MP/H Rules--Lung: In reference to lung, SINQ 20071028 states "'nodule' is not an equivalent term for tumor, mass, lesion, or neoplasm." However, slide 5 for the MPH lung section of "Beyond the Basics" states "we use the words 'mass, nodule and lesion' interchangeably." Which is it?
For cases diagnosed 2007 or later:
For the purpose of applying the Lung MP/H rules, the word "Nodule" can be used interchageably with "Tumor," "Mass," "Lesion" and "Neoplasm." HOWEVER, this does NOT apply to casefinding or staging.
This revision will be added to the next version of the MP/H rules. Sinq question 20071028 will be revised.
Multiple primaries--Lymphoma: Is a splenectomy done for non-Hodgkin lymphoma diffuse large B-cell of the spleen a composite histology and a single primary if a perihilar lymph node with Hodgkin lymphoma classic type is found at the time of this surgery?
For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:This is two primaries -- Non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) in the spleen and Hodgkin lymphoma (HD) in a lymph node.
Composite lymphoma is NHL and HD both in a single lymph node.
For cases diagnosed 1/1/10 and later, refer to the Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Neoplasm Case Reportability and Coding Manual and the Hematopoietic Database (Hematopoietic DB) provided by SEER on its website to research your question. If those resources do not adequately address your issue, submit a new question to SINQ.
MP/H Rules/Histology--Rectum: When not specifically mentioned as part of the histology, is the adenoma a second histologic type, or just a further physical description of the tumor? See Discussion.
Rectal tumor resection (APR) path report final dx: "mucinous carcinoma, see comment". The comment is the CAP-format tumor summary, which states "histologic type: adenocarcinoma with extensive mucin production (mucinous or colloid carcinoma). Additional pathologic findings: adenomas - tumor arises in a tubulovillous adenoma".
If you follow the rules and only use the final dx, you would code a different histology than if you use the 'additional path findings.'
For cases diagnosed 2007 or later
Other Sites histology rule H12 applies in this case. Assign histology code 8263 [adenocarcinoma in tubulovillous adenoma].
Use information from the CAP protocol and from comments associated with the final diagnosis to code histology.
The fact that the malignancy arose in a polyp can be taken from anywhere in the medical record; not limited to the final diagnosis.
Based on the information provided for this case, the histology is adenocarcinoma with extensive mucin production (mucinous or colloid carcinoma) arising in a tubulovillous adenoma.
Multiplicity Counter--Ill-defined sites: How is this field coded for Ill-Defined sites (C760-C768)?
Code the number of tumors present if known. If the number of tumors present is not known, code 99 [unknown number of tumors, unknown if multiple tumors].
CS Extension/Ambiguous terminology--Pancreas: Should an exception be made for "abuts" or "encased/encasing" regarding CS pancreas extension? See Discussion.
According to the CS Manual regarding ambiguous terminology, we do not accept "abuts" or "encased/encasing" as involvement. According to the March/April 2008 issue of "CA, A Cancer Journal for Clinicians", vol 58, number 2, an article concerning Pancreas staging by M.D. Anderson researchers/clinicians recommends defining unresectable involvement of the celiac axis/mesenteric artery with the terms "abutment" as involvement of 180 degrees or less of the circumference of the vessel, and "encasement" as more than 180 degree involvement. A large comprehensive cancer center in our area has already adopted these guidelines.
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.Follow the current CS instructions regarding ambiguous terminology. "Abuts" and "encased/encasing" are not involvement.
The American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer provided the following in response to this question: This concept can be considered for CS version 2, but it would need to be made in conjunction with acceptance of that same theory in AJCC 7th Edition so that the stage can be derived. Many times what can be defined and accepted in a closed environment of a single institution research project cannot be duplicated and accepted across the nation and in every community facility. Would pathologists specify the > or < 180 degree involvement in every pathology report? It would also have to be reviewed to see if this idea has been accepted by the larger oncology community, or just the idea of a single institution.
CS Extension--Brain and CNS: How is CS Extension coded for a malignant meningioma that demonstrates extension into adjacent brain tissue?
For malignant brain tumors, code 60 represents extension into the meninges. Would code 60 be the correct code for extension from a malignant meningioma into brain tissue?
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.Assign CS extension code 60 for malignant meningioma with extension to adjacent brain tissue.
According to the I&R, this section of CS was taken directly from SEER Summary Staging, since AJCC does not have a staging system for these tumors.
MP/H Rules/Histology--Breast: What is the histology code for the following?
4/21/03 Left breast: infiltrating ductal carcinoma, grade 3 micropapillary type. Tumor size: 3.5 cms; deep margin negative. Skin, nipple & areola positive for invasive ductal carcinoma. Dermal lymphatic invasion by carcinoma breast. Extensive intraductal component absent. 6+/6. See Discussion.
How should histology be coded for a 2003 diagnosis and also for the same diagnosis in 2007 or later?
For a case diagnosed in 2003, code 8507/3 [Duct micropapillary carcinoma]. See Coding Complex Morphologic Diagnoses, revised August 2002, 3rd example on page 5 and page 3, #4.
For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, code 8507/3 [Duct micropapillary carcinoma]. Use rule H12.
Ambiguous terminology/Reportability--Kidney: Is a case reportable if a biopsy diagnosis of "suggestive of oncocytoma, malignant neoplasm cannot be excluded" follows a CT scan that was read as "suspicious for carcinoma"? See Discussion.
Pt is nursing home resident. CT abdomen/pelvis shows a "mass in the right kidney, highly suspicious for renal cell carcinoma". CT-guided needle biopsy performed with final diagnosis: "Neoplasm suggestive of oncocytoma. A malignant neoplasm cannot be excluded." No other information is available.
This case is not reportable based on the information provided. The suspicious CT finding was biopsied and not proven to be malignant. "Suggestive of" is not a reportable ambiguous term.
Histology--Brain and CNS: How is histology to be coded for a pituicytoma WHO grade I, of the pituitary?
Assign code 9380/1 [glioma, borderline].
According to our pathologist consultant, the term pituicytoma is restricted to low-grade glial neoplasms of the neurohypophysis or infundibulum. The best category currently available for these is glioma.
MP/H Rules--Ovary: How do you code histology for a diagnosis of "clear cell CA, predominately cystic."
For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, assign histology code 8310 [Clear cell carcinoma]. Cystic describes the appearance of the tumor. Clear cell is the histologic type. Code clear cell carcinoma 8310/3. Rule H11 applies.
An official website of the United States government
Home