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: 03/01/2026 07:07 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20130035

Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned and what rule applies when a subsequent diagnosis of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (95%) and follicular lymphoma, grade 3 (5%) is made following an original diagnosis of low grade CD-10 positive B-cell lymphoma, most consistent with low grade follicular lymphoma (FL) ? See Discussion.

In 2011, patient presented with a large mesenteric mass, numerous other smaller mesenteric lymph nodes, moderate retroperitoneal and extensive iliac chain adenopathy greater on right; small inguinal nodes are also present mostly on right side and splenomegaly per the CT scan. Abdominal pelvic mass needle biopsies showed low grade CD-10 positive B-cell lymphoma, most consistent with low grade follicular lymphoma (FL). The patient was treated with R-CVP with unknown response.

In June 2012, patient presented again for laparoscopy and lymph node biopsy for stated recurrence of lymphoma found on CT scan. A large mass was seen in mesentery of bowel. Abdominal mass biopsy showed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Abdominal mass #2 excisional biopsy showed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, 95%, and follicular lymphoma grade 3, 5%. The majority of the tumor is now DLBCL.

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

This case should be accessioned as a single primary, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma diagnosed in 2011 per Rule M7. Note 4 for Rule M7 states to change the histology code on the original abstract to the more specific histology, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in this case. There is no time restriction for rule M7. Apply rule PH11 and code the histology as 9680/3 [DLBCL] when both DLBCL and follicular lymphoma are present in the same lymph node(s).

Ambiguous terminology is not used to code a more specific histologic type per the Heme Manual. The information submitted states only that this low grade B-cell lymphoma was "most consistent with follicular lymphoma." The term "consistent with" is an ambiguous term per SEER and cannot be used to code the histology of the 2011 neoplasm as follicular lymphoma. There was no subsequent clinical statement that this patient was diagnosed with follicular lymphoma in 2011.

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.

Although the ambiguous terminology on the pathology report is not used to code the histology to follicular lymphoma, had there been a subsequent clinical statement that this patient had follicular lymphoma, the histology would be coded to follicular lymphoma [9690/3]. A diagnosis of follicular lymphoma followed by a diagnosis of DLBCL more than 21 days later is a new primary per rule M12.

 2013
20130192 MP/H Rules/Histology--Pleura: How is histology coded when the pathology report final diagnosis is "malignant neoplasm, compatible with malignant mesothelioma" if the COMMENT section of the pathology report indicates the tumor has a mixed epithelial and sarcomatoid pattern? See Discussion. This case was discussed with a pathologist who feels the correct histology should be biphasic mesothelioma (9053/3) because there are both epithelial and sarcomatoid components to this tumor. However, applying the current MP/H Rules, the histology is coded to 9050/3 (mesothelioma, NOS) because the term "pattern" cannot be used to code a more specific histologic type for invasive tumors. If this truly is a biphasic mesothelioma, that data is lost for researchers because the current MP/H Rules fail to capture this information. Should the term pattern be used to code the more specific histology in this case? Code the histology to malignant mesothelioma, NOS [9050/3]. Apply the MP/H Rules as written until they are revised. The word "pattern" and other terms will be reconsidered for the next iteration of the rules. 2013
20130182 Primary site--Head and Neck: How is primary site coded if a floor of mouth biopsy reveals microinvasive squamous cell carcinoma but the definitive resection of the tongue and floor of mouth unifocal lesion reveals only in situ squamous cell cancer? See Discussion.

Patient with overlapping lesion of tongue and floor of mouth. Initial biopsy of floor of mouth reveals microinvasive squamous cell cancer. Definitive resection reveals in situ squamous cell cancer. Pathology report states unifocal tumor. The tumor site on pathology report is documented as involving the tongue and floor of mouth.

Should the primary site be coded to floor of mouth because it is the site of invasive disease? Or is primary site C148 [overlapping sites of lip, oral cavity and pharynx] because invasion should not be used to determine primary site?

Code the primary site to C068 [overlapping lesion of other and unspecified parts of the mouth]. Based on the information provided, this is a tumor described as a "book-leaf" lesion a lesion that overlaps the floor of the mouth and the underside of the tongue. 2013
20130097 Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Are either heparin-induced thrombocytopenia or heparin-induced thrombocytopenia that becomes refractory thrombocytopenia reportable?

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

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is not reportable.

If the diagnosis is changed to refractory thrombocytopenia, then this case is reportable.

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.

2013
20130151 Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: What is the primary site when a splenectomy shows "T large granular lymphocytic leukemia" and the peripheral blood flow cytometry is negative? See Discussion. The physician note states there is no evidence of leukemia on peripheral blood. The disease is localized to the spleen. Is the primary site coded to the bone marrow [C421] or can it be coded to the spleen [C422]?

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

Code the primary site to C421 [bone marrow]. Leukemias are coded to the bone marrow per the Heme DB.

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.

2013
20130027

Reportability--Are well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors and grade 1 neuroendocrine tumors of the appendix now reportable? See Discussion.

The terminology for carcinoid tumors has changed. The current terminology used is "neuroendocrine tumor." Are well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors of the appendix non-reportable because carcinoid, NOS of the appendix has a borderline behavior code [8240/1]? When the histology/behavior codes for the term "well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor" became 8240/3, did SEER intend this change to also apply to appendix primaries? If so, for which diagnosis year did this change go into effect?

Well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors and grade 1 neuroendocrine tumors of the appendix are reportable because these tumors have a morphology code 8240/3 per the WHO Classification of Tumors of the Digestive System. However, per the ICD-O-3, carcinoid tumors of the appendix have a behavior code of /1 [borderline].

The terminology of neuroendocrine tumors is evolving and current thinking at the international level is that carcinoid/WD NET of appendix is reportable. However, reportability in the United States is based on ICD-O-3. The histology code for "Carcinoid of appendix" is 8240/1; the histology code for a carcinoids of all other primary sites is 8240/3. Until the United States adopts the proposed changes for ICD-O-3, reportability of appendix cases is as follows:

  • Carcinoid
  • Well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor
  • Grade 1 neuroendocrine tumor
  • Well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor/carcinoid (Pathologist uses both terms in reporting the diagnosis and does not want to choose one diagnosis over the other.)
 2013
20130072

MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries--Lung: How many primaries are accessioned when the right lower lobe lung has two adenocarcinomas, both with lepidic pattern, if the tumor board staged these tumors as separate primaries? See Discussion.

Per pathology report

  • Lung, right lower lobe, wedge excision (A): Invasive moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma with focal lepidic pattern (pT1a, pN0).
  • Right lower lobe, completion lobectomy (F): Separate focus of well differentiated adenocarcinoma with lepidic pattern (<4mm) (see comment).
  • COMMENT: The block F7 shows a microscopic focus of adenocarcinoma with lepidic growth pattern. This most likely represents a separate primary tumor since the stapled margins were all negative for involvement. This focus measures less than 0.4 cm.
  • Tumor focality: Most likely two separate primary tumor nodules. Histologic type: adenocarcinoma, mixed type (NOS and lepidic type).

The tumor board has staged this as two separate primaries and is treating it as such. They are not considering the second focus metastatic even though it is the same histology. Lepidic is not in the ICD-O-3. Is lepidic a new term for histology?

For cases diagnosed 2007 and later, accession a single primary, adenocarcinoma [8140/3] of the right lower lobe lung. The steps used to arrive at this decision 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 Lung MP rules because site specific rules have been developed for this primary.

Step 2: Start at the MULTIPLE TUMORS module, rule M3. The rules are intended to be reviewed in consecutive order within a module. Stop at rule M12. Accession a single primary when the patient has two tumors in the same lung with the same histology.

Keep in mind that physicians follow different "rules" to determine the number of primaries. Even though the physicians consider this case to represent two primaries, the MP/H rules instruct you to accession one primary.

We have received quite a few questions about the term lepidic. Below is the general definition of lepidic that will be added to the next MP/H revision.

"Lepidic" is a growth pattern meaning that tumor cells are growing along the alveolar septa. It is characteristic of bronchioloalveolar carcinoma (BAC), but not diagnostic of it. The diagnosis of BAC also requires no stromal, vascular, or pleural invasion. Lepidic growth may be seen in other adenocarcinomas, including metastases to lung from other sites. It is not a type/subtype of adenocarcinoma. For lepidic lung neoplasms, code the histology indicated, for example BAC.

 2013
20130092

Reportability--Head & Neck: What are the correct site and histology codes if a glomus tympanicum tumor of the middle ear is reportable?

Glomus tympanicum tumors of the middle ear are not reportable. The 2005 WHO Classification of Head and Neck Tumors classified these tumors as a borderline [/1] behavior and recorded them in the ICD-O-3 with histology code 8690 [glomus jugulare tumor, NOS].

According to WHO, "the distinction between jugular and tympanic paragangliomas can easily be made in the patient by modern imaging methods ... the jugular neoplasm is identified as arising from the jugular bulb region ... while the tympanic neoplasm is confined to the middle ear." Benign and borderline neoplasms of the middle ear [C301] are not reportable. The middle ear is not a reportable CNS site for benign and borderline tumors.

 2013
20130149 MP/H Rules/Histology--Testis: What is the histology code for a testis primary with embryonal carcinoma (70%), yolk sac tumor (30%), and a focus of seminoma (<1%)? See Discussion.

The right orchiectomy specimen showed a mixed histology tumor. The retroperitoneal lymph nodes showed teratoma, NOS only. Does the presence of teratoma in the lymph nodes change the histology coding?

The MP/H Rules for Other Sites, Table 2 (Mixed and Combination Codes) does not include the combination of embryonal carcinoma, yolk sac tumor and seminoma. SINQ 20110013 does state the combination of embryonal carcinoma and yolk sac tumor should be coded to histology 9065/3 [germ cell tumor, nonseminomatous]. In this case, is the focus of seminoma comprising <1% included when coding the histology? If the seminoma is included, Table 2 still does not address this combination.

Code the histology to mixed germ cell tumor [9085/3] per Rule H16; code the appropriate combination/mixed code when there are multiple specific histologies.

According to the WHO Classification of Tumors of the Male Genital Organs, tumors of more than one histologic type (mixed forms) can occur in any combination of various germ cell histologies including embryonal, yolk sac, teratoma, and choriocarcinoma. Mixed teratoma and seminoma is included under histology code 9085/3 [mixed germ cell tumor] in the ICD-O-3. The revised MP/H rules will expand on these mixed testicular histologies.

Priority for coding histology is using the diagnosis from the primary site (when possible) over the histology from a metastatic site. The presence of teratoma, NOS in the retroperitoneal lymph nodes does not change the histology code.

2013
20130155

Diagnostic confirmation--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How do we code diagnostic confirmation if the pathology report states the diagnosis of a skin biopsy is "low-grade B cell lymphoma, most compatible with marginal zone lymphoma," genetic data includes positive rearrangement for immunoglobulin heavy chain gene favor a diagnosis of "B cell lymphoma," and the physician's clinical diagnosis is "cutaneous marginal zone lymphoma"?

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

Code diagnostic confirmation to 3 [positive histology AND positive immunophenotyping studies (9590/3 - 9992/3)].

Immunoglobulin heavy and light chain genes rearranged is listed under Genetics Data in the Heme DB for 9699/3 [extranodal marginal zone lymphoma]. Given the documentation of this positive genetic finding and the positive bone marrow, code diagnostic confirmation to 3.

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.

2013