Reportability/Histology--Small intestine: Is a neuroendocrine microtumor of the duodenum a reportable tumor? See Discussion.
This comment was added to the pathology report by the pathologist: A focus of neuroendocrine microtumor measured 350 micrometers, qualifying as a neuroendocrine microtumor. Focus was immunohistochemically positive for chromogranin and synaptophysin and negative for gastrin. The Ki-67/CD45 immunostain showed <1% positivity in microtumor.
Neuroendocrine microtumor of the duodenum is reportable as 8240/3. "Microtumor" pertains to the size/amount of NET and not to a histologic type.
MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries--Urinary: Is a renal pelvis diagnosed 5/2016 a separate primary when the first invasive bladder was 12/2011? Per rule M7, the 5/2016 renal pelvis is more than 3 years later. Does Multiple Primary/Histology (MP/H) rule M7 refer back to the original diagnosis date or to the last occurrence? See Discussion.
12/30/11 Bladder Biopsy: Diffuse carcinoma in situ of bladder, urothelial cancer at trigone (Stage T1)
1/30/2012 Transurethral resection of the bladder was non-papillary, urothelial carcinoma, focal invasion of lamina propria, staged T1
11/10/14, 9/28/15, 9/26/16, 10/19/17 all had positive bladder cytology of urothelial carcinoma
5/16/16 Left renal pelvis aspirate: positive for malignant cells, urothelial carcinoma
9/26/16 Left renal pelvis aspirate: positive for malignant cells, urothelial carcinoma
10/18/16-11/7/16 Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) x3 administered into the renal collecting system via ureteral catheter
For cases diagnosed prior to 2018
This case is a single primary. This patient has not had a disease-free interval as demonstrated by the positive cytologies from 2014 through 2017. The MP/H rules cannot be applied in this case.
To answer your question about the timing of rule M7, please see slide 6 in the Beyond the Basics MP/H advanced training, General Instructions, https://seer.cancer.gov/tools/mphrules/training_adv/SEER_MPH_Gen_Instruc_06152007.pdf
Do not report renal HTOC. According to our expert pathologist consultant, "the genetic studies seem to indicate that the chromosomal changes of chromophobe renal carcinoma are not found in the hybrid tumors."
Multiple Primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries should be reported when a 10/10/2017 skin biopsy identified myeloid sarcoma with monocytic differentiation, clinically stated to be leukemia cutis is followed by an 11/2/2017 BM biopsy showing an evolving high grade myelodysplastic process with atypical monocytes, likely an early evolving acute myeloid leukemia (AML), clinically stated to be a therapy-related AML (9920/3)? See Discussion.
Code 9920/3 is not included under rule M3. However, disease process knowledge would indicate that because the patient has an underlying AML subtype, the leukemia cutis is due to the AML cells that have migrated into the skin tissue. This appears to be a single advanced disease process essentially diagnosed simultaneously.
The leukemia cutis is secondary to leukemia that is already present. This is multiple disease processes going on at the same time. Look for more information on this case. Is there any previous diagnosis of MDS, leukemia, or some other disease that would result in a treatment related AML?
If no further information can be found, abstract one primary with 9920/3.
First Course of Treatment/Surgery of Primary Site--Melanoma: How do you code UVB therapy treatment for melanoma?
Code UVB therapy for melanoma as photodynamic therapy under Surgery of Primary Site for skin. Assign code 11 [Photodynamic therapy (PDT)] if there is no pathology specimen. Assign code 21 [Photodynamic therapy (PDT)] if there is a pathology specimen. Use text fields to document details.
2018 Solid Tumor Rules/Histology--Lung: What is the appropriate histology code for the case below in the Discussion section? Is there a difference between adenocarcinoma in situ (bronchioloalveolar carcinoma), non-mucinous type (8252/2) and adenocarcinoma in-situ, mucinous? See Discussion.
Procedure: Wedge, resection specimen, Laterality: Right, Tumor site: Right upper lobe, Tumor size: 1.0 cm in greatest dimension, Histologic type: Adenocarcinoma in-situ, mucinous, Histologic grade: N/A, Visceral pleura invasion: Not identified, Tumor extension: N/A, Margins: Uninvolved, Lymphocytosis.
Assign 8253/2 for adenocarcinoma in situ, mucinous. New codes were added in 2018 for mucinous adenocarcinoma in situ for lung cancer only as all cases were not invasive. Pathologist are discouraged from using the term BAC. In-situ lung tumors can now be identified as either mucinous or non-mucinous and the appropriate ICD-O code should be assigned based on diagnosis.
Date of Diagnosis--Colon: If a patient has a positive Cologuard test, is the date of diagnosis the date of the cologuard test or the date of the biopsy?
Do not use the date of a positive Cologuard test as the date of diagnosis.
Primary site--Colon: What is the correct topography code for appendiceal orifice? See Discussion.
From a number of definitions reviewed, it seems unclear if it's part of the appendix or the cecum of the colon. For example: The cecum is usually located in the right iliac fossa. In the pole of the cecum, there is often the appearance of fusion of the three teniae coli around the appendix, giving rise to the tri-radiate fold (Mercedes Benz sign), but the anatomy can be variable. The most reliable landmarks of the cecum are the appendiceal orifice and ileocecal valve. The appendiceal orifice is usually an unimpressive slit, often crescentic in shape. The ileocecal valve is made up of the superior and inferior lips (usually not seen en face) and is the gateway leading into the terminal ileum. It is located on the prominent ileocecal fold encircling the cecum, between 3 and 5 cm distal to the cecal pole. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212097113701730)
Assign C180, Cecum, when the neoplasm originates in the appendiceal orifice. The appendiceal orifice is a landmark in the cecum. During colonoscopy, visualization of the appendiceal orifice indicates that the entire colon was examined, from the anus to the cecum.
Reportability--Vulva: Is a biopsy showing high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (VIN II) in the vulva reportable for cases diagnosed in 2018? See Discussion.
In comparison to SINQ 20180022, this case does not mention VIN III anywhere in the final diagnosis. Is any mention of HGSIL in the final diagnosis reportable, even if it is qualified with a non-reportable term in parenthesis or CAP protocol?
Since this HSIL diagnosis is specified as VIN II, do not report it.
WHO includes both VIN II and VIN III as synonyms for HSIL of the vulva. HSIL is reportable and VIN III is reportable. VIN II is not reportable.
Reportability/Histology--Brain and CNS: Is multinodular and vacuolating neuronal tumor of the cerebrum reportable, and if so, is the histology coded as 9492/0? See Discussion.
Patient diagnosed with multinodular and vacuolating neuronal tumor of the cerebrum. My research shows: Multinodular and vacuolating neuronal tumor of the cerebrum is a recently reported benign, mixed glial neuronal lesion that is included in the 2016 updated World Health Organization classification of brain neoplasms as a unique cytoarchitectural pattern of gangliocytoma. There is no code in ICD-O-3 for it, so do I report it and use 9492/0 or not ?
Do not report multinodular and vacuolating neuronal tumor of the cerebrum. At this time, WHO is undecided about whether this is a neoplastic or a hamartomatous/malformative process. If WHO makes a determination that this is a neoplastic process, we will update reportability instructions and ICD-O-3 guidelines for registrars.
An official website of the United States government
Home