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: 02/27/2026 10:55 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20130055 Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is the primary site coded for a lymphoma with multifocal bone and epidural involvement but no lymph node involvement if the physician does not clearly state the primary site? See Discussion.

MRI Lumbar spine: Bony metastatic disease most evident at L5, L3 and T10. There is marrow tumor in the posterior elements of T12 and T10. The 14 mm epidural mass represents epidural tumor, likely metastatic, extending into the left intervertebral foramen at T12-L1.

PET scan: Hypermetabolic activity corresponding to epidural mass at the level of T12 and L1 concerning for malignancy. Other small areas of hypermetabolic activity in the left mandible and both femoral necks. There is no hypermetabolic activity corresponding to the areas of abnormal marrow edema in the vertebral bodies which enhanced on MRI scan in the lumbar and lower thoracic spine. No lymph nodes mentioned.

Biopsy epidural mass: Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma with a background of follicular lymphoma, consistent with a large cell transformation. Flow cytometry confirms a mixed large and small cell population of lymphoma (55% large cells).

T12/L1 Bone Biopsy: Bone and marrow with atypical paratrabecular lymphoid infiltrates, suspicious for involvement by follicular lymphoma. Negative for large cell lymphoma.

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

Code the primary site of the diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [9680/3] to C809 [unknown primary site] per Rule PH27. The patient has involvement of multiple bones and an epidural mass with no evidence of nodal involvement. Code the primary site to unknown [C809] when multiple organs are involved without any lymph node involvement, even when there is no statement from the physician regarding primary site.

SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx.

 2013
20130019 Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is the primary site coded when a patient has a lymph node biopsy and peripheral blood that are positive for B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma but refuses a bone marrow biopsy?

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

Code the primary site to C421 [bone marrow] per Rule PH5. Note 1 for Rule PH5 states CLL always has peripheral blood involvement. If the peripheral blood is positive for CLL/SLL and no bone marrow biopsy is done, code the primary site to C421 [bone marrow].

SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx.

2013
20130121 Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is "early essential thrombocythemia" reportable? See Discussion. The bone marrow biopsy diagnosis was, "Combined bone marrow morphologic, flow cytometric, immunohistochemical, molecular and cytogenetic findings are most consistent with early or evolving essential thrombocythemia with low level JAK2 V617F mutation documented on molecular testing." The physician is calling this a benign process. Is this reportable as essential thrombocythemia? Are the terms early or evolving ignored? Does the presence of a JAK2 mutation make this reportable? Without JAK2 testing is this case reportable?

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

Yes, this is a reportable case. The histology is coded to 9962/3 [essential thrombocythemia]. The positive JAK2 mutation testing and bone marrow biopsy results taken together support the diagnosis of essential thrombocythemia in this case.

In the Abstractor Notes section of the Heme DB, it indicates that only 50-60 percent of patients with essential thrombocythemia will have a positive JAK2 mutation. A diagnosis of essential thrombocythemia can still be made in the absence of a JAK2 mutation. For example, if the bone marrow biopsy final diagnosis or a physician's clinical diagnosis is essential thrombocythemia, despite a negative JAK2 mutation test, the neoplasm is still reportable.

SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx.

2013
20130136 Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: If a neoplasm is listed under the Transformations section in the Heme DB, is this always a new primary? See Discussion.

Where are the instructions for coding transformations? When a disease is listed under the transformations, the Multiple Primaries Calculator states it is a new primary. Is this a new primary when the physician calls it a transformation?

For example, patient was diagnosed in 2000 with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). A biopsy of a stomach mass on 4/26/12 was positive for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. DLBCL is listed under the Transformations To section in the Heme DB for CLL. Is this a new primary because it is a transformation?

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

Transformations do not always indicate a multiple primary is to be reported. Always apply the M Rules to determine the number of primaries. Refer to Rules M8-M13 in the Heme Manual address to determine the number of reportable primaries when chronic and acute neoplasms (transformations) are indicated on a case. Do not use the MP Calculator to determine the number of primaries unless the M Rules direct you to use it.

This case should be accessioned as two primaries, chronic lymphocytic leukemia [9823/3] diagnosed in 2000, and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [9680/3] diagnosed on 04/26/2012 per Rule M10. Abstract a new primary when a neoplasm is originally diagnosed as a chronic (less aggressive) neoplasm (CLL) and there is a second diagnosis of an acute neoplasm (DLBCL) more than 21 days later.

SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx.

2013
20130075

Reportability/Ambiguous terminology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is 'suspicious for an evolving acute leukemia' reportable?

For cases diagnosed 2010 and later

Please see the Hematopoietic database, https://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph/

 2013
20130115 Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is histology coded when the biopsy final diagnosis is "low grade B-cell lymphoma of unclear subtype (splenic marginal zone lymphoma?)" and the hematologist clinically diagnoses this as splenic marginal zone lymphoma? See Discussion.

This patient has massive splenomegaly. The biopsy final diagnosis was "low grade B lymphoma of unclear subtype (splenic marginal zone lymphoma?)." The pathologist's comment states, "Because of the clinical context (lymphocytosis and splenomegaly) a splenic marginal zone lymphoma is a possibility." There are no other histologic diagnoses. All the flow cytometry reports are as unclear as the biopsy.

The hematologist, after seeing the pathology report, states, "The bone marrow biopsy shows a significant infiltration by mature lymphocytes; their markers strongly suggest a marginal zone lymphoma, probably of splenic origin The final diagnosis is a splenic marginal zone lymphoma."

Should the clinical diagnosis of splenic marginal zone lymphoma [9689/3] be coded when a clinical diagnosis is not listed as a definitive diagnostic method for this neoplasm? Or should the histology be coded as low grade B-cell lymphoma [9591/3]? The clinicians will expect the case to be coded as a splenic marginal zone lymphoma when there's no doubt about the diagnosis.

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

Code the histology to 9689/3 [splenic marginal zone lymphoma] per Rule PH29 and Case Reportability Instruction #6 in the Heme Manual. Case Reportability Instruction #6 indicates, "Report the case when there is a (physician's statement) of reportable hematopoietic or lymphoid neoplasm."

The pathology gave an NOS diagnosis, low grade B-cell lymphoma [9591/3]. The physician clinically stated this was a splenic marginal zone lymphoma [9689/3]. Rule PH 29 states to code the specific histology when the diagnosis is one non-specific histology AND one specific histology AND the Heme DB MP Calculator indicates they are the same primary. Per the Multiple Primaries Calculator, these two histologies indicate the same primary.

SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx.

2013
20130079

Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is plasma cell dyscrasia reportable and synonymous with multiple myeloma? See Discussion.

Bone marrow biopsy and aspirate: Plasma cell dyscrasia with IgG kappa expression with FISH (+) for the following abnormalities: 3 copies of 1q21 (25/30 plasma cells) and an extra CCND1 signal (25/34 plasma cells) which is indicative of the presence of other chromosome 11 abnormalities possibly trisomy 11, a change known to occur in plasma cell neoplasms. Flow cytometry: A monoclonal plasma cell population is present, co-expressing cIgG, cKappa, CD56, & CD117 (up to 14% of analyzed cells).

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

Plasma cell dyscrasia and multiple myeloma are not synonymous terms. Plasma cell dyscrasia is not listed in the Alternate Names section of the Heme DB for plasma cell myeloma (multiple myeloma). Plasma cell dyscrasia is listed in the Alternate Names section of the Heme DB for MGUS [9765/1], which is not a reportable disease.

Plasma cell dyscrasia (PCD) is not reportable. PCD is a diverse group of neoplastic diseases that produces a serum M component (monoclonal immunoglobulin).

Usually these patients have a plasma cell morphology such as multiple myeloma or heavy chain disease. However, the registrar cannot diagnose multiple myeloma or heavy chain disease (or any other plasma cell neoplasm). There must be a physician statement and/or a positive biopsy to confirm a reportable diagnosis.

SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx.

 2013
20130041 Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is a flow cytometry immunophenotyping of peripheral blood that demonstrates a chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) phenotype reportable as CLL? See Discussion. Final Diagnosis: "Peripheral blood, flow cytometry immunophenotyping: Monoclonal B-cell lymphocytosis with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) phenotype; Negative for Zap 70; No abnormal T-cell population identified; CD34-positive blasts are not increased.

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

This is reportable. Code the histology to 9823/3 [chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)]. Per Rule PH5, Note 1, CLL will always have peripheral blood involvement. Based on the provided information, this patient's peripheral blood is positive for CLL.

SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx.

2013
20130070

Reportability--Is "intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm with low grade dysplasia" (also called IPMN adenoma) reportable? See Discussion.

According to the ICD-O-3, the histology for IPMN adenoma is 8453/0 is non-reportable. However, per SINQ 20021099, this is reportable.

Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) of the pancreas with low grade dysplasia, also referred to as IPMN adenoma, is not reportable.

IPMN of the pancreas is reportable when stated as "IPMN with high-grade dysplasia," or "IPMN with an associated invasive carcinoma," or  "IPMN with an associated in situ carcinoma."

The case in SINQ 20021099 is stated to have "multifocal high grade dysplasia (so-called borderline tumor and carcinoma in-situ)" and is reportable because there is an explicit statement of carcinoma in situ, not because of the reference to the presence of high grade dysplasia. It is coded 8453/2 [Intraductal papillary-mucinous carcinoma, non-invasive].

 2013
20130047 Date of diagnosis--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: What is the diagnosis date for a patient with a mild thrombocytosis diagnosed in 2008, that was subsequently treated with Anagrelide in 11/2010 following an increase in platelet count, and later in 3/2011 was found to have positive JAK2 study physician refers to as essential thrombocythemia? See Discussion. In 2008, patient diagnosed with mild thrombocytosis. The patient opted to be followed clinically with observation. In November 2010, a CBC showed an increased platelet count to 600,000. Anagrelide was started. The patient would never agree to a bone marrow biopsy. However, in 3/2011 a JAK2 study was performed and read as positive. Following the positive Jak2 study, physician stated the diagnosis was essential thrombocytosis and started the patient on a different drug.

Code the diagnosis date to 3/2011. It wasn't until 3/2011 that the physician documented a reportable diagnosis of essential thrombocytosis [9962/3].

Mild thrombocytosis is not reportable. Therefore, the case was not reportable in 2008. Although the patient was treated in 2010, there was no documentation of a reportable diagnosis.

2013