Histology--Thyroid: Should any mention of encapsulated be included in the histology coding (8343/3 vs. 8260/3) for papillary thyroid carcinoma cases? See Discussion.
Example: Left thyroid lobectomy with final diagnosis
When the only mention of encapsulation is included in the tumor characteristics of the College of American Pathologists (CAP) summary, not the pathologist's choice of histologic type, what is the preferred histology?
Assign 8343/3 for encapsulated variant of papillary thyroid carcinoma. If the pathology report is not available, use the histologic type in addition to other information in the CAP Protocol.
Reportability/Histology--Penis: Is a diagnosis of undifferentiated penile intraepithelial neoplasia (PeIN) reportable for cases diagnosed in any year? See Discussion.
Example: An October 2017 glans penis biopsy final diagnosis was reported as: Undifferentiated (Warty-Basaloid) penile intraepithelial neoplasia.
In January 2018, an additional penile glans biopsy final diagnosis was reported as: At least squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) in situ (HGPIN). Foreskin circumcision on the same pathology report shows SCC in situ.
It is unclear whether the term undifferentiated is synonymous with high-grade for the purposes of determining penile intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN/PEIN) reportability and diagnosis date.
Report undifferentiated penile intraepithelial neoplasia (PeIN) (8077/2). WHO Classification of Tumors of the Urinary System and Male Genital Organs, 4th edition, lists basaloid (undifferentiated) penile intraepithelial neoplasia and warty (Bowenoid) penile intraepithelial neoplasia as a variants of PeIN.
Reportability/Histology--Thymus: Is a thymoma a malignancy if described as having separate tumor nodules within peri-thymic adipose tissue? See Discussion.
Patient had a thymectomy including pericardial fat for a mediastinal mass found incidentally during lung screening. Final diagnosis is WHO B3 thymoma. Staging Summary lists transcapsular invasion: "Present, as separate tumor nodules within peri-thymic adipose tissue." Tumor extension is stated to be "Confined to thymus, including peri-thymic adipose tissue." The pathologist staged this resection as pT1a pNX with no mention of mets. Clinically, there are no noted metastatic sites and no further treatment is planned.
Report this case as a malignant thymoma. Our expert pathologist consultant reviewed this case and in his opinion, the "separate tumor nodules within peri-thymic adipose tissue" fit registry reporting criteria for separate tumor nodules making this a malignant thymoma.
Solid Tumor Rules (2018/2021)/Multiple Primaries--Brain and CNS: How many primaries should be accessioned and what multiple primaries/histology rules apply to a meningioma of the spinal meninges and a meningioma of the cerebral meninges? See Discussion.
Example: Brain MRI shows a mass along underside of right tentorium extending to posterior incisura consistent with meningioma. Spinal MRI shows mass at C4-5 level consistent with meningioma. Resection of spinal meningioma shows final diagnosis of meningioma and College of American Pathologists (CAP) protocol summary indicates Histologic Type (WHO classification of tumors of the central nervous system): Meningioma, meningothelial. There is no resection of the cerebral meningioma planned. Is the CAP protocol used if it provides a further subtype for meningiomas? Per Solid Tumor Rules, the final diagnosis has priority over the CAP summary. The answer to this question does affect the number of primaries accessioned in this case.
Accession as multiple primaries using Rule M7 of the Solid Tumor Rules for Non-Malignant Central Nervous System that says to assign multiple primaries for cerebral meninges C700 AND spinal meninges C701. The Non-malignant CNS H coding section, Priority Order for using Documentation to Identify Histology" lists final DX and synoptic report as requried by CAP as being equal in priority. Use whichever report provides more specific information. See the General Instructions, page 13.
Solid Tumor Rules (2018)/Histology--Lung: What is the correct histology code for minimally invasive adenocarcinoma in the lung, 8140/3 or 8256/3? See Discussion.
For example, 9/12/18 left lung upper lobe lobectomy: 1.5 cm, 0.8 cm invasive component, lepidic predominant adenocarcinoma with acinar and lepidic patterns, G2, no visceral pleural invasion, no LVI, 0/14 LNS positive. An additional minimally invasive adenocarcinoma, 1 mm, was seen away from the main tumor. The correct coding of the minimally invasive adenocarcinoma will ultimately determine if we have one tumor (using rule M7) versus two primaries (using rule M6).
Updated answer: Code minimally invasive adenocarcinoma, NOS as 8140/3. This is a new term and code in the 2018 ICD-O-3 New Codes, Behaviors, and Terms-Updated 8/22/18 list. See Solid Tumor Lung Table 3, and Solid Tumor Lung rules H1 and H10.
Tumor Size--Esophagus: Can information from the endoscopy procedure that implies a size of 3 cm for Tumor Size--Clinical be used for Esophagus? See Discussion.
1-28-2018 CT Scan: 2.4 cm mass
2-15-2018 Endoscopy: Mass was present 22 to 25 cm. Biopsies were taken with cold forceps for histology; biopsy positive.
For the case you describe, we would record the clinical tumor size stated on the CT report.
The priority order for clinical tumor size is as follows.
1. Biopsy or operative (surgical exploration) report
2. Imaging
3. Physical exam
We do not recommend coding tumor size based on an inferred tumor size from a description such as "Mass was present 22 to 25 cm." Look for an actual measurement of the mass, or a stated tumor size. Use text fields to record details.
Primary site--Breast: how is subsite coded for a breast cancer when it is described as central portion between 1-3:00 or central portion at 12:00?
See the SEER coding guidelines for breast, https://seer.cancer.gov/manuals/2018/AppendixC/Coding_Guidelines_Breast_2018.pdf Generally, codes C502 - C505 are preferred over C501. C501 would be preferred over C508. Apply these general guidelines when there is no other way to determine the subsite using the available medical documentation.
Table 1, Primary Site codes, in the breast solid tumor rules also provide helpful information for coding site.
Reportability/Histology--Bladder: Is papillary urothelial neoplasm of low malignant potential (PUNLMP) (8130/1) reportable when also referred to as papillary transitional cell carcinoma, grade 1, no invasion (8130/2) previously? See Discussion.
The pathology report reads: Urinary bladder, tumor over right ureteral orifice, biopsy: Urinary bladder mucosa (urothelium) and submucosa (lamina propria), with papillary urothelial neoplasm of low malignant potential (previously known as papillary transitional cell carcinoma, grade 1 of 3), no invasion identified.
This case is not reportable. PUNLMP (8130/1) is the diagnosis stated by the pathologist for this case and PUNLMP is not reportable. The information in parentheses is informational in this case and does not change the pathologist's diagnosis.
According to WHO Classification of Tumors of the Urinary System and Male Genital Organs, 4th edition, there is variation of architectural and cytological features between PUNLMP and papillary urothelial carcinoma, low grade, reflecting grading changes from an older classification system.
Update to current manual/Solid Tumor Rules (2018)/Histology--Brain and CNS: Table 6 (Non-Malignant CNS Equivalent Terms and Definitions) lists as a subtype/variant of craniopharyngioma 9350/1. This is not a valid histology per the ICD-O-3 or the 2018 ICD-O-3 Update Table. Is this actually supposed to read, ?
Adamantinomatous craniopharyngioma (9351/1) is a subtype of craniopharygioma. We will correct the Non-Malignant CNS Solid Tumor Rules in the next update.
An official website of the United States government
Home