per the Heme Manual. The information submitted states only that this low grade B-cell lymphoma was "most consistent with follicular lymphoma." The term "consistent with" is an ambiguous term per SEER and cannot be used to code the histology of the 2011 neoplasm as follicular lymphoma. There was no subsequent clinical statement that this patient was diagnosed with follicular lymphoma in 2011. 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. Although the ambiguous terminology on the pathology report is not used to code the histology to follicular lymphoma, had there been a subsequent clinical statement that this patient had follicular lymphoma, the histology would be coded to follicular lymphoma [9690/3]. A diagnosis of follicular lymphoma followed by a diagnosis of DLBCL more than 21 days later is a new primary per rule M12. |
2013 |
|
|
20120071 | Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is the primary site coded and what rule applies if the patient has involvement of multiple organs and one lymph node chain with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma? See Discussion. |
In 2011 the patient was diagnosed with a 15 cm mass involving the terminal ileum, cecum and adjacent mesentery. The pathology was positive for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. A staging PET/CT revealed a mass at the base of tongue and a left cervical lymph node. The biopsy of the base of tongue also showed DLBCL. |
For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph. Apply rule PH22 to code the primary site to C779 [lymph nodes, NOS]. While the pathology does not indicate that this particular case represents a B-cell lymphoma, unclassifiable with features intermediate between DLBCL and Burkitt variant, in the Abstractor Notes section of the Heme DB for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma it does indicate that its presentation, "may have lesions in ileocecal region or jaws. Bone marrow and peripheral blood may be involved. Patients present with lymphadenopathy or mass lesions in extranodal site." This patient does have involvement of two extranodal sites and involvement of regional lymph nodes for only one of those sites. PH22 indicates one is to code the primary site to C77.9 [lymph nodes, NOS] when lymphoma is present in multiple organs and lymph nodes that are not regional for that organ and the origin cannot be determined even after consulting the physician. There are two extranodal sites of involvement and only one chain of lymph nodes is regional to one of those sites so this rule applies. 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. |
2012 |
|
|
20130142 | Multiple primaries/Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are reported if a 2010 inguinal lymph node biopsy diagnosis of follicular lymphoma, grade 1 is subsequently diagnosed in 2012 with a 50% follicular, grade 3 and 50% diffuse large B-cell via a biopsy of an axillary mass? |
In 2010 a left inguinal lymph node biopsy revealed follicular lymphoma, grade 1. There were no other suspicious lymph nodes in the body. In 2012 a biopsy of a large axillary mass revealed a a 50% follicular, grade 3 and 50% diffuse large B-cell. According to the rules, the transformation to a B-cell is new primary. Is the mixed cell neoplasm a single primary? |
For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph. There are two reportable primaries for this case -- follicular lymphoma in 2010 and DLBCL in 2012. First determine the histologies needed to to determine the number of primaries to report. We determined the histologies are follicular lymphoma, grade 1 for 2010 and DLBCL for 2012 as follows:
Per the Hematopoietic database, follicular lymphoma (all types are chronic) transforms to DLBCL (acute). Per Rule M 10 instructions, "Abstract as multiple primaries when a neoplasm is as a neoplasm there is a of an neoplasm after the chronic diagnosis." Therefore, abstract the DLBCL as a second primary. 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. |
2013 |
|
|
20081101 | MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries--Lung: If a 1.7 cm LUL lung tumor is not treated surgically, would a 2.1 cm tumor in the same lobe three years later be a new primary? See Discussion. |
In 2004 the patient has a 1.7cm squamous cell carcinoma diagnosed in the LUL of the lung treated with radiation and chemotherapy. In 2007, the patient was diagnosed with a 2.1cm squamous cell carcinoma in the LUL treated with radiation. According to the lung MP/H rules, the 2007 tumor would be a new primary. Given that there was no surgery, would the second tumor be progression of disease or would it be a new primary? |
For cases diagnosed 2007 or later: If the tumor diagnosed in 2004 was successfully treated and disappeared, apply the MP/H rules for lung. According to rule M8, the 2004 tumor and the 2007 tumor are multiple primaries. If there was no disease-free interval between tumor occurrences, that is, if the 2007 tumor is still the same tumor that was diagnosed in 2004, the MP/H rules do not apply. |
2008 |
|
|
20091122 | MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries-Brain: Does a glioblastoma multiforme following a low grade glioma (oligodendroglioma) represent a new primary? See Discussion. | In 2/08 patient underwent resection of tumor of right frontal lobe. Path diagnosis showed a low grade glioma, favor low grade oligodendroglioma (WHO grade II). In 02/09 biopsy of a left thalamic mass showed glioblastoma mutiforme. Per rule M6 glioblastoma multiforme following a glial tumor is a single primary. Per path diagnosis, the first tumor represented a low grade glioma. However, oligodendroglioma is not on the glial branch of chart 1 in the MP/H rules. |
For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, glioblastoma multiforme following oligodendroglioma are multiple primaries according to rule M8. Rule M6 does not apply. M6 applies only to glial tumors as listed in chart 1. Chart 1 is based on the WHO classification. The WHO classification separates oligodendroglial tumors from glial tumors. | 2009 |
An official website of the United States government
Government Funding Lapse
Because of a lapse in government funding, the information on this website may not be up to date, transactions submitted via the website may not be processed, and the agency may not be able to respond to inquiries until appropriations are enacted. The NIH Clinical Center (the research hospital of NIH) is open. For more details about its operating status, please visit cc.nih.gov. Updates regarding government operating status and resumption of normal operations can be found at OPM.gov.
