Histology (Pre-2007)--Melanoma: How is a 2004 "malignant melanoma, nodular type, epithelioid cell type" coded?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Assign code 8771 [Epithelioid cell melanoma]. Code the cell type when specified.
For tumors diagnosed 2007 or later, refer to the MP/H rules. If there are still questions about how this type of tumor should be coded, submit a new question to SINQ and include the difficulties you are encountering in applying the MP/H rules.
Reportability/Behavior--Colon: Is a final diagnosis of "mucosal carcinoid" of the colon reportable with a behavior code 2 [in situ] or 3 [invasive] if the microscopic description states that a "malignancy is not appreciated"? See Discussion.
2002 carcinoid case. Path final diagnosis: sigmoid colon polyp, bx-- sm mucosal carcinoid (1.5mm) w/crush artifact in a colonic polyp showing assoc inflammatory and hyperplastic changes. Micro: due to prominent crush artifact, histologic detail is compromised; however, significant atypia or malignancy is not appreciated.
Our state registry requests that this case be abstracted using the histology code 8240/3 because it is a mucosal carcinoid.
AJCC states TIS as being confined w/i basement membrane w/no extension through muscularis mucosae into submucosa. SEER-EOD codes as invasive: mucosa, lamina propria and muscularis mucosae. Our pathologist goes along with AJCC while we are having to code with SEER rules.
1) Assign /3 to mucosal carcinoid, unless stated to be in situ in the final diagnosis. ICD-O-3 is the reference for assigning the behavior code, not AJCC, EOD or CS.
2) The ICD-O-3 code for carcinoid of the sigmoid colon is C187 8240/3. This is reportable to SEER based on the final diagnosis above. Use the histology stated in the final diagnosis.
CS Lymph Nodes/CS Site Specific Factor 3--Breast: How are positive intramammary lymph nodes reflected in these fields? See Discussion.
Patient with breast cancer underwent mastectomy. No axillary lymph nodes were positive, but 1 out of 2 intramammary lymph nodes were positive for mets (greater than 2 mm). CS Lymph node codes describe axillary and internal mammary nodes, but do not describe intramammary lymph nodes.
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.
Intramammary lymph nodes are coded as axillary lymph nodes for staging purposes. Intramammary node are nodes within the breast tissue. Both staging and treatment suggest these are equivalent to axillary nodes.
CS Eval--All Sites: If any of the CS fields (TS/Extension, LN, or Mets) are based on the TNM and there is no text documenting the basis for the evaluation, are the evaluation fields coded to 0 instead of 1?
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 code 0 [No surgical resection done...based on physical exam...or other non-invasive clinical evidence] to the corresponding eval fields when CS Extension, Lymph Nodes or Mets at Diagnosis are coded based only on the TNM and no further information is available.
Primary Site--Peritoneum: During a second look staging lap following a diagnosis of serous carcinoma of the left ovary, did the physician correctly indicate a new peritoneum, NOS primary for disease described as an endometrioid adenocarcinoma in a "paracaval cyst" that appears to have arisen in endometriosis?
The primary site is C482 [Peritoneum, NOS]. "Paracaval" means alongside or near the vena cava.
Code the site in which the primary tumor originated.
CS Site Specific Factor--Prostate: Is there an established range of values that can be used to code negative, borderline or elevated PSA values? See Discussion.
Previous SEER prostate coding guidelines listed a PSA range that could be used to code negative, borderline, or elevated values in the absence of any statement concerning elevated PSA in the medical record. Is this still in effect for SSF 2, or do we need a definite statement when only a numeric value is given?
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 matter is under consideration by the CS Steering Committee. The CS Steering committee is reviewing options for incorporating SEER guidelines into the CS manual.
CS Lymph Nodes--Breast: Must there be a statement of "moveable" present to code 25 in this field and if a lymph node is not stated to be "fixed" is it presumed to be moveable? Please provide an example in your answer of when to use code 25.
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.
The word "movable" does not have to be used to assign code 25. A "movable" lymph node is an involved lymph node not described as fixed or matted. The general rule is to code the lesser or lower category, which would be the case if neither movability nor fixation is mentioned. See page C-471 of the 2004 SEER Manual.
Code 25 Example: Involved lymph nodes per lymph node dissection. No mention of fixation or matting. Size of largest met within a lymph node is 4mm.
First Course Treatment--Unknown & ill-defined site: We have a case with an unknown primary site and the patient had chemoembolization into the hepatic artery. We don't know how to code this treatment. See Discussion.
We were told to code as surgery (10) and chemo (01). However an unknown primary automatically gets a (98) surgery code & the chemo is coded (01) but we can't code as systemic therapy. This is an edit. Chemo coded but no date of systemic therapy.
Effective for cases coded prior to the change in policy made on January 9, 2008, code chemoembolization of a metastatic site as 1 [nonprimary surgical procedure performed] in Surgical Procedure of Other Site.
Surgery of Primary Site code 98 is assigned to all cases with an unknown primary.
In the case of a liver primary, it would be coded 10 [local tumor destruction, NOS] in Surgical Procedure of Primary Site.
Collaborative Staging--Hematopoietic, NOS: Which Collaborative Staging schema is used for a connective, subcutaneous and soft tissue primary of the pelvis [C495] with the morphology of Langerhans cell sarcoma [9756/39]? See Discussion.
On page C-411 of the SEER manual for the connective, subcutaneous, and other soft tissues schema it lists exceptions for certain morphologies and the above is not listed as an exception. On the Hematopoietic scheme it lists the above morphology.
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 the hematopoietic schema on page C-709 of the 2004 SEER manual. The histologically defined schemas have priority over the site schemas when both apply. See page 115 of the 2004 SEER manual.
The morphology codes listed on page C-411 pertain to the SEER Site Specific Guidelines.
Grade, Differentiation--Bladder: If the only indication of grade for a bladder primary is "grade 2, NOS," and we do not know the grading system being used by the pathologist, is the numeric grade 2 coded?
See the General Coding Rules on page 92 of the 2004 SEER Manual for instructions about coding grade.
If the only information available is "Grade 2," assign code 2 [Grade II].
An official website of the United States government
Home