CS Extension/CS Mets at Dx--Lung: How are these fields coded for bilateral pleural effusion for a right lung primary? A code of 72 in the CS Extension field leads to a T4, but bilateral pleural effusion is M1. Should CS Mets at Dx be coded 39?
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 bilateral malignant pleural effusion, code the ipsilateral malignant effusion in CS Extension and the contralateral malignant effusion in CS Mets at Dx. Assuming the bilateral pleural effusion is the furthest extension in this case, code CS Extension to 72 [Malignant pleural effusion]. Code CS Mets at Dx to 40 [Distant mets, NOS].
Reportablility--Breast: Is lobular neoplasia, grade 2 reportable? See Discussion.
Path report reads: Lobular neoplasia, grade 2.
According to the AFIP nomenclature for DCIS (taken from the WHO terminology), this would be the equivalent of LCIS. But nowhere can I find this specifically applies to lobular in the same way that ductal neoplasia is treated.
According to the editors of ICD-O-3, lobular neoplasia grade 2 is not equivalent to LCIS. It is not a reportable term. Lobular neoplasia and lobular intraepithelial neoplasia are equivalent terms having a three grade system. Only LN/LIN grade 3 would be reportable since those terms are analogous to ductal intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3.
Histology (Pre-2007)--Pancreas: Should pancreatic neoplasia III (PanIN III) be coded to 8010/2 [carcinoma in situ, NOS] or 8500/2 [Ductal carcinoma in situ]? See Description.
There is no specific morphology code for PanIN-III in the ICD-O-3. In the chapter for exocrine pancreas found in the sixth edition of AJCC cancer staging manual, pg 160, reference is made to PanIN-III and its inclusion with carcinoma in situ.
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Code PanIN-III (pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia III) as 8500/2 [Ductal carcinoma in situ, includes DIN 3: Ductal intraepithelial neoplasia 3]. PanIN-III is a synonym for carcinoma in situ according to the WHO classification of Tumors and the College of American Pathologists' Protocol for exocrine pancreas. Do not code PanIN-I or PanIN-II as cancer.
For tumors diagnosed 2007 or later, see SINQ 20110081 and 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.
Histology (Pre-2007): Can we ever code this field using a more specific cell type from a metastatic site specimen rather than to a less specific cell type from the primary site specimen? See Discussion.
The histology for a metastatic deposit biopsy is mucin-producing adenocarcinoma. This report states that the primary site is the stomach. It is more specific than the histology from the stomach biopsy described as adenocarcinoma, NOS.
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Code the histology for the case example to 8481/3 [mucin-producing adenocarcinoma], the more specific histology.
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.
Primary Site--Head & Neck: How is this field coded for a tongue primary described as "located on the lateral" or "left oral" tongue? See Discussion.
Case 1. Patient with squamous cell carcinoma, left oral tongue.
Case 2. Squamous cell carcinoma, left lateral tongue.
Case 3. Patient status post biopsy of lesion on tongue. Exam: healing left lateral tongue incision with sutures in place in underside of tongue.
Code Primary Site for cases 1 and 2 above to C023 [Anterior 2/3 of tongue, NOS]. Code lateral tongue without mention of dorsal or ventral surface to C023 [Anterior 2/3 of tongue, NOS].
Code Primary Site for case 3 to C022 [Ventral surface of tongue]. The underside of the tongue is specified as the site of the biopsy in case 3.
CS Tumor Size/CS Extension/CS TS/Ext-Eval--Breast: How do you code these fields when the tumor size and extension differ pre and post treatment with neoadjuvant Arimidex? See Discussion.
Clinically on PE 3 cm mass attached to skin with dimpling and erythema overlying the mass. Ultrasound: 2-3 cm breast mass with overlying skin thickened by US evaluation, suggesting dermal invasion. Neoadjuvant Arimidex followed by MRM. Path: 4.5 cm ductal carcinoma (no DCIS), no invasion of skin.
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.Record the larger tumor size and the farthest extension documented.
Code CS Tumor Size/Extension Evaluation to 6 [Surgical resection performed, WITH pre-surgical systemic treatment...; tumor size/extension based on pathologic evidence].
Code CS Tumor Size for the example to 045 [4.5 cm].
Code CS Extension to 20 [Local skin involvement ...] based on clinical description provided.
Date of Diagnosis: When a 4/04 clinical impression indicates the appearance of a carcinoma that is contradicted by a negative 4/04 biopsy but is confirmed by a 5/04 resection, should the diagnosis date be coded to April or May? See Discussion.
4/04 colonscopy: irregular fungating mass that has appearance of carcinoma. 4/04 Bx: high grade dysplasia. 5/04: LAR. 5/04 Path: 3.2 X 2.5 cm mass wd adenoca with invasion of muscularis propria.
Should the diagnosis date be 4/04 based on the clinical impression during the colonoscopy OR 5/04 since the path for the bx was negative?
The date of diagnosis for the example above is 05/04 -- the date of the pathology report confirming malignacy. The biopsy in 04/04 negated the 04/04 clinical statement.
Histology (Pre-2007)--Bladder: What is the correct histology code for this tumor of the bladder? See Discussion.
TURBT was performed with invasive residual tumor remaining - path report reads "Mixed carcinoma of the urinary bladder, with components of invasive high grade urothelial carcinoma, invading deep muscle, and small cell carcinoma."
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Code combined small cell carcinoma [8045]. This mixed carcinoma is both urothelial and small cell. It is important to capture the small cell information in the code because the prognosis for small cell is different from pure urothelial carcinoma.
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: When a biopsy is suspicious for cancer and re-biopsy is negative, is reportability based on the clinician's judgement (cancer vs NED)?
If the re-biopsy was done because the first biopsy was inconclusive, do not report this case. If the re-biopsy was more complete, or performed in an attempt to gain a wider margin, this case is reportable based on the first biopsy.
An official website of the United States government
Home