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: 05/27/2026 00:08 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20120063 Reportability--Pancreas: Are neuroendocrine "tumors" reportable and are they synonymous with neuroendocrine "carcinoma"? See Discussion. Example: Pancreatic mass that probably represents a neuroendocrine tumor is staged as cT2N0M0.

According to the World Health Organization (WHO) pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NET) are malignant. They are reportable.

For pancreas primaries, code NET, G1 (well differentiated) to 8240/3; NET G2 (moderately differentiated) to 8249/3; and nonfunctional NET, GI or G2 to 8150/3.

The histology code for neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) is 8246/3, large cell NEC is 8013/3 and small cell NEC is 8041/3.

2012
20120055 Surgery of Primary Site--Kidney, renal pelvis: How do you code a laparoscopic renal mass core biopsy followed by cryoablation of the tumor? See Discussion. The note under the local tumor destruction codes states "No specimen sent to pathology from this surgical event 10-15." The patient had a pathologic specimen submitted from his core biopsy, but this was not a tumor excision or excisional biopsy [codes 20, 26-27]. Is the correct surgery code 13 [cryosurgery] because the tumor was only ablated and not excised, or surgery code 23 [any combination of 20 or 26-27 with cryosurgery] because a pathology specimen was submitted? Code for Surgery of Primary Site to 13 [Cryosurgery]. While the core biopsy provided a pathology specimen, it is not coded as surgery of the primary site. 2012
20120002

Histology/Diagnostic confirmation--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How are histology and diagnostic confirmation coded when a patient has a clinical diagnosis of lymphoma but a pathologic diagnosis of malignant neoplasm, NOS? See Discussion.

This patient had CT scans showing extensive bilateral retroperitoneal lymphadenopathy suspicious for lymphoma and left axillary lymphadenopathy. Thin core biopsies were done of the left axillary lymph nodes and immunohistology pathology was read as malignant neoplasm with extensive necrosis. Flow cytometry analysis of the sample shows no definitive or sufficient CD45+ events for informative analysis. Karyotype analysis could not be performed on this specimen due to inadequate sample. FISH analysis using IGH break apart probe showed no evidence of clonal rearrangement in limited number of cells available for analysis. The physician's diagnosis is probable lymphoma, no further workup felt necessary because patient would not tolerate chemotherapy anyway and hospice was felt most appropriate care for patient.

The definitive diagnostic method for lymphoma, NOS is histologic confirmation, but the only histologic confirmation was of "malignant neoplasm with extensive necrosis." Should the histology and diagnostic confirmation be coded as lymphoma, NOS [9590/3] and imaging without microscopic confirmation [7] or malignancy, NOS [8000/3] and positive histology [1]?

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

Code the histology to 9590/3 [malignant lymphoma, NOS] and the diagnostic confirmation to 7 [radiology and other imaging techniques without microscopic confirmation]. Per the Diagnostic Confirmation Coding Instructions for Heme and Lymphatic Neoplasms, use code 1 when ONLY the biopsy was used to diagnose the specific histology. The biopsy only confirmed a malignancy; the scan confirmed the specific diagnosis of lymphoma.

Note that a clinical diagnosis can be a definitive diagnostic method for malignant lymphoma, NOS. In this case, the biopsy was inadequate and a more specific diagnosis could not be made by histology. Because no further work-up was pursued, this NOS diagnosis of malignant lymphoma was a clinical diagnosis only.

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
20120093 MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries -- Ovary: How many primaries are to be accessioned and what rule applies when a patient has a serous carcinoma of the right ovary treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by a debulking surgery that revealed a serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma of the left fallopian tube?

For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, accession two primaries, serous carcinoma of the right ovary and serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma of the left fallopian tube based on the information provided.

The steps used to arrive at this decision are:

Open the Multiple Primary and Histology Coding Rules Manual. Choose one of the three formats (i.e., flowchart, matrix or text) and go to the Other Sites MP rules because neither the ovary nor fallopian tube have site specific rules developed.

Start at the MULTIPLE TUMORS module, Rule M3. The rules are intended to be reviewed in consecutive order within a module. The patient has multiple tumors with ICD-O-3 topography codes that are different at the third character (Cxx) and therefore this case should be accessioned as a multiple primary.

It could be helpful to know the extent of involvement noted prior to neoadjuvant therapy and debulking surgery. For example, if the patient had widely metastatic disease throughout the entire pelvis prior to the initiation of treatment, the answer may have been different.

2012
20120092 MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries/Recurrence -- Lung: How many primaries are accessioned if a diagnosis of squamous cell carcinoma of the lung is followed three years later by a diagnosis of adenocarcinoma of the lung if the pathologist reviews all the slides and states the subsequent diagnosis is a recurrence? See Discussion.

7/12/2007 Left upper lobe lung lobectomy: Squamous cell carcinoma.

3/09/2010 Left lung completion pneumonectomy: Adenocarcinoma, predominantly acinar. The diagnosis comment on the pathology report indicates the previous lobectomy specimen from 2007 was reviewed and "there are areas that appear histologically similar to the current neoplasm. Thus, the findings are most compatible with recurrence."

Despite the difference in histology, is this a single primary per the MP/H Coding Rules, General Information instruction 7 because the pathologist did refer to the 3/9/2010 diagnosis as a "recurrence" of the 7/12/2007 diagnosis after reviewing the slides?

For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, accession a single primary, left upper lobe squamous cell carcinoma diagnosed 7/27/2007.

The steps used to arrive at this decision are:

Go to the General Information notes for Determining Multiple Primaries for Solid Malignant Tumors in the Multiple Primary and Histology Coding Rules Manual.

General Information Rule 7 states "Use the multiple primary rules as written unless a pathologist compares the present tumor to the "original" tumor and states that this tumor is a recurrence of cancer from the previous primary."

Accession a single primary. Do not apply the Multiple Primary rules because the pathologist compared the 2007 and 2010 slides and determined this was a recurrence and not a new primary.

2012
20120087

MP/H Rules/Histology--Kidney: How is the histology coded and what rule(s) apply for "cyst associated renal cell carcinoma," "cystic renal cell carcinoma," and "cystic renal cell carcinoma, clear cell type"? See Discussion.

 

Per SINQ 20031008, these histologies were all coded as 8316/3 [cyst associated renal cell carcinoma]. What are the correct codes for these histologies using the 2007 MP/H Rules?

 

For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, the correct histology code for both cyst associated renal cell carcinoma and cystic renal cell carcinoma is 8316/3. The histology code for cystic renal cell carcinoma, clear cell type is 8255/3.

The steps used to arrive at these decisions are:

 

Step 1: Open the Multiple Primary and Histology Coding Rules Manual. Choose one of the three formats (i.e., flowchart, matrix or text). Go to the Kidney Histology rules because site specific rules have been developed for this primary.

 

Step 2: For the first histology, cyst associated renal cell carcinoma, start at the SINGLE TUMOR module, Rule H1. The rules are intended to be reviewed in consecutive order within a module. Stop at Rule H5. According to this rule you are to use Table 1 if you have a renal cell carcinoma and mention of a more specific renal cell type. To locate Table 1, go to Kidney under the Terms & Definitions section. Per Table 1, titled Renal Cell Carcinomas and Specific Renal Cell Types, "cyst associated" is a specific type of renal cell carcinoma. Code the histology to 8316/3 [cyst associated renal cell carcinoma].

 

Step 3: For the second histology, cystic renal cell carcinoma start at the SINGLE TUMOR module, Rule H1. The rules are intended to be reviewed in consecutive order within a module. Stop at Rule H5. As in the previous example you are to use Table 1 if you have a renal cell carcinoma and mention of a more specific renal cell type. Per Table 1 "cystic" is a specific type of renal cell carcinoma. Code the histology to 8316/3 [cystic renal cell carcinoma].

 

Step 4: For the third histology, cystic renal cell carcinoma, clear cell type, start at the SINGLE TUMOR module, Rule H1. The rules are intended to be reviewed in consecutive order within a module. Stop at Rule H6 which states you are to code histology to 8255 (adenocarcinoma with mixed subtypes) when there are two or more specific renal cell carcinoma types. To determine whether "clear cell" and "cystic" are types of renal cell carcinoma use Table 1 again. According to Table 1, both cystic and clear cell are specific types of renal cell carcinoma. Code the histology as 8255/3 [adenocarcinoma with mixed subtypes].

 

2012
20120086 Primary site: What is the single primary site used for a patient with multiple tumors in the duodenum and jejunum? See discussion. The patient has a tumor in the jejunum and another tumor in the duodenum. Both tumors have the same histology. This disease process is a single primary per Other Sites Rule M18. Is the primary site coded to the more invasive tumor? If the tumors are equally invasive, is the primary site coded to C179?

Code the primary site to C179 [small intestine, NOS] for multiple invasive tumors of the small intestine accessioned as a single primary.

The steps used to arrive at this decision are:

Step 1: Go to the Primary Site subsection located in Section IV of the 2012 SEER Manual titled "Description of This Neoplasm."

Step 2: Apply instruction 5. "Code the last digit of the primary site code to '9' for single primaries, when multiple tumors arise in different subsites of the same anatomic site and the point of origin cannot be determined." Code the primary site to C179 [small intestine, NOS].

When multiple tumors arising in different subsites are accessioned as a single primary, the primary site is coded to the NOS code, in this case small intestine, NOS [C179]. The level of invasion does not determine the primary site, unless one or more of the tumors is in situ and another is invasive.

 2012
20120080 MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries--Kidney, renal pelvis/Bladder: How many primaries are accessioned if the patient was diagnosed with transitional cell carcinoma in situ of the renal pelvis in October 2006, TCC in situ of the bladder in July 2008 and TCC in situ of the ureter in November 2009?. See Discussion. Per MP/H rule M8, the TCC in situ of the bladder diagnosed in July 2008 is the same primary as the TCC in situ of the renal pelvis diagnosed in October 2006. Should the new TCC in situ of the ureter diagnosed in November 2009 be a new primary per rule M7 because the renal pelvis TCC in situ was diagnosed in 2006? Or does the 3 year time frame for rule M7 start from the date of the last recurrence (July 2008)?

Abstract two primaries for this scenario per Rule M7. The first primary is the renal pelvis in Oct. 2006; the second primary is the ureter in Nov. 2009. The bladder tumor in July 2008 is not a new primary per Rule M8.

Compare the diagnosis date of the current (most recent) tumor to the diagnosis date of the original tumor. This applies even if the patient had six occurrences in-between these dates; you still compare the current tumor to the diagnosis date of the original tumor and ignore recurrences in this process.

See slide 6 of the Beyond the Basics presentation,

http://www.seer.cancer.gov/tools/mphrules/training_adv/SEER_MPH_Gen_Instruc_06152007.pdf.

2012
20120073 Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is the primary site coded for a 2011 diagnosis of systemic mastocytosis? See Discusson. Patient presented with leukopenia, anemia and monoclonal gammopathy. A bone marrow biopsy in 2011 showed systemic mastocytosis [9741/3]. A subsequent shave biopsy of abdominal skin showed histologic features that were consistent with a diagnosis of mastocytosis. A later bone marrow biopsy was subsequently performed that showed progressive systemic mastocytosis.

Updated May 2026

The Heme DB indicates the primary site for systemic mastocytosis is always coded to C421 [bone marrow].

2012
20120060 Primary Site/Reportability: What is the primary site and reportability status of a "pancreatic endocrine neoplasm" that arises in the heterotopic pancreas of the splenic hilum that is stated to be a "well-differentiated endocrine tumor, uncertain behavior per the WHO classification"? See Discussion.

SINQ 20120035 states that well differentiated pancreatic endocrine neoplasms should be reported with histology code 8240/3. However, the pathology report provides the WHO Classification which states "uncertain behavior." Should this tumor still be reported as 8240/3?

If reportable, how is the primary site coded? The tumor arose in heterotopic pancreas (in the splenic hilum), which is pancreatic tissue found outside the usual anatomical location of the pancreas. Per the pathology report, the tumor did not invade the spleen. Should the primary site be coded to C48.1 [mesentery]? The patient is female and the coding schema for "Peritoneum for Females" would apply to the case. However, none of those CS extension codes seem to apply to this localized case.

This case is reportable. Code the primary site to C25.9 [pancreas, NOS] and the histology to 8240/3 [neuroendocrine tumor (NET), Grade 1].

Per the 2012 SEER Manual, code the site in which the primary tumor originated. This neoplasm arose in pancreatic tissue and will behave accordingly, even though this pancreatic tissue is not located in the usual place.

Pancreatic endocrine and neuroendocrine neoplasms are essentially the same thing. However, they are described in two different WHO classifications; the endocrine classification and the digestive system classification. The digestive system classification is more recent, and is preferred by our expert pathologist consultant. The term "neuroendocrine" is to be used now, rather than "endocrine." In the pancreas, "well differentiated endocrine tumor" is synonymous with "neuroendocrine tumor (NET) Grade 1" and is coded 8240/3.

2012