Histology (Pre-2007)/Diagnostic Confirmation: What code is used to represent the histology that initially presents on uterine curettage as a hydatidiform mole and after pulmonary metastases develop a month later, the clinical diagnosis is "metastatic gestational trophoblastic disease"?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Code the Histology field to 9100/3 [Choriocarcinoma]. Gestational trophoblastic neoplasia includes the diagnosis of choriocarcinoma.
Code the Diagnostic Confirmation field to 8 [Clinical diagnosis only] based on the information above. However, if imaging, direct visualization, or another method identified the pulmonary metastases, then code the Diagnostic Confirmation accordingly.
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.
EOD 2018/Primary tumor--Melanoma: The code and level translations in the Note 4 of Extent of Disease (EOD) Primary Tumor for Melanoma Skin seem incorrect. Please advise.
* Code 000: In situ
* Code 100: Level I (should be level II) (< 0.75 mm Breslow's Depth)
* Code 200: Level II (should be level III) (0.76 mm to 1.50 mm Breslow's Depth)
* Code 300: Level III (should be level IV) (> 1.50 mm Breslow's Depth)
Please see the corrected levels below for the note. Note 4: If a Breslow's depth is given in the pathology report and there is no other indication of involvement, the following guidelines may be used (Note: If a physician documents a different Clark's Level than provided by these guidelines, go with the physician's Clark Level)
Code 000: Level I (In situ)
Code 100: Level II (< 0.75 mm Breslow's Depth)
Code 200: Level III (0.76 mm to 1.50 mm Breslow's Depth)
Reportability: Is positive urine cytology (ex: malignant cells interpreted as carcinoma) by itself reportable? If so, is the case coded to bladder by default or is is coded to C689, urinary system, NOS?
Urine cytology positive for malignancy is reportable. Code the primary site to C689 in the absence of any other information.
However, if a subsequent biopsy of a urinary site is negative, do not report the case.
For 2013 diagnoses and forward, report these cases when they are encountered. Do not implement new/additional casefinding methods to capture these cases.
As always, do not report cytology cases with ambiguous terminology.
Reportability--Hematopoietic, NOS: Is a "myeloproliferative disorder" reportable when the pathology report comment states this likely represents the "early/cellular phase of myelofibrosis/myeloid metaplasia" with cytogenetics and PCR pending?
For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:This case is not yet reportable. The bone marrow diagnosis "myeloproliferative disorder" is not reportable to SEER. It is likely that if this condition progresses, it will eventually be reportable.
For cases diagnosed 2010 forward, refer to the Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Neoplasm Case Reportability and Coding Manual and the Hematopoietic Database (Hematopoietic DB) provided by SEER on its website to research your question. If those resources do not adequately address your issue, submit a new question to SINQ.
CS Extension--Ovary: How are the following terms coded when they are described in the medical record without any other qualifying information? Seeding, talcum powder appearance, salting, miliary, and studding.
This answer was provided in the context of CSv1 coding guidelines. The response may not be used after your registry database has been converted to CSv2.Seeding, talcum powder appearance, salting and studding are synonymous with implants. When the size of implants is not stated, but operative report and scans state "seeding," "talcum powder appearance," "salting," and "studding" the CS extension code choice will depend on the location of the seeding, talcum powder appearance, salting, or studding.
The word "miliary" is not documented as a synonym for implants.
The term miliary does not affect the CS extension code choice according to the current CS instructions.
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).
Surgical Procedure of Other Site: Is the excision of a distant lymph node or a fine needle aspirate (FNA) of a distant lymph node coded as a Surgical Procedure of Other Site, even though they are performed for diagnostic purposes and not intended as treatment?
For cases diagnosed 1/1/2003 and after: Code the Surgical Procedure of Other Site field to 3 [Non-primary surgical procedure to distant lymph nodes] for an excision of a distant lymph node because it is a surgical procedure. However, if only a fine needle aspirate of a distant lymph node is done, code this field to 0 [None].
Fine needle aspirates of regional lymph nodes are the only FNA biopsies to be coded in a surgery field (Scope of Regional Lymph Node Surgery field). In addition, FNA biopsies of regional nodes are also included in the EOD-Number of Positive Regional and Examined Lymph Nodes fields.
Reportability--Ovary: Is immature teratoma of the ovary reportable if a subsequent comment states that "the teratoma shows immature neuroepithelium, but no malignant elements"?
There is conflicting information for this case. The final diagnosis conflicts with the comment. Go back and check with the physician to clarify his/her intent. If no further information can be obtained, the final diagnosis is preferred over the comment. This case is reportable based on the final diagnosis: "immature teratoma."
Multiple Primaries--Brain and CNS: How many primaries should be recorded in a patient with von Hippel Lindau disease that has a hemangioblastoma of the cerebellum in 2003 and a hemangioblastoma of the brainstem in 2007?
A tumor of the cerebellum (C716) and a tumor of the brainstem (C717) are multiple primaries because the topography codes are different at the fourth character of site.
Histology/Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Neoplasms--AML: What is the histology code for Acute Myelogenous Leukemia (AML) with monocytic differentiation, 9891/3: acute monoblastic and monocytic leukemia or 9867/3: Acute myelomonocytic leukemia?
Code AML with monocytic differentiation as acute myeloid leukemia, NOS (9861/3) per consultation with our expert hematopathologist.
Acute monoblastic and monocytic leukemia (9891/3) and acute myelomonocytic leukemia (9867/3) are distinct entities according to the WHO. "AML with monocytic differentiation" is a descriptive diagnosis, whereas, "Acute monoblastic and monocytic leukemia" are specific diagnoses. In the WHO Classification of Tumours, Central nervous system tumours (4th Ed) in 2016, WHObegan integrating information on molecular alterations that provide significant prognostic implications and/or a therapeutic target into the histology code/term itself. As a result it is also important to look at the molecular testing because acute myeloid leukemias can have different molecular mutations that could result in coding to a different histology code. In this case, there was no other information regarding additional immunophenotyping, so that is why AML, NOS was assigned. Acute myeloid leukemia with monocytic differentiation has been added to the Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Neoplasm Database as an alternate name for 9861/3.
An official website of the United States government
Home