CS Lymph Nodes--Breast: Are small isolated tumor emboli occasionally found in lymph node capsular or pericapsular lymphatics sufficient to code as a lymph node metastasis?
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 "small isolated tumor emboli" in the pericapsular lymphatics detected by H&E that are less than 0.2 mm as 05 [Regional lymph node(s) with ITC's detected on routine H & E stains].
Reportability/AmbiguousTerminology: Because there is a caveat in the SEER PCM, 3rd edition to ignore adverbs such as "strongly" when assessing reportability, should a term such as "likely" cancerous be reportable given than the expression "most likely" cancerous is reportable?
"Likely cancerous" is NOT reportable.
The CoC, NPCR and SEER have agreed to a strict interpretation of the ambiguous terms list. Terms that do not appear on the list are not diagnostic of cancer.
First Course Treatment/Surgery of Primary Site--Lung: How is radiofrequency ablation for lung primaries coded?
Assign code 15 [Local tumor destruction, NOS] in the Surgery of Primary Site field. RFA is a technique where a probe placed in or near a tumor sends radio waves into the tumor, causing it to heat up and kill the cancer cells. RFA doesn't fit neatly into code 12 or 13, so we are left with the NOS code.
2004 SEER Manual Errata/Grade--Colon/Bones: Is the term "pleomorphic" used to code tumor grade to 3 for selected primaries?
Delete the row containing the word "pleomorphic" from the tables on pages 93, C-219 and C-411. This correction will be included in the next set of replacement pages for the 2004 SEER manual.
Histology (Pre-2007)--Sarcoma: How is "acral myxoinflammatory fibroblastic sarcoma" coded?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
The ICD-O-3 histology code is 8811/3 [Fibromyxosarcoma] according to the WHO Classification of Tumours of Soft Tissue and Bone. WHO defines myxoinflammatory fibroblastic sarcoma (MIFS) as "a unique low grade sarcoma with myxoid stroma, inflammatory infiltrate and virocyte-like cells that predominantly involves the hands and feet."
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.
Chemotherapy--Breast: In the absence of more specific information, is the insertion of a port-a-cath one month after mastectomy enough documentation to code chemotherapy to 88 [Recommended]?
Assign chemotherapy code 88 [Chemotherapy was recommended, but it is unknown if it was administered]. Be sure to confirm whether or not treatment was administered and update this code accordingly.
CS Eval--Colon: Should 1 [No surgical resection done...] or 3 [Surgical resection performed...] be used to correctly reflect this field when a surgical observation is "adherent to duodenum" but the extension per the pathology is stated to be to the "subserosal tissue"? See Discussion.
7/2/04 Op Findings 5 cm mass in mid transverse colon involving also the right colon; mass was adherent to duodenum without obvious invasion. 7/2/04 Path: Rt & Transverse Colon: 6x5 cm mass, micro: MD Adenoca with invasion of subserosal tissue; margins neg. 17/17 colic LNs negative.
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.For the case described above, code extension as 46 [Adherent to other organ...no microscopic tumor found in adhesion]. Code CS TS/Ext eval as 3 [Surgical resection performed...].
Surgery was performed for this case. The fact that the adherence to the duodenum was proven not to be tumor involvement should be coded as 3 in CS TS/Ext Eval. By using eval code 3, the case will map to a pathologic T indicating that the patient had resective surgery. Eval code 1 would map to a clinical T, incorrect for this case.
Primary Site/CS Tumor Size/CS Extension--Lung: How are these fields coded when a chest CT for lung cancer documents multiple masses in different lobes of the lung? See Discussion.
Example
Chest CT: "Almost complete consolidation of RUL and superior segment of RLL, highly suspicious for malignancy and represents primary bronchogenic carcinoma until proven otherwise. Multiple pulmonary masses bilaterally consistent with metastatic disease."
The physician describes multiple masses throughout RLL and LLL of lung suspicious for met disease, particularly lesion in LLL measuring 2.5 cm. The 2 cm mass in right lung abuts pleura, another mass in RLL measures 2.5 cm, smaller nodules in RLL and another 1 cm lesion abuts the pleura. Bx of a rt supraclavicular LN is positive for met carcinoma c/w lung primary.
Would primary site be coded to RLL because the scan states that the lesions on the right side represent primary bronchogenic carcinoma until proven otherwise and the 2.5 cm lesion in the RLL is the location of the largest tumor on the right? Or should site be coded to right lung, NOS and size to unknown because there is no clear statement as to which lesion on the right represents the primary tumor? If the site is lung, NOS, would CS Extension be coded to 65 to describe the multiple nodules in the RLL?
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:
Code primary site C349 [Lung]. Code laterality 1 [Right]. Code CS Tumor Size 999 [Unknown]. Code CS Extension 65 [Separate tumor nodules, same lobe]. Code CS Mets at Dx 39 [Separate tumor nodule in contralateral lung].
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.
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