Reportability/Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms--Skin: Is elephantiasis nostras verrucosa (ENV) reportable as a lymphoma? See Discussion.
The autopsy report indicated a diagnosis of: Skin: Hyperkeratosis and pseudoepitheliomatous hyperplasia as well as reactive angioendotheliomatosis indicating Elephantiasis Nostras Verrucosa.
Elephantiasis nostras verrucosa (ENV) is not reportable. ENV is a rare form of chronic lymphedema caused by any number of conditions including neoplasms, trauma, radiation treatment, congestive heart failure, obesity, hypothyroidism, chronic venous stasis, and parasitic infection.
Histology--Brain and CNS: What morphology code should be assigned to a low-grade glial/glioneuronal neoplasm? See Discussion.
Pathology Diagnosis: Left temporal lesion - Low grade glial/glioneuronal neoplasm BRAF mutant. Pathologist Comment: The histopathological appearance of this lesion does not allow for a definitive diagnosis. However, the low-grade appearance, fibrillary nature, immunohistochemical profile, and the presence of a BRAF V600E mutation allow this to be categorized as a low-grade glial or possibly glioneuronal tumor. Despite the lack of exact classification this neoplasm can be expected to behave in a very indolent manner consistent with a WHO grade I classification.
Assign 9413/0 for glioneuronal neoplasm.
We consulted with our expert neuropathologist about the histology "glioneuronal neoplasm." This term is relatively new and has not yet been recognized by WHO or assigned an ICD-O code. Until such time that WHO determines a code for this neoplasm, our expert instructed us to use 9413/0. Since this is not a recognized neoplasm it is not included in the solid tumor rules.
Reportability/Histology--Penis: Are and (PeIN) equivalent to PeIN3 and thus reportable? See Discussion.
Appendix E1 of the 2018 SEER manual references a similar diagnosis as being reportable for vulva and vagina only. However, the WHO Classification of Tumors of the Urinary System and Male Genital Organs (4th ed) does include high grade penile intraepithelial neoplasia as a synonym for 8077/2.
Penile intraepithelial neoplasia, grade III (PeIN III) and squamous cell carcinoma in situ of the penis are reportable. If possible, query the physicians as to whether "high grade penile intraepithelial lesion" or are synonymous with one of the reportable terms. If no further information can be obtained, report the case as C609 8077/2, and use text fields to document the details.
Primary site/Histology--Peritoneum: What is the correct primary site code for peritoneal mesothelioma in a female? When I use C482, it seems that the fields are all geared towards primary peritoneal carcinoma with FIGO staging, etc.
For mesothelioma, NOS (9050) and epithelioid mesothelioma (9052) of the peritoneum for females, assign C481, C482, or C488 as appropriate based on the site of origin in the medical documentation. The Primary Peritoneal Ca schema is assigned and you will need to complete the SSDIs for FIGO staging, CA-125 PreTx Interpretation, and Residual Tumor Volume Post Cytoreduction.
If the histology is 9051 or 9053 with primary site of C481, C482, or C488 for females, the Retroperitoneum schema is assigned. The only SSDI for this schema is Bone Invasion.
Reportability/Histology--Pancreas: Is mucinous cystic neoplasm of pancreas reportable?
Non-invasive mucinous cystic neoplasm (MCN) of the pancreas with low or intermediate grade dysplasia is NOT reportable.
Non-invasive mucinous cystic neoplasm (MCN) of the pancreas with high grade dysplasia is reportable. For neoplasms of the pancreas, the term MCN with high grade dysplasia replaces the term mucinous cystadenocarcinoma, non-invasive.
Reportability/Histology--Breast: Is a breast mastectomy showing mildly atypical cells within the nipple epidermis which are suspicious for Paget disease of the nipple a reportable malignancy? See Discussion.
Example: Left breast total mastectomy final diagnosis is incidental microscopic findings suspicious for early Paget disease of the nipple. The diagnosis comment states: The left breast mastectomy shows mildly atypical cells within the nipple epidermis which are suspicious for early Paget disease of the nipple. Additional sampling of the left breast was performed, and no evidence of atypical hyperplasia, in situ carcinoma, or invasive carcinoma within the left breast tissue was identified.
Would this case be non-reportable using rationale similar to an early/evolving melanoma per SINQ 20180029?
Code as 8540/3, Paget disease, based on the use of reportable ambiguous terminology (suspicious) listed in the 2018 SEER Coding Manual. In addition, Rule H8 of the 2018 Breast Solid Tumor Rules says to code Paget disease (8540/3) when the diagnosis is exactly Paget disease when a new tumor with no underlying tumor and the pathology documents invasive or unknown behavior.
When two ambiguous terms are used and one is on the reportable list (suspicious) and one is not (early), accept the reportable term and report the case. See #1.b.ii on page 12 in the SEER manual, https://seer.cancer.gov/manuals/2018/SPCSM_2018_maindoc.pdf
Summary Stage 2018/Extension--Prostate: Can imaging be used to code SEER Summary Stage 2018? MRI shows tumor involved the seminal vesicles and the patient did not have surgery. AJCC does not use imaging to clinically TNM stage a prostate case.
Note 5 was changed in Version 2.0.
Per Note 5 of the 2018 SEER Summary Stage Prostate chapter: Imaging is not used to determine the clinical extension. If a physician incorporates imaging findings into their evaluation (including the clinical T category), do not use this information.
This note was changed in Version 2.0 (2021 changes) to be in line with how AJCC stages; therefore, AJCC and Summary Stage agree.
Tumor Size--Esophagus: Can information from the endoscopy procedure that implies a size of 3 cm for Tumor Size--Clinical be used for Esophagus? See Discussion.
1-28-2018 CT Scan: 2.4 cm mass
2-15-2018 Endoscopy: Mass was present 22 to 25 cm. Biopsies were taken with cold forceps for histology; biopsy positive.
For the case you describe, we would record the clinical tumor size stated on the CT report.
The priority order for clinical tumor size is as follows.
1. Biopsy or operative (surgical exploration) report
2. Imaging
3. Physical exam
We do not recommend coding tumor size based on an inferred tumor size from a description such as "Mass was present 22 to 25 cm." Look for an actual measurement of the mass, or a stated tumor size. Use text fields to record details.
EOD 2018/EOD Primary Tumor/Neoadjuvant treatment: If there is no clinical information available and all that is available is the post-neoadjuvant information, is it better to code EOD unknown (999) or use the post-neoadjuvant information to code EOD? See Discussion.
The Extent of Disease (EOD) Manual states: Neoadjuvant (preoperative) therapy: If the patient receives neoadjuvant (preoperative) systemic therapy (chemotherapy, immunotherapy) or radiation therapy, code the clinical information if that is the farthest extension documented. If the post-neoadjuvant surgery shows more extensive disease, code the extension based on the post-neoadjuvant information.
Code EOD Primary Tumor using the post neoadjuvant information for this case. Since the only information you have is the post neoadjuvant, code that. EOD combines clinical and pathological information.
An official website of the United States government
Home