Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20100103 | Reportability--Corpus uteri: Is gestational trophoblastic neoplasia reportable if there is no mention of metastasis but the patient has been treated with chemotherapy? See Discussion. | Per SINQ 20021106, for tumors diagnosed prior to 2007, a clinical diagnosis of metastatic gestational trophoblastic disease was to be coded to histology 9100/3 [Choriocarcinoma]. "Gestational trophoblastic neoplasia includes the diagnosis of choriocarcinoma." |
Do not report gestational trophoblastic neoplasia unless stated to be malignant. | 2010 |
|
|
20100099 | Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Should all cases of precursor B acute lymphoblastic leukemia diagnosed 1/1/10 and later with histology coded to 9836/3 have the values changed to 9811/3 per the Heme DB Abstractor Notes section or should they remain coded 9836/3. | For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.
For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, code histology to 9811/3 [B lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoma, NOS] which is the new classification for pre-BALL. The histology code 9836/3 is obsolete as of 2010 and should not be used for cases with diagnosis date after 12/31/2009.
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. |
2010 | |
|
|
20100056 | Primary site/Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How are these fields coded for a case with pathologic diagnosis of "anaplastic large cell lymphoma, ALK-negative" involving the brain and a clinical statement of involvement in the right inguinal lymph nodes and the right lower extremity by a cutaneous lymphoma? See Discussion. |
The final diagnosis on the pathology report for a brain biopsy is "Anaplastic large cell lymphoma, ALK-negative." Per a progress note: right inguinal lymphadenopathy. CT scan is consistent with multiple lymph node groups enlarged. Right lower extremity cutaneous nodular lesion; cutaneous lesions likely cutaneous lymphoma.
Should the histology be coded 9702/3 [anaplastic large cell lymphoma, ALK-negative], and the primary site C447 [skin of leg]? Or is the physician using "cutaneous lymphoma" as a general term indicating infiltration and the primary site is really C779 [lymph nodes, NOS]? |
For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.
Code to primary site to C447 [skin of leg]) per Rule PH25 and histology to 9702/3 [anaplastic large cell lymphoma, ALK-negative]. Per the Abstractor Notes section in Heme DB, these are the usual presentations for this disease. It also states this disease presents with peripheral node involvement and is often generalized with infiltrates in the bone marrow, liver, spleen, and extranodal tissue. Less frequently involved sites are lung, salivary gland and CNS.
Per PH25, code the primary site to the organ when the lymphoma is present in an organ (skin, right leg) and that organ's regional lymph nodes (inguinal). Distant lymph nodes or other organs may also be involved, but should be disregarded for coding primary site.
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. |
2010 |
|
|
20100102 | Behavior--Breast: How is behavior coded when a biopsy shows in situ carcinoma with a focus suspicious for invasion and a subsequent excision/resection shows only in situ carcinoma? | Code this case as in situ. The specimen from the excision/resection is the more reliable source for determining behavior, compared to a biopsy, especially in this case where the behavior is ambiguous on the biopsy. | 2010 | |
|
|
20100067 | MP/H Rules/Reportability--Ovary: Should an ovarian tumor with the histology of mixed epithelial borderline tumor with multiple foci of intraepithelial carcinoma be accessioned based on the presence of a foci of intraepithelial carcinoma? See Discussion. | The final diagnosis on the pathology report, "Omentum: mixed epithelial borderline tumor with multiple foci of intraepithelial carcinoma. Peritoneal fluid for cytology: neoplastic cells present; low grade serous neoplasm. Lymph nodes, right pelvic: one lymph node harboring implants of serous borderline tumor and endosalpingiosis within the subcapsular sinus. Bilateral fallopian tubes and ovaries: mixed epithelial borderline tumor with multiple foci of intraepithelial carcinoma involving ovarian surface and serosal surface of the tube. Detached fragment of borderline tumor within the tubal lumen. Uterus, cervix, and segment of colon: mixed epithelial borderline tumor with multiple foci of intraepithelial carcinoma involving parametrial and paracervical tissue, cul de sac, uterine and colonic serosa. Nine pericolonic lymph nodes negative for tumor. Stage III.
I&R # 45622 asked if a mucinous borderline tumor with intraepithelial carcinoma and focal microinvasion is reportable. The answer given on that site was that the case is not reportable. According to MPH, FORDS, and Collaborative Stage, intraepithelial carcinoma is in situ, behavior code 2, and is reportable. Has this changed? |
This case is reportable because there is a diagnosis of carcinoma (intraepithelial carcinoma). | 2010 |
|
|
20100008 | Primary site--Bladder/Unknown & ill-defined sites: Should the coding of primary site be based on a molecular study when it is not verified by a clinical correlation? See Discussion. | Patient was seen in 2009 at Hospital A for bone pain and was found to have metastatic adenocarcinoma. A paraffin block specimen was sent to BioThernostics for THEROS CancerTYPE ID Molecular Cancer Classification Tests. The results came back with a 94% likelihood that the urinary bladder was the primary site. No scans were done on the abdomen or pelvis.
The patient was then sent to Hospital B for radiation to the bones and chemotherapy (Carboplatin and Taxol). The patient died within 6 months.
According to Hospital A, the primary site is bladder based on the molecular study report. Hospital B says this is an unknown primary. Which is correct? Do we take primary site from these tests, even when no clinical correlation is documented? |
Code primary site to bladder in this case. Code the known primary site when given the choice between a known primary site and an unknown primary site. | 2010 |
|
|
20100083 | Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned for a patient with a longstanding history of follicular cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma followed by a 2010 diagnosis of "B-cell lymphoma with prominent large cell component, compatible with primary cutaneous follicle center cell lymphoma"? See Discussion. | Patient has a history of follicular cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma dating back to the 1990s. The patient was treated with chemotherapy and bone marrow transplantation, radiation and rituximab. The patient had no evidence of recurrence. In April 2010 a lesion appeared on the side of the scalp above the left ear with a diagnosis of "B-cell lymphoma with prominent large cell component, compatible with primary cutaneous follicle center cell lymphoma." The oncology diagnosis is "primary cutaneous follicle center lymphoma."
Would the Multiple Primaries Calculator be used in this case? |
For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.
Accession two primaries per Rule M15. Per the Multiple Primaries Calculator, primary cutaneous follicle center lymphoma [9597/3] following a diagnosis of follicular lymphoma, NOS [9690/3] is a new primary.
While the pathologic diagnosis was B-cell lymphoma "compatible with" primary cutaneous follicle center cell lymphoma and ambiguous terms cannot be used to identify a more specific histology, the physician confirmed the more specific diagnosis without ambiguous terminology. Therefore, this diagnosis should be coded.
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. |
2010 |
|
|
20100028 | Primary site/Histology--Head & Neck: How are these fields coded when the final diagnosis for a skull based mass is "neuroendocrine carcinoma" and the IHC studies are incompatible with a brain/spinal cord primary (ependymoma)? See Discussion. |
The pathology report final diagnosis is, "skull base mass, biopsy: neuroendocrine carcinoma, see note. NOTE: Ancillary IHC studies reveal ...the IHC signature is incompatible with ependymoma. The constellation of findings is diagnostic of well differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma." The site/histology combination of C410 and 8246/3 is 'impossible' by SEER edits. There is no override. What is the correct primary site and histology? |
According to our subject matter expert physician, this unusual case is most likely a sino-nasal tumor (some variant of esthesioneuroblastoma [olfactory neuroblastoma]). Code to nasal cavity [C300] as indicated in ICD-O-3 by site-associated topography code attached to the morphology code for olfactory neuroblastoma [9522/3]. |
2010 |
|
|
20100048 | Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is the primary site coded for a patient diagnosed with Langerhans cell histocytosis/eosinophilic granuloma involving both the seventh rib and the right temporal bone? See Discussion. | Patient was diagnosed with Langerhans cell histiocytosis/eosinophilic granuloma following a biopsy of the seventh rib on 3/22/10. On 4/13/10 the patient had a right external ear canal mass (right temporal bone) biopsy with same diagnosis. Should the primary site be coded to bone, NOS [C419]? | For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.
Per Rule PH30, use the Heme DB to determine the primary and code it to bone, NOS [C419]. Langerhans cell histiocytosis can occur as a solitary lesion, multifocal lesions, or multisystem disease. In this case, the patient has multifocal disease of the bone. The abstractor notes in the Hematopoietic DB were used as a reference for this answer.
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. |
2010 |
|
|
20100015 | Type of Multiple Tumors/Multiplicity Counter--Breast. Are the data items "Type of Multiple Tumors Reported as One Primary" and "Multiplicity Counter" related? How should they be coded for breast cases in which there are multiple measured invasive tumors, plus DCIS which is not measured nor stated whether it is separate from the invasive tumors? See Discussion.
|
For example, path report states only "multifocal invasive ductal carcinoma, 1.5 cm and 0.8 cm, and low-grade DCIS." The Multiplicity Counter instructions tell us to ignore/do not count foci that are not measured. Should we interpret this to mean, count only the two invasive foci and ignore the DCIS? Should Type of Multiple Tumors then be coded 30 or 40, because only the invasive tumors are coded in Multiplicity Counter? | Code Type of Multiple Tumors 30 [in situ and invasive]. The code in Type of Multiple Tumors may or may not reflect the tumors that were counted in Multiplicity Counter. For this case, it is correct to code 02 in multiplicity counter. | 2010 |
An official website of the United States government
