Reportability--Lung: Is sclerosing hemangioma of the lung with multiple regional lymph nodes metastases reportable?
No, it is not reportable. According to the WHO Classification of Lung Tumours, sclerosing hemangioma "behaves in a clinically benign fashion...Reported cases with hilar or mediastinal lymph node involvement do not have a worse prognosis."
Date of Diagnosis--Lung: Should the diagnosis date be coded to the date of the scan or the date of the resection when there is a negative biopsy that occurs between the two procedures? See Discussion.
11/2003 CT chest: 2 cm LLL mass should be considered carcinoma until proven otherwise.
2/2004 CT Chest: stable LLL mass still consistent with primary or metastatic lung neoplasm
11/2004 CT chest: LLL mass suspicious for slow growing carcinoma
3/2005 FNA L lung: atypical cells
4/2005 L lobectomy: well-diff adenocarcinoma
Code the date of diagnosis as 11/2003. A clinical diagnosis was made on 11/2003 and this is the earliest date of diagnosis for this case.
CS Site Specific Factor--Prostate: Are the EOD guidelines developed for coding apex involvement still in effect for determining the code for apical involvement in SSF 4? See Discussion.
How do the old prostate codes 31, 33, and 34 correspond to the new SSF 4 field? Because "arising in" or "extending into" apex is rarely, if ever, stated, previous SEER guidelines instructed us to use code 33 for "apex only" involvement, and code 34 for "apex and any other area of prostate". Code 31 [into/arising, NOS] was to be avoided.
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.No, the EOD guidelines for coding apex involvement are not in effect for coding SSF4.
The codes for CS site specific factor 4 include code 2 [into prostatic apex/arising in prostatic apex, NOS]. When it cannot be determined if apical involvement is arising in, or extending to, the apex, use code 2.
CS Extension--Kidney: When an incidentally found 5 cm mass discovered on a CT scan during a work-up for colon carcinoma is stated to be consistent with renal cell ca, should the case be staged as localized or unknown when no other information is available related to a work-up for the kidney 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.
Code what is known. In the example above, the tumor size and the extension are known and can be coded. The information is limited, but not completely missing.
Code what you DO know rather than coding nothing. Any metastases from the kidney would have been discovered during the workup of the rectal cancer.
Reportability/In Situ--Prostate: Was there a time period when PIN III was reportable to SEER?
Per the 2004 SEER Manual, page 2, Reportable Diagnoses, Exceptions, 1.b.iii "Prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN III) of the prostate (C619). (Collection stopped effective with cases diagnosed 1/1/2001 and later.)"
Surgery of Primary Site--Colon: In the absence of detailed operative or pathology report descriptions of the specific segment(s) of the colon removed, should a hemicolectomy be coded if stated by the surgeon to be such?
Yes, code hemicolectomy as stated by the surgeon when there is no conflicting or additional information avaliable.
Reportability--Brain and CNS: Does a case of astrogliosis meet the criteria for gliomatosis cerebri? See Discussion.
Case clinically stated to be a glioma of the brain. Pathology from resection states astrogliosis.
Anderson's Pathology defines astrogliosis as astrocytic proliferations. Gliomatosis cerebri is defined as diffuse neoplastic transformation of poorly differentiated astrocytes over a wide area; predominantly invovles hemispheric white matter.
The pathologic diagnosis for this case, astrogliosis, is not reportable to SEER. Take the definitive diagnosis for this case from the pathology report from the resection. The pathology report takes precendence over the clinical diagnosis.
Reportability--Hematopoietic, NOS: Is a "myeloproliferative disorder" reportable when the pathology report comment states this likely represents the "early/cellular phase of myelofibrosis/myeloid metaplasia" with cytogenetics and PCR pending?
For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:This case is not yet reportable. The bone marrow diagnosis "myeloproliferative disorder" is not reportable to SEER. It is likely that if this condition progresses, it will eventually be reportable.
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.
CS Lymph Nodes/Scope of Regional Lymph Node Surgery--Prostate: When prostate cancer is an incidental finding at cystoprostatectomy for bladder cancer, is the pelvic lymph node dissection coded for the prostate as well as the bladder?
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.
Yes, the pelvic lymph node dissection is coded as regional lymph node surgery for both primaries and the nodes are counted in collaborative staging for both primaries. The examination of the pelvic lymph nodes is relevant to both the bladder and the prostatic primaries.
An official website of the United States government
Home