Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20130183 | Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is a peripheral blood finding consistent with involvement by monoclonal, lambda-restricted mature B cell population with co-expression of CD5 and CD23 reportable if, immunophenotypically, the case is consistent with a chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma? See Discussion. |
Peripheral blood: Final diagnosis: Leukocytosis absolute lymphocytosis monoclonal, lambda restricted B-cell population w/co-expression of CD5 and CD23 absolute increase in CD4=helper T cells. See comment. Comment: Peripheral blood findings are consistent with involvement by monoclonal, lambda-restricted mature B cell population with co-expression of CD5 and CD23, which is immunophenotypically consistent with a chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma immunophenotype. However, the absolute monoclonal population is only 3.02k/ul. According to WHO criteria, in the absence of extramedullary tissue involvement, the monoclonal lymphocyte population must be greater than or equal to 5.0 k/ul. Therefore, in the absence of clinical evidence of extramedullary tissue involvement, the diagnosis is most consistent with a monoclonal B cell lymphocytosis. Review of initial analysis reveals well-defined groups of cells within lymphocyte, monocyte and granulocyte gates as defined by CD45 and sid-scatter characteristics (%'s are listed). Overall, peripheral blood findings are consistent with involvement by monoclonal, lambada-restricted B cell population with a chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma immunophenotype. |
For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph. This case is reportable. Code histology to 9823/3 [CLL/SLL]. Ambiguous terminology is used to accession cases (determine reportability) because it has been used for over 30 years to do so. Any deviation from using ambiguous terminology to determine case reportability would cause the reporting of incidence counts to vary. In this case, there was a reportable, ambiguous terminology diagnosis on peripheral blood that is "consistent with" involvement by chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) immunophenotype. The ambiguous terminology "consistent with" in the flow cytometry report is acceptable to determine reportability. Given that it is the only reportable histology mentioned in the scenario, it is also used to code histology. The instruction "Do not code histology based on ambiguous terminology" is intended to be used when there is a reportable NOS histology and reportable more specific histology stated in the diagnosis. Ambiguous terminology cannot be used to report the more specific diagnosis in cases of Heme & Lymphoid neoplasms. 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 |
|
|
20130176 | Reportability--Ovary: Is an adult granulosa cell tumor of the right adnexa reportable if the left adnexa, diaphragm and paratubal tissue are reported to be consistent with metastasis? See discussion. |
Per the pathology report: Right adnexa: adult granulosa cell tumor. Left adnexa: Foci of metastatic granulosa cell tumor in paratubal tissue. Diaphragm smears: consistent with metastatic granulosa cell tumor. Comment: The morphology and immunoprofile of the cellular aggregates in the paratubal soft tissue are consistent with metastatic granulosa cell tumor. |
Based on the information provided, this case of adult granulosa cell tumor is malignant and reportable. According to our expert pathologist consultant, "though granulosa cell tumor NOS/ adult NOS is 8620/1, the presence of peritoneal implants or metastases, and/or lymph node metastases indicates the tumor is malignant, and it should be coded /3."
Note that the presence of implants or metastases does not indicate malignancy in the case of low malignant potential ovarian epithelial tumors. Our path expert explains "in contrast, by convention the behavior of borderline/LMP ovarian epithelial tumors is determined by the ovarian primary, and is /1, even though there may be peritoneal implants/metastases, or metastatic disease in lymph nodes. The treatment may vary in these circumstances, but to my knowledge the decision as to the tumor designation remains based on the primary tumor." |
2013 |
|
|
20130012 | MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries--Urinary: If topography codes C681-C689 are not included in Urinary Multiple Primary Rule M8, would a subsequent renal pelvis papillary transitional cell carcinoma be a new primary? See Discussion. |
The patient had a papillary transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder and ureter diagnosed in 2010. The primary site was coded to C689 [urinary system, NOS]. The patient was diagnosed with a transitional cell carcinoma of the renal pelvis [C659] in 2012. In applying the MP/H rules to the 2012 diagnosis, rule M8 would be ignored because the primary site of the 2010 primary was coded to C689. The result is that M9 or M10 would be applied which indicates a new primary for the 2012 diagnosis. Should the 2012 renal pelvis carcinoma be a new primary? |
For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, accession a single primary, papillary transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder and ureter [C689, urinary system, NOS] diagnosed in 2010. The steps used to arrive at this decision are: Open the Multiple Primary and Histology Coding Rules Manual. Choose one of the three formats (i.e., flowchart, matrix or text). Go to the Urinary MP Rules because site specific rules exist for this primary. Start at the MULTIPLE TUMORS module, rule M3. The rules are intended to be reviewed in consecutive order within a module. This patient has urothelial tumors in two or more of the listed sites (bladder, ureter and renal pelvis) diagnosed within 3 years. When C689 is assigned because tumors of the bladder and tumors of the ureter were determined to be a single primary and the site of origin is not known (as in this example), rule M8 is applied when a subsequent tumor is diagnosed in one of the listed sites. However, if site C689 [urinary system, NOS] was assigned for other unknown urinary primary site situations, rule M8 would not be used. Rule M8 was written specifically for urothelial tumors in the renal pelvis, ureter, bladder and urethra. Paraurethral gland [C681] and overlapping lesions of urinary organs [C688] do not belong in rule M8. We will add this issue to the list of possible revisions for the next edition of the MP/H Rules. |
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 |
|
|
20130107 | Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is the histology coded for a diagnosis of polycythemia vera with myeloproliferative syndrome? | For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.
Code the histology to 9950/3 [polycythemia vera], the more specific histology, per Rule PH29. Myeloproliferative syndrome is a non-specific (NOS) histology and polycythemia vera is a specific type of myeloproliferative disease.
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 | |
|
|
20130173 | Histology/Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is the primary site and histology coded when a bladder biopsy reveals myeloid sarcoma and a simultaneously performed bone marrow biopsy demonstrates acute myeloid leukemia? See Discussion. | 12/22/11 Bladder biopsy: myeloid sarcoma,
12/22/11 Bone marrow biopsy: acute myeloid leukemia.
Presenting symptoms were urological with three month history of painful hematuria and hydronephrosis with solid mass of bladder.
Prior to biopsy hem/onc states bladder mass of unknown pathology. CBC revealed peripheral blasts and Auer rods -- presumed diagnosis of acute myeloid leukemia (AML). No statement from physician as to where disease originated. |
For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.
Per Rule M3, abstract a single primary when a sarcoma (myeloid sarcoma) is diagnosed either simultaneously or after a leukemia of the same lineage (acute myeloid leukemia). Per the notes for Rule M3, the sarcoma is a solid manifestation of the associate leukemia.
Per PH10, code the histology to 9861/3 [acute myeloid leukemia] and the primary site to C421 [bone marrow]. PH10 states one is to code the primary site bone marrow (C421) and code the histology acute myeloid leukemia, NOS (9861/3) or any of the specific AML histologies (9840/3, 9865/3-9867/3, 9869/3-9874/3, 9891/3, 9895/3-9898/3, 9910/3, 9911/3 and 9931/3) when the diagnosis is myeloid sarcoma (9930/3) AND there is a simultaneous or previous diagnosis of acute myeloid leukemia.
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 |
|
|
20130023 | Reportability--Brain and CNS: Why has reportability changed for "intradural extramedullary schwannomas"? Are all "spinal" schwannomas reportable or only those stated to be "intradural"? See Discussion. |
If intradural schwannomas are to be collected for cases diagnosed 2011 and later, why were they not included in the 2012 SEER Manual? Should collection of spinal schwannomas be postponed until the next revision of the MP/H Rules? |
The reportability of schwannomas was not initially agreed upon by the standard setters. After the issue was discussed by the CoC, NPCR and SEER Technical Workgroup and an agreement was reached. See #2 under Reportability in the Data Collection Answers from the CoC, NPCR, SEER Technical Workgroup http://www.seer.cancer.gov/registrars/data-collection.html#reportability.
The most accurate and most current instruction is to report these spinal tumors when they arise within the spinal dura or spinal nerve roots, or when they are stated to be "intradural" or "of the nerve root." Do not report these tumors when they arise in the peripheral nerves. The peripheral nerves are the portion of nerve extending beyond the spinal dura.
Spinal cord intradural schwannomas originate in spinal nerve roots. Spinal nerve root is best classified as spinal cord, C720. |
2013 |
|
|
20130040 | Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned and what rule applies when a patient has a history of chronic myeloid leukemia diagnosed in 1993 followed by a diagnosis of acute myeloid leukemia arising in chronic myelogenous leukemia, blast phase? See Discussion. |
12/1993 Bone marrow biopsy: Chronic myeloid leukemia t(9;22) (q34;q11).
09/2011 Bone marrow biopsy: Abnormal cytogenetic & FISH support persistent involvement by chronic myelogenous leukemia.
12/2011 Peripheral blood, flow cytometry: Involvement by acute myeloid leukemia arising in chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML, blast phase, 30% blasts by manual diff.).
Is the 12/2011 diagnosis a new primary? If not, why don't Rules M8-M13 apply when the Heme DB Abstractor Notes section for CML indicates that when there is a chronic, accelerated and blast phase that develops later in the course of the disease, change the histology code to the more specific diagnosis?
|
For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.
This case should be accessioned as a multiple primary: chronic myelogenous leukemia t(9;22) (q34;q11) [9863/3] diagnosed in 1993 and acute myeloid leukemia [9861/3] diagnosed in 2011 per Rule M15.
Use the diagnosis date to determine the appropriate manual and rules to follow to determine the histologies for this case. To determine the histology of the 1993 diagnosis, use the ICD-O-2. The Heme Manual & DB will be used to determine the number of primaries and the histology of the 2011 diagnosis of AML.
Rules M8-M13 in the Heme Manual cannot be applied to this case because no transformation occurred. CML does not transform to another neoplasm.
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 |
|
|
20130150 | MP/H Rules/Histology--Bladder: What is the histology code histology code for a bladder TUR that demonstrates mixed invasive urothelial and small cell carcinoma? See Discussion. |
SINQ 20041104 (prior to 2007 MP/H rules) states to code histology to 8045. The MP/H rules do not address this combination of urothelial and small cell carcinoma. The current MP/H rule that applies is Rule H8, code the higher histology (8120/3). However, if the histology is coded to 8120/3, the fact that small cell carcinoma exists will be lost. If the small cell carcinoma drives the treatment plan/prognosis, shouldn't this situation be reflected in the rules for coding histology? |
Code the histology to 8045/3 [mixed small cell carcinoma]. The presence of small cell carcinoma drives the treatment decisions for this case.
This issue will be addressed in the next revision of the MP/H rules. |
2013 |
|
|
20130089 | MP/H Rules/Histology--Breast: How is the histology coded when a pre-treatment core biopsy showed ductal carcinoma, but the mastectomy specimen following neoadjuvant chemotherapy showed lobular carcinoma? See Discussion. | 11/06/2012 Ultrasound-guided biopsy of the left breast and left axilla showed invasive ductal carcinoma. The patient underwent 6 months of chemotherapy. In 05/2013 the patient underwent a mastectomy that showed invasive lobular cancer, pleomorphic type, with 11 axillary lymph nodes negative. | The histology is coded to lobular carcinoma, NOS [8520/3] because the mastectomy (the most representative specimen) showed only lobular carcinoma.
The MP/H Rules state to code the histology from the most representative tumor specimen examined. Although this patient underwent neoadjuvant treatment, there is no indication that the ultrasound-guided biopsy contained more tumor than the mastectomy. The mastectomy is the most representative specimen and should be used to code the histology.
|
2013 |
An official website of the United States government
