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: 09/20/2025 03:33 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20130116 Histology/Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How are the histology and primary site coded if a pleurocentesis is compatible with plasmablastic plasmacytoma/lymphoma when no further information is available?

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

Code the histology to 9735/3 [plasmablastic lymphoma] and the primary site to C809 [unknown] per Rule PH27.

Code the histology specified when the only histology for the case is preceded by ambiguous terminology. For this case, code the histology to plasmablastic lymphoma because it is the only histology mentioned in the diagnosis.

Per the Heme DB Abstractor Notes section for plasmablastic lymphoma, most patients present with Stage III-IV disease. The positive pleural fluid is likely due to advanced disease. In the absence of any other information for this case, Rule PH27 applies, "Code primary site to unknown primary site C809 when there is no evidence of lymphoma in lymph nodes AND the physician documents in the medical record that he/she suspects that the lymphoma originates in an organ(s) OR multiple organ involvement without any nodal involvement."

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
20130065 Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Should the higher histology code associated with grade 1 follicular lymphoma [9695/3] be used rather than grade 2 follicular lymphoma [9691/3] in cases of follicular lymphoma grade 1-2? Code histology to 9691/3 [follicular lymphoma, grade 2], histology. For follicular lymphoma, when there is a grade such as 1-2 indicated, take the histology associated with the higher grade disease process, even though the lower grade histology code is higher. 2013
20130093 MP/H Rules/Histology--Lung: What histology code is used for an adenocarcinoma in situ/bronchioloalveolar carcinoma (BAC) of the lung? See Discussion.

Classification of lung malignancies has undergone a change. The bronchioloalveolar carcinoma histology is being replaced by adenocarcinoma in situ and minimally invasive adenocarcinoma, using an evaluation of lepidic growth pattern in the tumor.

The final diagnosis is "adenocarcinoma in situ/BAC" and the comment states, "The findings in the current biopsy are most compatible with low grade malignant lesions which, in this sample, shows features of adenocarcinoma in situ (former bronchioloalveolar adenocarcinoma), given the proliferation of pneumocytes is limited to the alveolar lining with no evidence of invasion. However, classification of the lesion depends, per reference guidelines (Travis et al. J THOR ONCOL 2011 6,(2):244-275), on its size and its overall histologic features, to rule out the presence of an invasive component and therefore can only be performed upon examination of it in its entirety, upon resection." The radiation oncologist staged this T1N0M0, stage 1 BAC.

Code the histology to 8140/2 [adenocarcinoma in situ, NOS].

The comment for this case is consistent with information from the CAP protocol, which says, "The diagnosis of bronchioloalveolar carcinoma requires exclusion of stromal, vascular, and pleural invasiona requirement that demands the tumor be evaluated histologically in its entirety. It is therefore recommended that a definitive diagnosis of bronchioloalveolar adenocarcinoma not be made on specimens in which the tumor is incompletely represented."

This tumor was not completely resected. Therefore, code to adenocarcinoma in situ based on the information provided.

2013
20130204 MP/H Rules/Histology--Kidney, renal pelvis: How is histology coded for a tubulocystic renal cell carcinoma? See Discussion. Per the resected specimen final diagnosis COMMENT in the pathology report: Tubulocystic renal cell carcinoma is a relatively new renal epithelial neoplasm that has been added to an updated WHO classification of renal tumors. (Srigley et al. The International Society of Urologic Pathology Vancouver Classification of Renal Neoplasia Am J Surg Pathol. 2013;37:1469-1489). The majority of tubulocystic renal cell carcinomas reported in the literature (greater than 90%) have behaved in an indolent manner. Code the histology to 8312/3 [renal cell carcinoma, NOS] per Rule H3. The term "tubulocystic" is not a specific renal cell histology according to our kidney pathology expert. 2013
20130219 Date of diagnosis/Ambiguous terminology--Breast: Can a mammogram BIRADS 4 or 5 assessment be used to assess reportability and can the date of the mammogram be used to code the date of diagnosis? See Discussion.

  1. Assessment: BIRADS category 4-suspicious. Findings are considered suspicious/indeterminate for malignancy

  • Assessment: BIRADS 5- highly suspicious. Findings are highly suggestive of malignancy.

  • Assessment: BIRADS 4- suspicious abnormality consider biopsy

    • Can the BIRADS number be used to assess reportability? Can a BIRADS assessment of "suspicious" be used to code the date of diagnosis?

    		BIRADS category 4 and category 5 mammograms are not to be interpreted as a reportable "malignancy" for cancer registry purposes nor are they to be used to code the date of diagnosis should the patient subsequently have a malignancy confirmed. 2013
    		20130140 Reportability/Ambiguous terminology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is a peripheral blood sample with an immunophenotype that is "characteristic of B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia" reportable?

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

    This is a reportable diagnosis of chronic lymphocytic leukemia [9823/3]. The physician is using the terms "characteristic of" in the same manner as he/she would use the terms "diagnostic of."

    This case fits with the usual diagnosis of CLL. The peripheral blood is diagnostic for leukemias. There was a specific leukemia noted, B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia. CLL (B-cell is the phenotype) is usually diagnosed incidentally by a peripheral smear because it is asymptomatic. However, we recommend looking for further work-up, such as a bone marrow biopsy.

    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
    		20130043

    Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is reactive plasmacytosis a reportable diagnosis that is equivalent to plasmacytoma?

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

    Reactive plasmacytosis is not reportable unless there is another indication of a reportable neoplastic disease. Reactive plasmacytosis is "a well known pathological process described as occurring in a variety of situations including infections, autoimmune disease, diabetes mellitus, sideropenia, liver cirrhosis and neoplastic conditions including leukemia. This process, by definition, is assumed to be a reaction of the immune system to an unknown or poorly defined stimulus." Based on this definition, reactive plasmacytosis is not the same as a plasmacytoma, although it may indicate the presence of a neoplastic process, such as leukemia.

    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
    		20130166

    Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is "indolent multiple myeloma" reportable and synonymous with "indolent/smoldering myeloma"? See Discussion.

    7/10/12 Diagnosed with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS)

    7/27/12 Diagnosed with MGUS/smoldering myeloma. There was no intervention at this time.

    In about October/November 2012 the diagnosis was reported as smoldering myeloma,.

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

    Indolent myeloma [9732/3] and smoldering myeloma [9732/2] are reportable terms synonymous with plasma cell myeloma. Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) [9765/1] is not 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
    		20130127 Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: When did smoldering myeloma become reportable?

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

    Smoldering multiple myeloma [9732/3] has always been a reportable neoplasm. Per the Abstractor Notes section in the Heme, smoldering multiple myeloma is a variant of multiple myeloma in which the diagnostic requirements for multiple myeloma are met, but there is no organ damage. The patient is usually asymptomatic.

    Smoldering myeloma is listed under the Alternate Names section in the Heme DB for multiple myeloma [9732/3] to clarify that it is a reportable neoplasm.

    Report all new diagnoses of smoldering multiple myeloma now. Registries are not required to spend time and effort to find these cases if they have not been reporting them in the past. However, report earlier earlier cases if encountered today while performing casefinding or chart review procedures.

    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
    		20130094 MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries--Lung: How many primaries are accessioned and which M rule applies for a 2010 diagnosis of clear cell adenocarcinoma of the left upper lobe lung followed by a 2012 diagnosis of adenosquamous carcinoma of lung origin without evidence of a primary lung tumor? See Discussion.

    Patient was diagnosed with T1 N0 M0 adenocarcinoma with prominent clear cell features [8310/3] in the LUL on 08/05/2010. The patient underwent a lobectomy only.

    On 10/09/2012 the patient underwent an iliac bone biopsy showing non-small cell carcinoma with glandular and squamous features [8560/3]. Clinically, the physician is calling this stage IV adenosquamous carcinoma of lung origin involving lymph nodes, spleen and bones. There were no FDG avid pulmonary nodules found. There was no pathologic comparison to the prior lung tumor.

    Should the 2012 diagnosis be a new primary because the histology is different from the 2010 diagnosis? Or should this be one primary because there appears to be only metastatic disease with no new primary lung tumor identified in 2012? The choice of one primary seems supported by the fact that the 2012 tumor showed glandular and squamous features, and the 2010 tumor also showed glandular and clear cell (NOS) features. The clear cell could have been a clear cell squamous cell carcinoma. The original tumor was not re-examined.

    Accession a single primary, clear cell adenocarcinoma [8310/3] of the left upper lobe lung [C341] diagnosed on 08/05/2010.

    The MP/H Rules do not apply to the 2012 diagnosis because only metastatic sites were examined and there was no re-examination of the original 2010 tumor. Therefore, the disease process in 2012 is assumed to be metastatic from the lung primary diagnosed in 2010.

    		2013