Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007)/Recurrence--Cervix: How many primaries should be abstracted if a patient had a diagnosis in 1998 of adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix treated with a total hysterectomy and a July 2004 vaginal mass biopsy with a diagnosis of invasive adenocarcinoma that is consistent with an endocervical primary?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Abstract the July 2004 diagnosis as a new endocervical primary. Abstract an invasive cancer in the same site more than two months after an in situ cancer as a new primary. Residual cervical tissue is present following a hysterectomy.
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--Brain and CNS: Which types of neurofibromatosis are reportable to SEER? See Discussion.
Clin exam: probable neurofibromatosis, type I. On the trunk alone are >14 cafe au lait spots all at least 10mm. Both axillary regions have freckling. No palpable fibromas, spine is straight, no organomegaly. MRI of head: no abnormality.
Neurofibromatosis type I (von Recklinghausen's disease, the Elephant Man disease) is primarily tumors of the subcutaneous tissues. By itself, NF1 is not reportable. NF2 is much more likely to develop acoustic neuromas. This syndrome is reportable only when acoustic neuroma(s) is present, because the acoustic neuroma is what is reportable. This case is not reportable because none of the symptoms affect the central nervous system.
Histology (Pre-2007)--Melanoma: How is histology coded if the final diagnosis is "melanoma" and only in the comment section of the pathology report is there an indication of "Type: Lentigo Maligna. Cell Type: Small Cell"?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Code the histology as 8742 [lentigo maligna melanoma]. Code the specific histologic type, even if stated only in the comment section.
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.
CS Lymph Nodes--Breast: Which category has priority when both apply, "Regional lymph nodes, NOS" or "Stated as N_, NOS"? See Discussion.
Example: When there is a clinical diagnosis of axillary lymph node metastasis for a breast primary on a physical exam "Enlarged axillary lymph nodes suspicious for metastatic involvement", as well as a clinical N1 designation, do we code as 60 [Axillary LNS, NOS] or 26 [Stated as N1, NOS]?
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 example provided, assign code 25 [Movable axillary lymph node(s)...] for "Enlarged axillary lymph nodes suspicious for metastatic involvement." Code 60 [Axillary/regional lymph node(s), NOS] is the least specific and would not be used in this case because axillary nodes are defined in code 25. Code 26 is for cases in which "N1, NOS" documented by the physician is the only information available.
CS Lymph Nodes/CS Site Specific Factor--Breast: When there are no lymph nodes removed and none palpable for an inflammatory breast cancer and the physician stages the case Nx, is the CS Lymph Node field code to 00 [None, no regional lymph nodes involved] or 99 [Unknown, not stated] and would SSF 4 and 5 be coded to 000 [Regional lymph nodes negative...] or 888 [Not applicable]?
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 00 [clinically negative]. See note 3 for CS Lymph Nodes.
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.
CS Tumor Size--Rectum: Should the tumor size be coded to 080 from the colonoscopy size or 075 from the CT scan size? See Discussion.
6/29/04 Colonoscopy with biopsy: near obstructing circumferential friable mass extending from 8 to 16cm above anal verge. 6/30/04 CT Scan Abdomen/Pelvis: 7.5X7.2cm large rectal mass. The patient had radiation with concurrent 5-FU. Surgery is done after treatment.
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 tumor size as 080 (8cm). Code the largest pretreatment size recorded when there is preoperative systemic treatment.
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.
Histology/Reportability--Hematopoietic, NOS: Is "drug induced" myelodysplastic syndrome synonymous with "therapy related" myelodysplastic syndrome? If so, would "drug induced" myelodysplastic syndome be SEER reportable and coded with the histology 9987/3?
Page 44 of the "Abstracting & Coding Guide for the Hematopoiectic Diseases" lists this histology & behavior with the proper EOD code to use but yet on page 36 it states "Do not accession the following diagnoses coded to 285.0 and lists secondary SA as well as drug-induced SA.
For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:
There is considerable difference between therapy-related myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and drug-induced sideroblastic anemia (SA).
Therapy-related MDS is the result of irreversible damage to the bone marrow caused by certain kinds of myelotoxic drugs used to treat cancer. Examples are Cytoxan and Etoposide. There is usually a 10+ year delay between the first primary and its treatment and the therapy-related MDS. Therapy-related MDS is not reversible and is reportable as a malignancy. Because the drugs were almost always given to treat a malignancy, therapy-related MDS is almost always a second primary.
Drug-induced SA is not reportable as a malignancy. Drug-induced SA is the result of short term effects of certain drugs on the bone marrow. Drug-induced SA is reversible, as the marrow recovers once the drugs are out of the system.
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.
An official website of the United States government
Home