System Guide
Back to Search Results

Search Results

Display Options
Display Options
Select Fields
Export Results to CSV Create Report 0
+ Add all results to report

Report Produced: 02/19/2026 10:59 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20051019 CS Lymph Nodes--Breast: How is this field to be coded if the pathologist staged the case pN1a and the lymph node is stated to be negative on H&E, is .3 cm on IHC stain for pancytokeratin but on review of smears shows no malignant cells?

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.

Code CS Lymph Nodes as negative [00]. The positive stain for pancytokeratin is contradicted by the statement "malignant cells are not identified." See also sinq 20010055.

 2005
20051119 CS Eval--Colon: When the surgical resection occurs after radiation or chemo, how is the tumor size/extension evaluation field coded when there is no mention of the tumor size or extension in the surgical resection pathology report? See Discussion. 6/30/04 CT Scan abd/pelvis: 7.5x7.2 cm large rectal mass with l cm nodular densities in perirectal region probably adenopathy; irregularity of perirectal soft tissue which could be due to tumor infiltration. 7/26/04 Patient has radiation therapy and 5FU. 10/19/04 LAR: MD Adenoca rectum with regional node mets (3/8).

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.Based on the information provided above, code CS Tumor Size and Extension from CT scan. Code CS TS/Ext eval 5 [Surgical resection performed with pre-surgical treatment...size based on clinical evidence].

Code CS lymph nodes using information from resection. Code CS Reg Nodes eval 6 [Regional LN removed...with pre-surgical treatment...based on pathologic evidence].

 2005
20051101 CS Extension--Cervix: How are "positive pelvic washings" coded for a cervical primary?

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.

According to the CS Steering Committee, positive pelvic washings for primary cervical cancer are not part of the staging criteria in the collaborative staging system (nor in TNM and FIGO). Document positive pelvic washings in a text field. The CS steering committee will add a statement to CS extension to clarify this for cervix uteri.

 2005
20051065 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.

 2005
20051133 Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007)/Histology (Pre-2007)--Breast: How are the number of primaries, histologies and CS extension fields coded for breast tissue that contains separate areas of invasive ductal carcinoma, intraductal carcinoma and Paget disease? See Discussion.

Excisional biopsy of a breast mass: 1.0 cm tumor that was infiltrating ductal carcinoma, high grade, with an associated intraductal component with comedonecrosis.

Pathology report for the mastectomy three weeks later: no residual tumor was found near the original biopsy site. In another portion of the same breast was found high-grade intraductal carcinoma involving the nipple ducts, with Paget Disease of the nipple. (No size was given for this.)

For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:

This is a single primary. According to Exception 3 of Multiple Primary Rule 6 for multiple tumors, combinations of Paget disease and ductal carcinoma are a single primary. The histology code for this case is 8541 [Paget disease and infiltrating duct carcinoma]. Assign CS extension code 10 [confined to breast tissue] based on the information above.

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.

 2005
20051110 Other Therapy: Can herbal therapy be coded when used as a single therapy or when used in combination with conventional therapy as a complimentary treatment? See Discussion. Page 201 of the SPCM 2004, item #5, states "Assign code 6 for unconventional methods whether they are single therapy or given in combination with conventional therapy." This statement itself is ok but there is no guideline on the use of complementary therapy when it is given as the only treatment. The SPCM, 3rd editon, page 140 states: "Use code '6' for alternative and complementary therapies ONLY IF the patient receives no other type of treatment." There is no such statement in the SPCM 2004. Assign code 6 for unconventional methods whether they are single therapy (alternative medicine is the only treatment) or given in combination with conventional therapy (complementary medicine plus conventional). 2005
20051032 Reportability/Behavior--Brain and CNS: How is a brain "neoplasm" diagnosed only by CT scan reported to SEER? See Discussion. We have a significant number of patients who come into our emergency room and are diagnosed with a brain neoplasm by CT scan. They are transferred to another facility for further care. Some of those facilities will give us information - histology, treatment, etc. Some will not. How are we supposed to report these brain neoplasms if we don't know if they are benign or malignant? Can we report them as behavior code 9 or do we just report them as benign if we can't get any further information? The case above is reportable and 8000/1 is the most appropriate histology/behavior code. A clinical diagnosis alone from diagnostic imaging reporting a brain 'neoplasm' (with a diagnosis date supporting the reportable case requirements) even with no other information available (from biopsy or resection) is reportable. Care should be taken when reviewing terms used by the radiologist on these reports, since some tumors exhibit defining characteristics that can be picked up on diagnostic imaging. 2005
20051030 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.

 2005
20051068 CS Extension--Retinoblastoma: When the degree of extension differs between the retinas, how is extension coded for simultaneous bilateral retinoblastoma?

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 the CS extension code that corresponds to the greatest level of extension seen in either eye, excluding information from enucleation.

Record extension based on enucleation in Site Specific Factor 1.

Record bilateral disease under laterality. For retinoblastomas, bilaterality is not a component or consideration for staging.

 2005
20051046

Reportability/Diagnostic Confirmation--Leukemia: What is the diagnostic confirmation if a positive BCR/ABL result is diagnostic of a malignancy in a patient suspected to have chronic myelogenous leukemia? See Discussion.

Example 1: Peripheral smear states: "No morphologic evidence of chronic myelogenous leukemia."

Addendum: Molecular diagnostic studies showed a positive rearrangement for the BCR gene with the M-bcr (CML type) and of bcr-abl transcript expression".

Example 2: Hematopathology is negative.

Molecular diagnostic study: "fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) studies exceeded the limits established by the XXX Cytogenetics Laboratory for this probe set, and thus, demonstrated statistical evidence of BCR/ABL fusion."

For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:

Do not determine reportablility using cytogenetics or molecular studies alone.

Since these are not routine screening tests, we suggest that you query the physician and review the medical record to see what prompted the study and what is being done with the result, but the test alone is not in and of itself sufficient to report the case.

For cases diagnosed 2010 forward, 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.

 2005