Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20230066 | Solid Tumor Rules/Histology--Lung: Table 3 in Lung Solid Tumor Rules, 2023 Update, lists neuroendocrine carcinoma, NOS 8246 as a specific subtype/variant for small cell carcinoma 8041/3. Should the table be updated? See Discussion. |
Small cell carcinoma is a specific type of neuroendocrine carcinoma for the lung. However, Table 3 lists neuroendocrine carcinoma, NOS as the more specific subtype/variant in Column 3. Using Lung Solid Tumor Rules, Rule H6, a diagnosis of poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (small cell carcinoma)” would be coded as 8246, instead of 8041, because there are two histologies under consideration (an NOS and a subtype/variant in Table 3), and the rule tells us to code the subtype/variant. However, small cell carcinoma is more specific than the NOS diagnosis (neuroendocrine carcinoma, NOS). Should Table 3 be updated to reflect which histology is the NOS and which is the more specific? |
The Solid Tumor Rules for Lung have been updated for 2024. The row for Small cell carcinoma 8041/3 has been deleted and new separate rows have been added for Neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) 8246 and Neuroendocrine tumor, NOS (NET) 8240. This change is based on the WHO Classification of Thoracic Tumors, 5th edition, and current concepts. In addition, Table 3 now reflects that Small cell carcinoma/small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma 8041 (located in Column 3) is a subtype/variant of neuroendocrine carcinoma, NEC 8246 (Column 1). As a result, application of Rule H6 to a diagnosis of poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (small cell carcinoma)” would be coded as 8041, instead of 8246. Please note: the 2024 updates may be used for cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2024 unless otherwise noted in the rules. |
2023 |
|
|
20230036 | Reportability/Histology--Vulva: Is angiomyxoma (8841/1), such as aggressive angiomyxoma of vulva diagnosed in 2022, reportable? |
Do not report superficial angiomyxoma (8841/0) or aggressive angiomyxoma (8841/0). WHO Classification of Female Genital Tumors, 5th edition, defines deep (aggressive) angiomyoma as a benign, infiltrative, myxoid spindle cell neoplasm that occurs in deep soft tissue of the pelviperineal region. |
2023 | |
|
|
20230059 | Histology--Heme and Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is histology coded for a diagnosis stated as MDS/AML (myelodysplastic syndrome/acute myeloid leukemia) per the international consensus classification (ICC)? See Discussion. |
The final diagnosis on bone marrow biopsy was high grade myeloid stem cell neoplasm, 17% blasts by differential count. The pathologist further states that this could be classified as “MDS with increased blasts (MDS-IB2) per the WHO 5th edition classification, or MDS/AML per the international consensus classification (ICC).” FISH and cytogenetics revealed a loss of 7q, but no other AML-related genetic abnormalities. The physician confirms the patient has MDS/AML. |
Updated Answer July 2024 Code histology as myelodysplastic neoplasm with increased blasts (9983/3) based on the WHO Classification of Hematolymphoid Tumors, 5th edition, Beta version 2. WHO lists MDS with increased blasts-2 (MDS-IB2) as a subtype of 9983/3. Terms coded to 9983/3 include
When differences exist between WHO and ICC, assign the histology based on the WHO Classification. |
2023 |
|
|
20230005 | SEER Manual/First Course Treatment--Radiation Treatment Modality: How is Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy (PRRT), a form of molecular therapy, coded when used to treat neuroendocrine tumors? See Discussion. |
The 2023 SEER Manual indicates PRRT should be coded in the Other Therapy field per coding instruction 2.d. Likewise, SINQ 20180106 instructs to code PRRT as Other Therapy, while the discussion portion clearly outlines the radioactive nature of this modality. Would PRRT be best coded as a radioisotope in the Radiation Treatment Modality--Phase I, II, III field rather than in the Other Therapy field? |
For cases diagnosed in 2023 and later, Update to the current manual: Assign code 13 (Radioisotopes, NOS) in Radiation Treatment Modality--Phase I, II, III for PRRT. We will make this change in the next version of the SEER Manual. |
2023 |
|
|
20230070 | Solid Tumor Rules/Multiple Primaries--Breast: How many primaries should be accessioned for a diagnosis of invasive carcinoma of the left breast (8500/3) in 2020 followed by a 2023 diagnosis of dedifferentiated carcinoma in the left breast (8020/3)? See Discussion. |
The WHO Blue Books do not include dedifferentiated carcinoma as a valid histology for the breast. However, there is known to be progression of ductal carcinoma that is essentially dedifferentiation of an estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2 breast carcinoma to a triple negative "dedifferentiated" carcinoma which it appears this patient has. Whether we should accession this as a separate 8020/3 primary per M14 is unclear and the Solid Tumor Manual does not address this scenario. |
Abstract a single primary using Breast Solid Tumor Rules, Rule M18, as none of the previous rules apply. Undifferentiated carcinoma is a malignant epithelial tumour lacking overt evidence of a specific line of differentiation. Dedifferentiated carcinoma is composed of an undifferentiated carcinoma and a differentiated component. Dedifferentiated carcinoma (8020/3) as a morphology is associated with cancer of the endometrium and ovary rather than the breast. Breast cancer shows a broad spectrum of morphology with extensive variation in histological type and grade, related to the complexity of carcinogenesis. This includes initial genetic changes in the cell of origin, subsequent genetic and epigenetic alterations, and reprogramming that occur at various stages of development along with interaction of other factors that influence the process of differentiation. This scenario likely represents the process of phenotypic change of a carcinoma at a later stage, better known as transdifferentiation. |
2023 |
|
|
20230049 | Update to Current Manual/Surgery of Primary Site 2023--Skin: Regarding the 2023 skin surgery codes for punch biopsy NOS (B220) and shave biopsy NOS (B230), how is Date of First Surgical Procedure coded for cutaneous lymphoma and Kaposi sarcoma when the punch or shave biopsy is not excisional? See Discussion. |
Now that there are specific surgery codes for shave and punch biopsies, are these biopsies always the Date of First Surgical Procedure (NAACCR Item #1200)? Or should we still be applying the Surgery of Primary Site 2023 instruction in the SEER Manual that states shave or punch biopsies are most often diagnostic; code as a surgical procedure only when the entire tumor is removed and margins are free/gross disease is removed? We are aware of the instruction for melanoma cases outlined in SINQ 20230034; however, it is unclear if this should also apply to cutaneous lymphomas and Kaposi sarcomas, or if the intent of the procedure is used for these specific types of skin cases that typically present with multifocal involvement. Example 1: Patient is diagnosed March 2023 with primary cutaneous T-cell lymphoma presenting as pink, tan patches on the trunk. Punch biopsy diagnosed CTCL and treatment was given via narrow band UVB phototherapy. Example 2: Patient is diagnosed February 2023 with Kaposi sarcoma presenting as widespread violaceous macules, papules, plaques on the torso, bilateral extremities, and abdomen. Punch biopsy diagnosed Kaposi sarcoma. |
Code the Date of First Surgical Procedure (NAACCR Item #1200) as the date the shave, punch, or elliptical biopsy was performed. This instruction applies to cutaneous lymphoma and Kaposi sarcoma as well. Beginning with cases diagnosed 2023 and after, shave, punch, or elliptical biopsies are coded as a surgical procedure regardless of margin status. The instruction in the 2023 SEER Manual that states "shave or punch biopsies are most often diagnostic; code as a surgical procedure only when the entire tumor is removed and margins are free/gross disease is removed" has been deleted from the 2024 SEER Manual. Refer also to the Appendix C Coding Guidelines for Kaposi Sarcoma of All Sites and Lymphoma for coding primary site. |
2023 |
|
|
20230044 | First Course Treatment/Neoadjuvant Therapy--Breast: What pathology report descriptions are permissible to use in coding the Neoadjuvant Therapy Treatment Effect data item? See Discussion. |
1) In the SEER Manual's code definitions for Neoadjuvant Therapy - Treatment Effect, some sites specify the percentage of viable tumor. Pathology reports often list this along with the percentage of necrosis (e.g., 10% necrosis and 90% viable tumor). If only the percent necrosis is stated, is it acceptable to infer the percent viable tumor? For example, pathology report states only "treatment effect: present, necrosis extent: 30%" - could we then deduce that the percent viable tumor in this case would be 70%? 2) Can statements of Residual Cancer Burden (RCB) Class be used? For example, pathology report states Treatment Effect: Residual Cancer Burden Class II, with no further description of partial vs. complete response. It appears that RCB Class II is a "moderate burden" of residual tumor after neoadjuvant therapy; could this be interpreted as a partial response in the Neoadjuvant Therapy--Treatment Effect code definitions? |
1) Do not infer the percent of viable tumor if only percent of necrosis is provided. For the example, assign code 6 when Neoadjuvant therapy was completed and the treatment effect in the breast is stated only as “Present". 2) Do not use the residual cancer burden (RCB) score from the pathology report to code the Neoadjuvant Therapy--Treatment Effect field for breast cancer. We do not have a crosswalk from RCB to neoadjuvant Therapy--Treatment Effect. RCB index is an accurate and reliable tool to assess patient prognosis. RCB is estimated from routine pathologic sections of the primary breast tumor site and the regional lymph nodes after the completion of neoadjuvant therapy. The data item Neoadjuvant Therapy--Treatment Effect records information on the primary tumor only. Document information in a text field in both examples. |
2023 |
|
|
20230027 | Solid Tumor Rules/Multiple Primaries--Peripheral Nerves: How many primaries should be abstracted, and which M Rule applies, when a malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST) in the right arm (C471) is followed greater than one year later by a separate malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor of the thoracic chest wall (C473)? See Discussion. |
Since the peripheral nerves are included in the Malignant CNS schema of the Solid Tumor Rules, neither the differences in subsite nor timing indicate these are separate primaries (Rule M10 indicates a single primary). However, these are separate MPNSTs in different sites and the tumors are not stated to be metastasis. Additionally, these are treated as separate primaries by the managing physician. While the malignant CNS tumors do not take timing into account, is this correct for these peripheral nerve tumors that are often treated similarly to soft tissue tumors? Should Rule M8 be updated to include tumors in different peripheral nerve subsites? |
Abstract a single primary using Solid Tumor Rules, Malignant CNS and Peripheral Nerves, Rule M10 based on the information provided. Rule M10 applies as both non-contiguous tumors are of the same histology; i.e., on the same row in Table 3. As MPNST can arise in many sites, look for information about the precise location and tissue type in which the tumor arose. For example, if the tumors are stated to arise in soft tissue, follow the Multiple Primary Rules for Other Sites. Both WHO Classification of Central Nervous System Tumors and WHO Classification of Soft Tissue and Bone Tumors state that MPNST is a malignant spindle cell tumor often arising from a peripheral nerve, from a pre-existing benign nerve sheath tumor, or in a patient with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1). Future updates will move C470-C479 from CNS to other sites module. |
2023 |
|
|
20230012 | Solid Tumor Rules/Multiple Primaries--Prostate: How many primaries are accessioned when a 06/2022 diagnosis of prostate adenocarcinoma is followed less than one year later by a 01/2023 diagnosis of small cell carcinoma (SmCC)? See Discussion. |
Rule M4 was added to the Other Sites M Rules to address diagnoses of small cell carcinoma following prostate adenocarcinoma, but Rule M4 states the diagnoses must be greater than one year apart. In this situation, the diagnoses were less than one year apart and one must continue through the M Rules. The next M Rule that applies Rule M19: “Abstract multiple primaries when separate/non-contiguous tumors are on multiple rows in Table 2-21 in the Equivalent Terms and Definitions. Timing is irrelevant.” If one were to STOP at the first rule that applies, one would stop at Rule M19 which confirms the prostatic adenocarcinoma and small cell carcinoma are separate primaries, regardless of timing. If these are not to be accessioned as multiple primaries, does an Exception need to be added to M19? |
Assuming the smal cell is a seperate tumor, accession two primaries, adenocarcinoma (8140/3) of the prostate and SmCC (8041/3) of the prostate using Rule M19 of the current Other Sites Solid Tumor Rules. As these two tumors are less than a year apart, Rule M4 does not apply; however, Rule 19 does apply as these are two distinct histology types. It takes time for an acinar tumor to transform into the small cell and it is usually triggered by hormone and/or radiation treatment. |
2023 |
|
|
20230040 | First Course Treatment/Hormone Therapy--Prostate: Is Lupron first course therapy in a patient who initially elected active surveillance for prostate cancer and then consented to treatment with Lupron? See Discussion. |
in March, the patient with stage cT1c, Gleason grade 7, prostate cancer elected active surveillance. In April, the patient consented to treatment with Lupron. There was no evidence of disease progression. According to the rules on page 161 of the 2023 SEER manual, we think the answer is yes, but the reporting hospital states that this is second course therapy. |
Code Lupron as second course therapy and code active surveillance as first course therapy in this scenario. The 2023 SEER Manual states to code all treatment data items to 0 or 00 (Not done) when the physician opts for active surveillance, deferred therapy, expectant management, or watchful waiting. Assign code 2 to Treatment Status. Active surveillance is not the same as "refusing treatment." Active surveillance is a valid option offered to the patient. The patient chose this option and later changed their mind. This is not a refusal of recommended treatment. Document all the details in the appropriate treatment text fields. |
2023 |
An official website of the United States government
