System Guide
Back to Search Results

Search Results

Display Options
Display Options
Select Fields
Export Results to CSV Create Report 0
+ Add all results to report

Report Produced: 09/09/2025 05:58 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20000280 Primary Site--Breast: Is there a hierarchy for coding subsite for breast cases when there is conflicting information in the physical exam, mammogram, operative and pathology reports as to the exact location of the primary? See discussion.

Example: Two mammograms were performed. One report indicates the lesion is at 12:00 and the other indicates it is in the upper central quadrant. However, the pathology report from the modified radical mastectomy specimen indicates the mass is in the UIQ.

According to one of our physicians, when a pathologist has a mastectomy specimen with attached axillary contents, the location of the lesion (subsite) is very accurate.

Code the Primary Site field to C50.2 [upper inner quadrant]. In general, the priority for using information is pathologic, operative, and clinical findings. The pathology report would take precedence in this case.

The 2004 SEER Program Code manual will include the following instructions for determining breast subsite.

Priority Order for Coding Subsites

Use the information from reports in the following priority order to code a subsite when the medical record contains conflicting information:

1 Pathology report

2 Operative report

3 Physical examination

4 Mammogram, ultrasound

If the pathology proves invasive tumor in one subsite and insitu tumor in all other involved subsites, code to the subsite involved with invasive tumor.

 2000
20000244 Behavior Code--Bladder/Lymphoma: Should the "in situ" designation on a bladder primary's pathology report be ignored that states a diagnosis of "in situ lymphoma"? Ignore the in situ designation. You cannot assign an in situ behavior code to a lymphoma primary. The term or designation of "in situ" is limited to solid tumors; carcinoma and/or cancer. 2000
20000242 EOD-Size of Primary Tumor--Prostate: Should the size of tumor be recorded as 001 (focus) or the actual size when both are stated? See Discussion. The pathology report from a TURP identifies a 3-mm focus of adenocarcinoma. For cases diagnosed 1998-2003, code the EOD-Size of Primary Tumor field to 003 [3 mm]. The rule that says to code a focus or foci of tumor as 001 was developed for use when no tumor size is given. 2000
20000529 EOD-Extension--Lung: If LUL mass "crosses the pleural surface" into the LLL, do we assume this represents extension to the pleura? See discussion.

9/22/93 Left upper lobe lobectomy: 3 x 3 cm mass in the periphery of the LUL near the LLL. Multiple enlarged nodes around the aortic arch and within the pulmonary fissure.

9/22/93 Pathology: Moderately differentiated Adenoca. The neoplasm does cross the pleural surface into the segment of the lower lobe. Lower margin of resection is free of neoplasm. Six lymph nodes negative for metastatic carcinoma. Tumor staged as T2N0M0 Stage Ib by physician.

Is tumor extension coded 10 [confined to one lung] or 40 [extension to pleura]?

For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:

Code the EOD-Extension field to 40 [extension to pleura]. The tumor has penetrated (extended to) the pleura.

 2000
20000268 EOD-Size of Primary Tumor--Prostate: When there are multiple nodules in the prostate, can size of tumor be based on the size of the largest nodule? See discussion. Rectal exam: Prostate enlarged, nodular and irregular. No masses. Pathology from prostatectomy: Focal nodules measuring up to 1.3 cm in diameter. Moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma. Would tumor size be 013 or 999?

For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:

Code the EOD-Size of Primary Tumor field to 013 [1.3 cm]. Code the size of a mass or nodule only when there is pathologic confirmation of malignancy. In the case you mention, the nodules were pathologically confirmed as cancer, so you would code the size of the largest nodule. If a nodule/or mass in the prostate is confirmed as cancer by needle biopsy, you would code the size of the mass or nodule.

 2000
20000436

Histology (Pre-2007)--Colon: What code is used to represent the histology "adenocarcinoma arising in a papillary adenomatous polyp"? See discussion.

Is "adenocarcinoma arising in a papillary adenomatous polyp" equivalent to adenocarcinoma in a villous adenoma [8261/3] or adenocarcinoma in an adenomatous polyp [8210/3]?

For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:

Code the Histology field to 8261/3 [adenocarcinoma in a villous adenoma]. In describing colon polyps, papillary and villous are equivalent terms.

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.

 2000
20000530 Histology (Pre-2007)/Grade, Differentiation--Brain and CNS: What code is used to represent the histology and grade for "WHO-II astrocytoma, grade II" of the brain when the WHO-II classification is different from the classification systems previously used? See discussion. According to the WHO-I classification system, this is a moderately anaplastic astrocytoma. According to the Duke criteria, this is an astrocytoma. By Dauma-Dupont criteria, this is a grade 2 astrocytoma.

For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:

Code the Histology and Grade, Differentiation fields to 9401/34 [anaplastic astrocytoma].

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.

 2000
20000248 Date of Diagnosis: When doing follow-back at nursing homes on DCO cases, we find it difficult to code diagnosis date because the nursing home records are often vague or incomplete. Should the diagnosis date be coded as unknown (excluded from SEER database), the date of death, or the approximate date of diagnosis as reported on the death certificate?

If the nursing home record indicates that the patient had cancer, use the best approximation for date of diagnosis.

If the record says the patient had cancer when admitted, but it does not provide a date of diagnosis, use the date of admission as the date of diagnosis.

If there is no mention of cancer in the nursing home record and/or all work-up in the record is negative, assume the cancer was discovered at autopsy. Use the date of death as the date of diagnosis, and leave as a Death Certificate Only case.

 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