Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20091092 | MP/H Rules/Histology--Lung: How should Diagnosis Date, Diagnostic Confirmation and Histology be coded for the LEFT lung mass in the following case? PET shows a 3 cm mass in the left lung and a 2.9 cm mass in the right lung. No reportable terminology in PET. The right mass is biopsied and shows adenocarcinoma. The left mass is not biopsied. Based on rule M6, this should be reported as two primaries. No additional information in medical record. Patient expired. |
For cases diagnosed 2007 or later: For date of diagnosis, use the date of the PET scan for both primaries. For the left tumor, assign diagnostic confirmation code 8 [Clinical diagnosis only] and assign histology code 8000/3 [malignant neoplasm]. The left lung mass is reported as a separate primary because there is one tumor in each lung. According to Rule M6, when there is one tumor in the left lung and one tumor in the right lung, each tumor is a separate primary. Tumor and mass are equivalent terms for purposes of the multiple primary rules. |
2009 | |
|
|
20091084 | Primary site--Colon: How do you determine the correct subsite when there is conflicting information in different reports? Are there priority rules for coding subsite for sites other than Head and Neck? See Discussion. | The path report for a hemicolectomy says, " Specimen: left colon..." and the microscopic says, "...received in formalin designated left colon..." The Operative procedure report says, "Postoperative diagnosis - splenic flexure tumor." The text of this report says, "Mobilizing the splenic flexure mass was incredibly difficult..." and then goes on to describe exactly how and where it was resected. The discharge summary says adenosquamous carcinoma of the splenic flexure. SINQ20051010 says to use the pathology report first, but this was written before the new MP/H rules. | Use the operative report information to code primary site in this case. It is more accurate. The operative report is usually a better source of location information compared to the pathology report. The pathologist can only reiterate the location as it was reported to him/her. The 2007 SEER manual states "Unless otherwise instructed, use all available information to code the site," page 69. |
2009 |
|
|
20091023 | Sugery of Primary Site--Breast: When a patient is simultaneously diagnosed with bilateral breast cancer and bilateral mastectomies are done, do you code the total mastectomies to 40 or 41 or 42? | Abstract cancer of the left breast and cancer of the right breast as separate primaries. Code the surgery for each primary independent of the other primary. For the first primary, assign code 41 [Total (simple) mastectomy, NOS WITHOUT removal of uninvolved contralateral breast]. For the second primary, assign the code for the procedure performed on that site. |
2009 | |
|
|
20091124 | CS Eval--Lung: How is the CS Reg Nodes Eval field to be coded when the FNA of a paratracheal lymph node is positive for adenocarcinoma and the patient subsequently undergoes neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy followed by an excision of multiple lymph node fragments that show adenocarcinoma? See Discussion. | The CSv1 scheme for lung shows that code 1 under CS Reg Nodes Eval is a path staging basis. However, the definition for code 1 also states that no regional lymph nodes were removed for examination. Would we use code 1 because the case represents path staging basis? If we select code 5 because regional lymph nodes were dissected, the staging basis would be clinical. If we select code 6, the staging basis would be y. | This answer was provided in the context of CSv1 coding guidelines. The response may not be used after your registry database has been converted to CSv2.
Use code "6" for the CS LN evaluation field. As explained on page 113 in the 2007 SEER Manual, when post-operative disease is more extensive despite neoadjuvant therapy, this can be coded in the evaluation field. In this case, only an FNA was done on lymph nodes pre-operatively, but actual lymph nodes were removed and documented in the post-neoadjuvant excision of the lymph nodes which documented that they are histologically positive -- proving that the neoadjuvant therapy did not work. |
2009 |
|
|
20091048 | Surgery of Primary Site--Lymphoma/Soft Tissue: How is this field coded for an excision of a neck mass that found lymphoma in soft tissue (C49.0)? See Discussion. | CT scan showed soft tissue mass in the retropharynx. 9/23/2008 Laryngoscopy with biopsy taken of left tonsil and left base of tongue and random biopsies of nasopharynx; FNA of left neck. Path stated left tonsil, squamous papilloma. Left base of tongue, no significant histopathology. Nasopharynx biopsies, compatible with tonsillar tissue. Pretracheal lymph node biopsies, mild reactive lymphoid hyperplasia. 9/30/2008 Excision of left neck mass with limited deep jugular chain lymph node dissection. Path stated lymph node left jugular biopsy, no tumor seen. Soft tissue, left neck biopsy, malignant B cell lymphoma with plasmacytoid differentiation. Addendum from consult: favor a diagnosis of a marginal zone lymphoma. Per the gross description, the specimen was fibrofatty connective tissue in which there is a tumor infiltrate. | Assign code 26 [partial resection]. Use the surgery codes that apply to the primary site. See page C-597 of the 2007 SEER manual for surgery of primary site codes applicable to primary sites of soft tissue coded to C490 - C499. | 2009 |
|
|
20091015 | MP/H Rules/Histology--Gallbladder: What histology is coded for a tumor described as "90% high grade neuroendocrine ca, large cell type; and 10% low grade adenocarcinoma, conventional type"? | For cases diagnosed 2007 or later: MP/H Rule H17 for Other Sites applies. Code the histology 8140 [adenocarcinoma]. The ICD-O-3 code for large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma is 8013 and the code for adenocarcinoma is 8140. |
2009 | |
|
|
20091009 | MP/H Rules/Histology--Kidney: How do you code histology for a renal cell carcinoma when pathologists disagree as to whether or not the tumor is consistent with thyroid-like follicular carcinoma of the kidney? See Discussion. | Final diagnosis states 'left radical nephrectomy, renal cell carcinoma.' The CAP Histologic Type is listed as: Unclassified, most consistent with primary thyroid-like follicular carcinoma of the kidney.' Because of the unusual histology it was sent for a consult to a genitourinary pathology specialist. His response was: 'histologic features not typical for any of the known subtypes of renal cell carcinoma and are not consistent with primary thyroid-like follicular carcinoma of the kidney, a distinct renal tumor that we have recently published in the literature.' The tumor was TTF-1 negative, arguing against metastasis from a thyroid primary. | For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, assign code 8312 [renal cell carcinoma, NOS]. The diagnosis is renal cell carcinoma, but the specific type is in question. | 2009 |
|
|
20091012 | MP/H Rules/Histology--Head & Neck: If the final diagnosis states "see microscopic description," can the micro information be used to code the histology? See Discussion. | In regards to coding histology for 2007 and forward cases, we are instructed to use the final diagnosis, and any addenda or comments associated with the final diagnosis. We are not to use the microscopic description. However, we are seeing pathology reports with a final diagnosis that also includes the notation "see microscopic description" or "see description". Example: "Left Parotid: High grade carcinoma involving deep lobe with marginal extension. See description." The microscopic description goes on to describe the carcinoma in more detail, which includes a statement "consistent with the ductal type of primary parotid carcinoma." Can we use this microscopic description or not? | For cases diagnosed 2007 or later: When the final diagnosis indicates that the microscopic section contains the detailed diagnosis, use the microscopic description to code the histology. Otherwise, code from the final diagnosis only and not from the microscopic description. The final diagnosis is usually the pathologist's conclusion after consideration of the various choices listed in the microscopic description. The histology code should represent the pathologist's final conclusion. |
2009 |
|
|
20081063 | MP/H Rules--Breast: How many primaries should be abstracted when a patient has a mass at 6:00 that showed poorly differentiated ductal carcinoma and a hypoechoic nodule at 9:00 that was excised with no real tumor present there though path showed angiolymphatic invasion by carcinoma throughout the entire specimen? See Discussion. | Palpable mass in right breast at 6:00. Path stated 'poorly differentiated ductal carcinoma with extensive necrosis and extensive angiolymphatic invasion. Focal high grade comedocarcinoma (1%)'. Another hypoechoic nodule was seen at the 9:00 position. This mass was excised from surrounding tissue. This mass was more like an inflammatory mass; there was no real tumor present there. Path report stated "Breast mass 9:00 excisional biopsy - angiolymphatic invasion by mammary carcinoma throughout the entire specimen." Is this two primaries because of the two different histology codes: 8500 and 8010? |
For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, abstract as a single primary using rule M3 (a single tumor is always a single primary). There was one tumor present according to the information provided. The second specimen was not a separate tumor ("There was no real tumor present there"). | 2008 |
|
|
20081098 | MP/H Rules/Histology--Colon: How do you use Rule H5 or H6 to code "moderately diff adenoca with mucinous component"? | For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, code the histology 8140 [Adenocarcinoma]. Rule H6 applies because the final diagnosis is not "mucinous adenocarcinoma" and the percentage of mucinous adenocarcinoma is not stated. Rule H13 does not apply because "component" is not a term that indicates a specific histology. |
2008 |
An official website of the United States government
