SEER Inquiry System - Search

For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:Abstract the example above as two primaries. Hematologic malignancies (including lymphoma) and solid tumors are handled differently when determining the number of primaries. For hematologic malignancies, take the physician's opinion into account. Use the Single Versus Subsequent Primaries of Lymphatic and Hematopoietic Diseases table as an aid when there is insufficient information available.

For solid tumors, follow the multiple primary rules in the SEER Program Code Manual.

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.

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 the tumor size from the mammogram. Do not code the tumor size from the needle biopsy because residual tumor was present in the lumpectomy specimen.

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.

The CS Mets Eval code refers to the method used to evaluate the site farthest from the primary site. The correct code may not be the highest eval code. For example 1 above, if the liver is the site farthest from the colon primary that was evaluated for distant mets, code the CS Mets Eval code to the method used to evaluate liver. Code surgical evaluation as 1.

Assuming this is all of the information about possible distant metastatic sites for the examples above, code CS Mets at DX as 00, and CS Mets Eval as 1 for each.

Please note: imaging of farther sites should also be included when CS Mets at DX is coded. For example, if there was also a negative chest X-ray, the CS Mets at DX field would be 00 but the CS Mets Eval field would be 0 because the CXR documents that there are no mets beyond the immediate area of the tumor.

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.

For cases diagnosed 1998-2003: For this scenario, assign code 15 if an ultrasound was not performed, performed and negative, or when it is unknown whether or not an ultrasound was performed. Assign code 30 only if an ultrasound was performed and there is no documentation stating that it was negative or positive.

Please refer to the Prostate EOD Coding Guidelines for all of the instructions pertaining to the coding of prostate EOD.

For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:

The combination of C381 [anterior mediastinum] and 8246 [neuroendocrine carcinoma] will be removed from the list of "impossible" site/histology combinations. There are rare cases of neuroendocrine carcinoma of the anterior mediastinum. As illustrated in the discussion, verify that the primary site is anterior mediastinum, the histology is neuroendocrine ca, and document those findings in the text.

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.

Yes, this case is reportable in 2003. Malignancy was confirmed in 2003. The diagnosis made in 2001 is not reportable for that year, and was not reviewed or revised according to the information provided.

For tumors diagnosed 2001-2006:

This ovarian tumor is not SEER reportable if diagnosed between 2001-2006. The histology and behavior codes are 8442/1 [serous cystadenoma, borderline malignancy]. Sequence is coded appropriately from 60-88 [non-malignant tumor or central registry-defined neoplasm].

The behavior code could be changed to /3 only when the pathologist states that the disease is malignant. Approximately 20% of serous tumors of low malignant potential have lymph node involvement, according to the WHO Classification of Ovarian Tumours. In ovarian serous tumors of low malignant potential, lymph node involvement is not always equivalent to metastasis and does not signify malignancy in these tumors unless definitely stated as such by the pathologist.

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.

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 CS Lymph Nodes code 10 [Regional lymph nodes] based on the physician's N1. Assign code 10 because it is the lowest numerical CS code that corresponds to N1 in the scheme for rectum. Use the physician's assignment of TNM when the information in the medical record is incomplete or ambiguous. Code CS Reg Nodes Eval field 0 [No lymph nodes removed] for the case described above because there is no indication that N1 was assigned based on the endoscopic exam. The NI may be based solely on TNM documentation provided by the clinician and you do not know what the clinician used as the basis for the staging.