MP/H Rules/Histology--Melanoma: How is histology coded for a "melanoma in situ, lentiginous type," arising in the skin of the lower leg? See Discussion.
In researching this, acral lentiginous melanoma is observed on the palms, soles and under the nails. To code to 8744, do we specifically have to see the word "acral" lentiginous melanoma?
For cases diagnosed 2007 to 2020
Assign 8742/2 [lentigo maligna] to "melanoma in situ, lentiginous type."
Acral lentiginous melanoma is not the same as melanoma, lentiginous type. "Acral lentiginous melanoma," 8744, should be used only if the report states acral lentiginous melanoma or malignant melanoma, acral lentiginous type.
Acral lentiginous melanoma most often occurs on the soles of the feet or the palms of the hands.
MP/H Rules/Histology--Brain: How is histology coded for a "low grade neuroglial tumor" of the fourth ventricle?
For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, assign histology code 9505/1 [Ganglioglioma, NOS].
According to our pathologist consultant, low grade neuroglial tumor of the fourth ventricle correlates best to the "rosette-forming glioneuronal tumor of the 4th ventricle" which is a new WHO entity. There is no current ICD-O-3 code for this. The best code available at this time is 9505/1.
Grade--Breast: How is this field coded for an "invasive ductal carcinoma, well differentiated, low nuclear grade"?
Assign code 1 [Grade 1, well differentiated]. Use the table in the 2007 SEER Manual on page C-607. Both "low grade" and "well differentiated" are coded 1 in the grade field.
Grade-Breast: How is this field coded for a breast tumor described as "intermediate nuclear grade"? See Discussion.
Guidelines for selecting grade for breast primaries prioritize nuclear grade right after B&R grade. The conversion table displays only numeric values for nuclear grade. How is grade coded for tumors in which nuclear grade is described by terminology? Does it make a difference if the tumor is invasive or in situ?
Example 1: Ductal carcinoma, intermediate nuclear grade.
Example 2: Ductal carcinoma, high nuclear grade.
Example 3: Ductal carcinoma, moderate nuclear grade.
Example 4: DCIS, intermediate nuclear grade.
Use the table on page C-607 of the 2007 SEER manual. The terms "low," "intermediate," and "high" appear in the column labeled "BR Grade." Use this column to determine the appropriate grade code when grade is described using these terms. If the grade of an in situ tumor is described using these terms, use the table to determine the appropriate code for the grade field.
Multiplicity Counter/Type of Multiple Tumors--Breast: How are these fields coded when a patient underwent a lumpectomy demonstrating two measured foci of invasive ductal carcinoma (1.5 cm and 3 mm) and "focally seen" in situ ductal carcinoma (DCIS) followed by a re-excision that is positive for 1.5 mm focus of residual invasive carcinoma? See Discussion.
Lumpectomy path shows two foci of invasive ductal carcinoma, 1.5 cm & 3 mm sizes, and CAP summary lists "DCIS: focally seen", no further description. The re-excision pathology specimen finds a 1.5 mm focus of residual invasive carcinoma, very close to the new inferior margin (so registrar assumed this was probably not part of the previously excised mass), and no mention of any more in situ.
Can we assume the DCIS was associated with/part of the invasive tumors because it was not measured or described separately? If we say there are 3 tumors (for the measured invasive foci), should Type of Multiple Tumors be coded 30 [In situ and invasive] or 40 [Multiple invasive]?
Code 03 [3 tumors] in the multiplicity counter. Do not count the "focally seen" DCIS because it was not measured.
Code 30 [In situ and invasive] in Type of Multiple Tumors Reported as One Primary. The single primary reported for this case is a combination of in situ and invasive tumors.
Behavior--Breast: How is this field coded for a case in which the final diagnosis reports DCIS, but the CAP protocol or microscopic findings show microinvasion? See Discussion.
1. Path report for breast cancer has final diagnosis as 'DCIS' but the CAP protocol in the body of the report says 'microinvasion seen, T1mic.'
2. Path report says 'DCIS' in the final diagnosis and microinvasion is identified in the microscopic portion of the report, but it is not in CAP protocol format and not stated in the final diagnosis.
Code both scenarios /3 [malignant (invasive)]. Information regarding behavior is not limited to the final diagnosis or the CAP protocol. See page 84 in the 2007 SEER manual:
Code the behavior as malignant /3 if any portion of the primary tumor is invasive no matter how limited; i.e. microinvasion.
MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries--Lung: How many primaries are to be reported for an adenocarcinoma of the lung in the right middle lobe of the lung and bronchioalveolar carcinoma, non-mucinous type in the right upper lobe? See Discussion.
Bilobectomy revealed two tumors, adenocarcinoma in the right middle lobe and bronchioalveoar carcinoma non-mucinous type in the right upper lobe. MP/H rule M10 states that tumors with non-small cell carcinoma (8046) and a more specific non-small cell type (chart 1) are a single primary. Does rule M10 apply to only those cases for which one tumor is stated to be non-small cell, NOS? Or do we use chart 1 to identify specific subtypes? For this case, using chart 1, would we note that bronchioalveolar is a subtype of adenocarcinoma and count this case as a single primary? Most of the MP/H rules schemas have a rule making an adenocarcinoma and a more specific type of adenocarcinoma a single primary. Would we apply rule M10 to this case and count it as a single primary? Or would we move on to rule M11 and count the case as two primaries?
For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, Rule M11 applies. Accession two primaries.
Rule M10 applies only to cases for which one tumor is stated to be "non-small cell carcinoma."
Primary Site--Breast: What subsite is to be coded for a case of invasive Paget disease of the nipple with an infiltrating ductal carcinoma of the lower inner quadrant?
Code C50.9 [Breast, NOS]. Code the last digit of the primary site to '9' for single primaries when multiple tumors arise in different subsites of the same anatomic site and the point of origin cannot be determined. Nipple [C50.0] and LIQ [C50.3] fit this rule. This is a single primary per MP/H Breast Rule M9.
CS Lymph Nodes/CS Site Specific Factor--Head and Neck: How should these fields be coded when the information is from an out of state data exchange and the record provides no supporting text, all the required fields are not coded and the codes that are provided are in conflict? See Discussion.
A parotid case with CS LN coded to 10 [single positive ipsilateral regional node]; Regional LNs Positive coded to 68 and Regional LNs Examined coded to 74. No SSFs were coded. Based on the number of nodes coded as positive, the CS LN code was incorrect. Because the only information available to the central registry was that multiple regional LNs NOS were positive, we coded CS LN to 80 [lymph nodes NOS] and coded all SSFs to 999. Upon running the SEER edits, this case popped up on edits yielding a CS Site-Specific Factor codes, CS Lymph Nodes and Head/Neck Schemas conflict. Provide some guidance as how to properly code CS LNs & SSFs 1-6 for this case given the very limited information provided to us?
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.This is an unusual situation with conflicting information. If possible, request the pathology report and/or audit the case.
If you cannot obtain any further information or clarification, there are two choices:
MP/H Rules/Histology--Breast: What histology code is used for a single tumor, micropapillary carcinoma with components of mixed ductal and lobular carcinoma?
For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, use rule H16 and assign code 8522 [Duct and lobular carcinoma].
Micropapillary is specific duct type (see Table 1).
An official website of the United States government
Home