Grade, Differentiation--Prostate: Has SEER officially changed the conversion code for Gleason score 7 to poorly differentiated [grade 3]?
For cases diagnosed prior to 2003, there has been no change in SEER standards for converting a Gleason score to a grade. As described in the SEER Program Code Manual, Gleason score 7 is converted to moderately differentiated [grade 2]. ONLY if the pathology report lists moderately poorly differentiated IN ADDITION to the Gleason's score 7, would you code the case as 3.
For cases diagnosed in 2003 and later, please see question number 20031123.
Reportability/Histology--Skin: Is dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans (DFSP) with fibrosarcomatous overgrowth, DFSP with fibrosarcomatous component Grade 2, or DFSP with focal myxoid features (2022) reportable for 2021-2022 diagnoses?
Yes. DFSP with fibrosarcomatous overgrowth and DFSP with fibrosarcomatous component Grade 2 are synonymous with fibrosarcomatous DFSP (8832/3). Our expert pathologist also advises that DFSP with focal myxoid features is the same as DFSP, myxoid (8832/3).
EOD-Extension/EOD-Lymph Nodes--Kaposi Sarcoma: What code is used to represent this field for a Kaposi sarcoma with no skin lesions but positive lymph node and bone marrow biopsies?
Code the EOD-Extension field to 13 [Visceral (e.g., pulmonary, gastrointestinal tract, spleen, other)], because of the positive bone marrow. Code the EOD-Lymph Nodes field to 3 [Both clinically enlarged palpable lymph nodes (adenopathy) and pathologically positive lymph nodes], for the pathologically positive node.
Note: Potential revision of the extension scheme will be referred to SEER Medical Advisory Group (SMAG).
Primary Site--Melanoma: How would this field be coded for a pleural effusion consistent with metastatic melanoma and "no skin lesions?"
Code primary site as C44.9 [Skin, NOS]. ICD-O-3 does not list a suggested site code for 8720/3 because melanoma can arise in other parts of the body. However, C44.9 [Skin, NOS] is the default when the primary cannot be found.
Solid Tumor Rules (2018)/Histology--Lung: The Histology coding guidelines for lung cancer state to code histology when stated as type or subtype but not to code when described as pattern. How should the histology be coded (Adeno, NOS or Adeno, Mixed subtypes) if the College of Americal Pathologists Protocol of the pathology report lists the following: Histologic type: Adenocarcinoma, papillary (90%), lepidic (8%), and solid (2%) patterns?
The term/modifier "patterns" is no longer allowed to code a specific histology according to the Lung Solid Tumor H rules. Disregard the papillary, lepidic, and solid patterns and code histology to adenocarcinoma, NOS (8140/3).
Reportability--Corpus uteri: Is endometrial atypical complex hyperplasia/borderline endometrial adenocarcinoma (FIGO 1), (mucinous type), (no invasion of myometrium) reportable?
Do not report this case based on the information provided. The actual diagnosis is somewhere between atypical hyerpplasia and carcinoma in situ. Do not report until/unless a more definitively reportable diagnosis is made.
Solid Tumor Rules (2018)/Histology--Lung: If the pathology states non-small cell carcinoma of the lung (NSCLC), consistent with squamous cell carcinoma, is the code non-small cell carcinoma according to the Solid Tumor Rules? The Medical Oncologist states that the tumor is a squamous cell carcinoma. In these instances would you code the squamous cell carcinoma since you have a definite physician statement?
Code the histology to SCC 8070/3.
Based on registrar feedback on the NSCLC rule, we added a rule that specifically addresses when ambiguous terminology can be used to code histology other than NSCLC. The lung rules were update 10/12/2018 so please make sure you are using the currently posted rules. The new rule is: Rule H3-Code the specific histology when the diagnosis is non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) consistent with (or any other ambiguous term) a specific carcinoma (such as adenocarcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, etc.) when:
* Clinically confirmed by a physician (attending, pathologist, oncologist, pulmonologist, etc.)
* Patient is treated for the histology described by an ambiguous term
* The case is accessioned (added to your database) based on ambiguous terminology and no other histology information is available/documented
Example 1: The pathology diagnosis is NSCLC consistent with adenocarcinoma. The oncology consult says the patient has adenocarcinoma of the right lung. This is clinical confirmation of the diagnosis, code adenocarcinoma.
Histology (Pre-2007)/Behavior Code: What code is used to represent the histology "foci of well differentiated intramucosal carcinoma [carcinoma in situ] arising on the surface of a tubular adenoma"? The pathologist referred to this colon biopsy as "in situ".
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Assign histology code 8210 [adenocarcinoma in a tubular adenoma] and behavior code 2 [in situ]. "In situ" is specified by the pathologist.
For tumors diagnosed 2007 or later, refer to the MP/H rules. If there are still questions about how this type of tumor should be coded, submit a new question to SINQ and include the difficulties you are encountering in applying the MP/H rules.
Solid Tumor Rules (2018)/Histology--Lung: What is the histology code of a 2018 lung cancer case with invasive non-mucinous adenocarcinoma? For non-mucinous carcinoma/adenocarcinoma, the Solid Tumor Rules have codes for microinvasive, minimally invasive, preinvasive, and in situ. Do we default to the microinvasive/minimally invasive code?
Code histology to adenocarcinoma, NOS (8140/3). The World Health Organization and the College of American Pathologists no longer recognize non-mucinous carcinoma/adenocarcinoma, NOS. Pathologists are discouraged from using this term. Microinvasive/minimally invasive lung tumors have very specific criteria and these criteria do not apply to non-mucinous carcinoma, NOS.
An official website of the United States government
Home