Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Cancer Site Category | Data Item Category | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20021044 | Histology (Pre-2007)/Grade, Differentiation: Can histology and/or grade be coded from a metastatic site? See discussion. | Example 1: No pathology specimen is available from the primary site for a lung primary. Rib biopsy demonstrated "anaplastic adenocarcinoma."
Example 2: Lung tissue biopsy revealed "poorly differentiated non-small cell carcinoma" for a lung primary. Pleural effusion cytology was consistent with "adenocarcinoma". |
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Example 1: Code the Histology and Grade, Differentiation fields to 8140/39 [adenocarcinoma, NOS, grade not stated]. Because there was no microscopic examination of tissue from the primary site, the histology may be coded from the microscopic examination of the tissue from a metastatic site. Do not code grade from a metastatic site regardless of whether the involvement of the metastatic site is by direct extension or by discontinuous metastases.
Example 2: Code the Histology and Grade, Differentiation fields to 8046/33 [non-small cell carcinoma, poorly differentiated]. Because there is a microscopic examination of tissue from the primary site, that information should be used to code histology rather than a cytology of a metastatic site.
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. |
N/A | Histology | 2002 |
|
|
20021047 | Surgery of Primary Site--Bladder: Do we code "random bladder biopsies" as an excisional biopsy (27) or as no cancer directed surgery (00) even if the only involvement mentioned on the pathology reports is "focal carcinoma in situ"? | Code the Surgery of Primary Site field to 00 [None; no surgery of primary site] when only random biopsy procedures are performed on the bladder. | Bladder | Surgery of Primary Site | 2002 | |
|
|
20021209 | EOD-Extension/EOD-Lymph Nodes--Rectosigmoid: How do you code these fields for a scan-based clinically staged T3 N1 rectosigmoid primary in a patient who received chemotherapy and radiation prior to a resection that demonstrated invasion only into the muscularis and no positive lymph nodes? | For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
Use the best information available, in this case, the clinical staging, to code EOD. Code the EOD-Extension field to 40 [Invasion through muscularis propria or muscularis, NOS] and the EOD Lymph Node field to 3 [Regional lymph node(s) NOS] because the case had a clinical stage of T3 N1. EOD is coded using the most extensive clinical or pathologic stage. |
Colon | N/A | 2002 | |
|
|
20021089 | Primary Site--Ovary/Peritoneum: When ovaries are not found on a resection or if the ovaries removed are negative for malignancy, but the clinician refers to the adenocarcinoma in the pelvis as being an "ovarian" primary, should the primary site be coded as ovary, pelvic peritoneum or unknown? See discussion. | Example 1: Patient has a history of a BSO without an indication that it was done for malignancy. Pt has a resection. No ovarian tissue found. No site is mentioned in the pathology report. The clinician refers to the diagnosis of adenocarcinoma in the pelvis as an "ovarian" primary.
Example 2: Resected ovaries are negative. No specific site of origin is mentioned in the path. Again, the clinician refers to the diagnosis of adenocarcinoma in the pelvis as an "ovarian" primary. |
Code the Primary Site for both examples to peritoneum [C48.2]. When the physician refers to a case as "ovarian" even though the ovaries are negative or when the histology is an ovarian histology, such as papillary serous ca, the primary site should be coded to the peritoneum. Code the Primary Site to where it appears the disease is arising. | Ovary | Primary site | 2002 |
|
|
20021056 | Histology (Pre-2007)/Terminology: Are "pattern", "architecture", and "architectural pattern" terms that indicate a majority of tumor? |
For tumors diagnosed 2004 to 2006: The terminology "Architectural pattern: ____________," when used in the final pathology diagnosis, indicates a subtype that can be coded. This type of format in a pathology report is based on a College of American Pathologists (CAP) protocol. Disregard "pattern" and "architecture" when not used in accordance with the CAP protocol. See www.cap.org for cancer protocols. 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. |
N/A | Histology | 2002 | |
|
|
20020044 | Terminology/EOD-Extension--Prostate: How does SEER define the prostatic "apex"? See discussion. |
Some pathologists define the prostatic apex as including the bottom third of the prostate whereas others regard only the bottom-most portion of the gland to be the apex. |
SEER defines the apex as being the bottom-most portion of the gland. Apex means "narrowest part," which in the prostate would be the bottom-most portion of the gland. |
Prostate | N/A | 2002 |
|
|
20021039 | Grade, Differentiation--Breast: How do we code grade for a breast primary diagnosis of "Low grade invasive duct, modified Bloom-Richardson grade II/III (tubule formation 2, nuclear grade 1, mitotic rate 1)"? This appears to add up to a Bloom-Richardson score of 4, which does not fit with a Bloom-Richardson II/III. | Code the Grade, Differentiation field to 1 [grade I] using the information from the BR score.
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003: Grade or differentiation information from breast pathology reports is used in the following priority order: 1. Terminology (well, moderately, poorly) 2. Histologic grade (grade I, grade II) 3. BR scores 4. BR grade 5. Nuclear grade
On the hierarchical list for coding breast grade, the first two priorities do not apply to this case, but the third (Bloom-Richardson scores) does. Add the BR information (2+1+1) for a total score of 4, which translates to BR low grade (code 1). The statement of "II/III" may be a typo that should state I/III. |
Breast | N/A | 2002 | |
|
|
20021061 | Multiple Primaries/Histology--Mycosis Fungoides/Cutaneous T cell Lymphoma: Physicians often use the terms cutaneous T cell lymphoma (CTCL) and mycosis fungoides interchangeably and yet the SEER Single versus Subsequent Primaries of Lymphatic and Hematopoietic Diseases table indicates that these 2 diagnoses represent separate primaries. Do these cases represent one primary? If so, what histologic type should they be coded to? | For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:The patient does not have two different malignancies. Code the Histology field to 9700/3 [mycosis fungoides], the specific type of cutaneous T cell lymphoma. Mycosis fungoides is one of several types of cutaneous T cell lymphoma. Physicians often refer to mycosis fungoides by the "umbrella term" cutaneous T cell lymphoma.
The table indicates that the broad category of "T/NK-cell NHL" (which includes CTCL) and mycosis fungoides are presumably separate primaries because several entities are included in that broad category. In the specific case cited above, one entity (CTCL) within the broad category (T/NK-cell NHL) and mycosis fungoides are not separate primaries. 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. |
Lymphoma | Histology | 2002 | |
|
|
20021188 | Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007)--Testis: How many primaries should be reported when seminoma is diagnosed simultaneously in both testicles and both tumors are encapsulated? | For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Report this cases as two primaries, unless there is information in the record confirming one primary.
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. |
N/A | N/A | 2002 | |
|
|
20020047 | Scope of Regional Lymph Node Surgery/Radiation Sequence with Surgery/Date Therapy Initiated: Is the Scope of Regional Lymph Node Surgery field used to code date of first therapy and radiation sequence with surgery? See discussion. | Example: There is no primary site surgery and only an aspirate of a lymph node and the date of therapy is based on this procedure. | Yes, the Scope of Regional Lymph Node Surgery field is used to code the Date Therapy Initiated field and the Radiation Sequence with Surgery field. | N/A | Date therapy initiated, Radiation Therapy, Scope Regional LN Surgery | 2002 |
An official website of the United States government
