| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20000461 | Surgery of Primary Site/Date Therapy Initiated--Cervix: Should "negative endocervical curettings" be coded as surgical treatment for carcinoma in situ of the cervix primaries and should the date of the procedure ever be used in coding the Date Therapy Initiated field? | For cases diagnosed 1/1/2003 and later: Code Surgery of Primary Site to 25 [D&C endocervical curettage (for in situ only)]. If this is the first treatment given, the Date Therapy Initiated is coded to the date of the curettage. | 2000 | |
|
|
20000449 | EOD-Extension/EOD-Lymph Nodes--Lung: Is "subcarinal extension" with no mention of lymph nodes coded in the EOD extension field or in the EOD lymph node involvement field? See discussion. | Should "subcarinal extension" with no mention of lymph nodes be assumed to be direct contiguous extension of the primary tumor or does it represent lymph node involvement? If it is direct extension, should we code it as 70 in the extension field? If not, should we code it as 2 in the lymph node involvement field? |
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
Code the EOD-Extension field to 70 [mediastinum, direct extension]. |
2000 |
|
|
20000277 | Ambiguous Terminology: Should SEER's lists of ambiguous terminology be modified to reflect how pathologists and radiologists actually use these terms? See discussion. | Pathologists and radiologists say the term "suggestive" is used to describe a lesion that may be malignant, and the term "suspicious" is not used to describe lesions that may be malignant. According to the physician director of our Breast Center the FDA governs the use of terminology, and the term "highly suggestive" instead of "highly suspicious" must be used if there is a greater chance that a mass is malignant. | We recognize that the way clinicians and registrars speak is often different, and that the differences vary from region to region.
Our Medical Advisory Board reviewed the lists of ambiguous terminology before they were included in the third edition of the SEER EOD and the SEER Program Coding and Staging Manual 2004. Since that time, specific terminology has been mandated for describing mammography results. We know some of these terms are discrepant with our ambiguous terminology list.
As of 2007, the standard setters (CoC, NPCR, SEER and CCCR) all use the same ambiguous terminology list. Changes to the list must be approved by the NAACCR Uniform Data Standards Committee. |
2000 |
|
|
20000262 | EOD-Clinical Extension/EOD-Lymph Nodes--Prostate: How do you code clinical extension and lymph nodes for path only prostate cases treated with a TURP? Would clinical extension be coded to unknown or localized, NOS? | For cases diagnosed 1998-2003: Code the EOD-Clinical Extension field to 30 [localized, NOS] and the EOD-Lymph Nodes field to 0 [no lymph node involvement]. Per Note 7: Use code 30 when there is insufficient information as to whether the tumor is clinically apparent or inapparent but the tumor is confined to the prostate. This is an example of a case where there is insufficient information as to whether the tumor is clinically apparent or inapparent. Assume the tumor is confined to the prostate. | 2000 | |
|
|
20000534 | EOD-Clinical Extension--Prostate: In the SEER EOD manual, there is a list of terms to distinguish apparent from inapparent tumor for prostate primaries. If a physician uses a term not currently on the list or if a physician uses a list in the "maybe" category, should we assume the tumor to be clinically inapparent or clinically apparent tumor? | For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
If the physician used a term not on the clinically apparent/inapparent list, ignore that term and use the best information available from other sources to code the EOD-Extension field.
If clarifying stage information is missing and the term is in the maybe category or the term is not on the list, then code EOD-Extension as 30 [localized, NOS] for cases that appear localized. |
2000 | |
|
|
20000532 | EOD-Pathologic Review of Number of Regional Lymph Nodes Positive and Examined: Should a lymph node biopsy be counted in these fields or are these fields for lymph node dissections only? See discussion. | Example: 1) Lymph node biopsy: adenocarcinoma. 2) Lymph node dissection: 4/15 regional lymph nodes positive for adenocarcinoma. | For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
These fields record the number of regional lymph nodes examined pathologically whether from a biopsy or from a dissection. If the single lymph node biopsied was a regional lymph node, code the Number of Regional Lymph Nodes Positive field to 05 and the Number of Regional Lymph Nodes Examined field to 16. If the lymph node biopsied was a distant node, code these fields to 04 and 15 respectively. |
2000 |
|
|
20000265 | EOD-Extension: General instructions, page 7, note 3 states: " Extent of disease information obtained after treatment with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, hormone or immunotherapy has begun may be included." Because the SEER manual does not mention radiation treatment, can we use information from a lobectomy to code EOD if a patient has neoadjuvant radiation therapy? | Radiation therapy was inadvertently omitted from the list. Please see SINQ 20031012 answer as to when the surgical information can be used to stage the case. | 2000 | |
|
|
20000486 | EOD-Pathologic Review of Number of Regional Lymph Nodes Positive and Examined/Surgical Procedure of Other Site--Kaposi Sarcoma: How do you code these fields for a groin mass excision containing 4 lymph nodes for a Kaposi sarcoma case that presented with multiple skin lesions? | Code the EOD-Pathologic Review of Number of Regional Lymph Nodes Positive and Examined fields to 99 99 for Kaposi cases that present systemically and for those that present in more than one site (which includes cases with more than one skin subsite involved at diagnosis). There are no "regional" lymph nodes for such cases. This represents a majority of currently diagnosed Kaposi cases. However, for localized Kaposi cases, you can count the number of regional lymph nodes positive and examined if the primary site selected has a regional lymph node chain(s) associated with it (e.g., soft palate, hard palate, or a skin subsite).
For cases diagnosed 1/1/2003 and after: Code the groin mass excision in the Surgical Procedure of Other Site field to 1 [Non-primary surgical procedure performed; Non-primary surgical resection to other site(s), unknown if whether the site(s) is regional or distant]. |
2000 | |
|
|
20000419 | EOD-Extension--Corpus Uteri: How do you code myometrial involvement described as 1) "to the level of the middle one-third" or 2) "superficial"? | For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
Evaluate each case carefully.
1. Code the EOD-Extension field to 12 [Myometrium-inner half] because the pathology report indicates involvement of the myometrium "to the level of." However, if you feel that you cannot make that determination with certainty and you cannot ask a pathologist for clarification, then code the EOD-Extension field to 14 [Myometrium, NOS].
2. Code the EOD-Extension field to 12 [Myometrium-inner half] for cases with "superficial" myometrial invasion. |
2000 | |
|
|
20000270 | EOD-Lymph Nodes--Lung: What code is used to represent this field when the only information is a description of: 1. "hilar mass" 2. "mediastinal mass" 3. "enlarged" or "greater than 1 cm" used to describe any of the lymph nodes listed under code 2 in the EOD Lymph Nodes field? |
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
Code EOD-Lymph Nodes fields as follows for the examples given:
1) 9 [Unknown; not stated] for a "hilar mass" 2) 2 [Mediastinal] for a "mediastinal mass" 3) 2 [Mediastinal] for "enlarged" or "greater than 1 cm," if used to describe any of the named lymph nodes listed under code 2 in the EOD-Lymph Nodes field. |
2000 |
Home
