System Guide
Back to Search Results

Search Results

Display Options
Display Options
Select Fields
Export Results to CSV Create Report 0
+ Add all results to report

Report Produced: 09/08/2024 02:23 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20081111

MP/H Rules/Histology--Breast: If an in situ carcinoma diagnosed in 2007 demonstrates comedo necrosis, should the histology be coded to comedocarcinoma in situ? See Discussion.

According to the new MP/H rules, we code descriptive features. There is no coding guidance or reference to "necrosis" within the breast MP/H rules. Based on SEER SINQ 20021002, the "comedo necrosis" would not be coded at all for pre-2007 cases. Does this still hold true for cases diagnosed after January 1, 2007?

For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, comedo necrosis is not synonymous with comedocarcinoma. If no further information is available for this case, code as carcinoma in situ.

 2008
20081110

MP/H Rules--Breast: Is a ductal carcinoma diagnosed in August, 2008 following a lobular-ductal primary diagnosed in February 2007 a new primary? See Discussion.

Patient has two right breast tumors excised in February, 2007. One is lobular and the other ductal - abstracted as single primary per rule M10. Patient presents with new right breast tumor in August, 2008. This is a ductal carcinoma stated to be a recurrence. Would we again stop at M10 (single primary) or continue on to M12 and make this a new primary (difference at third number)?

For cases diagnosed 2007 or later:

Stop at rule M10 -- this is the first rule that applies. The 2008 diagnosis is not a new primary.

 2008
20081109

MP/H Rules--Breast: Patient has 2 existing primaries, both of left breast and both were pure lobular carcinoma, one was diagnosed in 1994 and the other in 2005. Now a biopsy in 2008 of a supraclavicular lymph node (laterality unknown) and subcutaneous scalp tissue show metastatic DUCTAL carcinoma. Per path report, breast is the primary site. Slides from prior tumors were not reviewed. Should this be made a new primary or assumed to be metastasis from the prior breast tumors? See Discussion.

A modified radical mastectomy was performed on 10/6/94.

The 2007 MP/H rules tell us that multiple ductal and lobular tumors of breast are a single primary; however, the rules do not apply to metastatic tumors.

For cases diagnosed 2007 or later:

Abstract the 2008 diagnosis as a new primary.

Since the primary site is unproven but stated to be breast, and since the laterality is unknown, we cannot determine that the 2008 diagnosis is the same as the 2005 or the 1994 diagnosis.

Revise this case accordingly if more information becomes available.

 2008
20081108 CS Extension--Pancreas: How is this field coded for a head of pancreas primary with involvement of the inferior vena cava?

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.Assign CS extension code 54 [Blood vessel(s) major]. The inferior vena cava is one of the major blood vessels.

The inferior vena cava is located just behind the head of the pancreas. The hepatic artery, the superior mesenteric vessels and the portal vein are nearby.

 2008
20081107 Multiplicity Counter/Ambiguous terminology: How should these fields be coded for cases with an unknown date of diagnosis? If the date of diagnosis is unknown, it is likely that you have little information for this case. Both multiplicity counter and ambiguous terminology fields would probably be coded as unknown. However, if information on the number of tumors and the diagnostic confirmation are available, code these fields as specified in the manual. 2008
20081106

MP/H Rules--Breast: How many primaries for the following?

Breast lumpectomy: Three foci of invasive ductal carcinoma.

Tumor nodule #1 - Invasive ductal carcinoma.

Tumor nodule #2 - Invasive ductal carcinoma with tubular features.

Tumor nodule #3 - Invasive tubular carcinoma.

See Discussion.

According to the MP/H rules, this case is reportable as three primaries with histologies coded 8500, 8523 and 8211. However, our QC staff is having a problem accepting this. When the pathologist specifies that a ductal carcinoma has tubular features or is tubular type, isn't s/he saying that tubular is a type of duct? In addition, the first line of the FDx states, "Three foci of ductal carcinoma," which indicates that the pathologists interprets the three nodules to be ductal carcinoma.

For cases diagnosed 2007 or later:

These three tumors are three separate primaries. Rule M12 applies.

According to the 2007 MP/H rules, tubular carcinoma is not a type of duct carcinoma.

Among the paramount reasons for writing the MP/H rules are the non-standard usage of nomenclature by physicians and the inconsistency in interpretation of these non-standard phrases. The MP/H rules must be applied consistently by each cancer registrar in order for data to be comparable across registries.

 2008
20081105 Primary site/Surgery of Primary Site--Lymphoma: What is the primary site for lymphoma involving lymph nodes and tonsil? Is a tonsillectomy coded as surgery for lymphoma? See Discussion.

6/1/2008 cervical lymph node biopsy showed lymphoma. A 6/3/2008 CT Chest/abdomen showed mediastinal and mesenteric lymphadenopathy. A 6/15/2008 tonsillectomy is performed for markedly enlarged right tonsil. Tonsil pathology reveals extensive lymphoma involvement.

Nothing in the chart specifies the primary site.

Should this be a C778 primary because of 3 lymph node areas plus tonsil (a lymphatic organ)? Or should it be coded to C099 Tonsil?

Is this tonsillectomy coded as surgical therapy? If so, is it surgery of primary site or surgery of other site?

For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:Code the primary site to tonsil (C099). This advanced stage lymphoma involves an extranodal site (tonsil) and that site's regional lymph nodes (cervical). The lymphoma has also spread to non-regional lymph nodes (mediastinal and mesenteric). Code the tonsillectomy as surgery of primary site.

For cases diagnosed 1/1/10 and later, 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.

 2008
20081103 CS Lymph Nodes--Breast: What code should be used for the the following? There is no mention of LNS clinically; the patient has neoadjuvant therapy; and the LNS are matted pathologically.

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.Use the information from the pathologic evaluation to code CS Lymph nodes.

In the nodes evaluation field, assign code 6 [Regional lymph nodes removed for examination with pre-surgical systemic treatment or radiation and lymph node evaluation based on pathologic evidence]. See CS Lymph Nodes note 4.

 2008
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
20081100

MP/H Rules/Histology--Rectum: When not specifically mentioned as part of the histology, is the adenoma a second histologic type, or just a further physical description of the tumor? See Discussion.

Rectal tumor resection (APR) path report final dx: "mucinous carcinoma, see comment". The comment is the CAP-format tumor summary, which states "histologic type: adenocarcinoma with extensive mucin production (mucinous or colloid carcinoma). Additional pathologic findings: adenomas - tumor arises in a tubulovillous adenoma".

If you follow the rules and only use the final dx, you would code a different histology than if you use the 'additional path findings.'

For cases diagnosed 2007 or later

Other Sites histology rule H12 applies in this case. Assign histology code 8263 [adenocarcinoma in tubulovillous adenoma].

Use information from the CAP protocol and from comments associated with the final diagnosis to code histology.

The fact that the malignancy arose in a polyp can be taken from anywhere in the medical record; not limited to the final diagnosis.

Based on the information provided for this case, the histology is adenocarcinoma with extensive mucin production (mucinous or colloid carcinoma) arising in a tubulovillous adenoma.

 2008