Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20130078 | Ambiguous terminology/Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is a physician diagnosis of "appears to be a myeloproliferative disorder" reportable if the patient has no treatment and the physician elects to follow the patient with CBC's?. |
Yes. This is a reportable diagnosis and should be accessioned with the histology coded to 9975/3 [myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasm, unclassifiable]. The word is a reportable ambiguous term per the Hematopoietic Coding Manual (Case Reportability Instructions, Rule 4). Myeloproliferative disorder is synonymous with myeloproliferative disease. Myeloproliferative disease is listed as an alternate name for myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasm, unclassifiable. |
2013 | |
|
|
20130209 | Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is a new bone marrow diagnosis of acute myelogenous leukemia that follows a 2007 treated diagnosis of a JAK-2 positive polycythemia vera a new primary? |
For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph. Per Rule M10, abstract two primaries. Per the Heme DB, polycythemia vera [9950/3] transforms to an acute myelogenous leukemia [9861/3]. According to Rule M10, one is to abstract multiple primaries when a neoplasm is originally diagnosed as a chronic neoplasm (e.g., polycythemia vera) AND there is a second diagnosis of an acute neoplasm (e.g., acute myelogenous leukemia) more than 21 days after the chronic 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 | |
|
|
20130024 | MP/H Rules/Histology--Bladder: How many primaries are accessioned and what rule applies when the patient has a mixed tumor with a urothelial carcinoma, NOS and a more specific histologic type followed by a diagnosis of urothelial carcinoma? See Discussion. |
The MP/H Rules do not specifically cover how to process urothelial carcinomas with a more specific type of carcinoma. Patient 1: Diagnosed in April 2010 with invasive urothelial carcinoma with signet ring features of the bladder. Site and histology are coded as C679 [bladder] and 8490/3 [signet ring cell carcinoma]. In January 2012 a subsequent diagnosis of invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder is made [C679, 8120/3]. Patient 2: Diagnosed in November 2009 with invasive papillary urothelial carcinoma with micropapillary and mucinous features of the bladder. Site and histology are coded C679 [bladder] and 8480/3 [mucinous carcinoma]. In April 2012 a subsequent diagnosis of high grade papillary and flat urothelial carcinoma without evidence of invasion is made [C679, 8130/2]. Does rule M9 apply and these are new primaries? |
For cases diagnosed 2007 and later, accession two primaries for each patient, signet ring cell carcinoma of the bladder and invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder for patient 1 and mucinous carcinoma of the bladder and non-invasive papillary urothelial carcinoma of the bladder for patient 2. 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. For both patients, rule M9 applies because the tumors have histology codes that are different at the second (xxx) number. This guideline will be reviewed for the next version of the MP/H Rules. |
2013 |
|
|
20130192 | MP/H Rules/Histology--Pleura: How is histology coded when the pathology report final diagnosis is "malignant neoplasm, compatible with malignant mesothelioma" if the COMMENT section of the pathology report indicates the tumor has a mixed epithelial and sarcomatoid pattern? See Discussion. | This case was discussed with a pathologist who feels the correct histology should be biphasic mesothelioma (9053/3) because there are both epithelial and sarcomatoid components to this tumor. However, applying the current MP/H Rules, the histology is coded to 9050/3 (mesothelioma, NOS) because the term "pattern" cannot be used to code a more specific histologic type for invasive tumors. If this truly is a biphasic mesothelioma, that data is lost for researchers because the current MP/H Rules fail to capture this information. Should the term pattern be used to code the more specific histology in this case? | Code the histology to malignant mesothelioma, NOS [9050/3]. Apply the MP/H Rules as written until they are revised. The word "pattern" and other terms will be reconsidered for the next iteration of the rules. | 2013 |
|
|
20130015 | Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is essential thrombocytopenia reportable? See Discussion. | Many times essential thrombocytopenia has been coded based on blood counts. Sometimes the discharge summary states thrombocytosis (NOS), and the case is coded to essential thrombocytopenia. Are these cases reportable? | For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.
The following are not alternative names for any reportable disease process:
The diagnosis of essential thrombocythemia is based on blood counts, but is usually a diagnosis made by excluding other myelodysplastic disorders. The following are reportable disease processes:
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 |
|
|
20130058 | Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is EBV-positive hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) reportable when diagnosed in a 5 year old child and resulted in death in less than two months? | For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.
Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) is not a reportable disease because it is not listed in the Heme DB.
Per our expert pathologist consultant, "HLH is a lymphocyte driven hemophagocytic syndrome which may be either genetically based or caused by over-activated lymphoid cells, often in response to a viral infection. It is an abnormal immune response and is not considered a malignant disease, and is, therefore, not reportable. It is not synonymous with EBV-positive T-cell lymphoproliferative disease of childhood (9724/3)."
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 | |
|
|
20130114 | Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is the histology coded when the bone marrow biopsy shows acute myeloid leukemia, but the physician states this is therapy-related AML secondary to prior radiation treatment? See Discussion. | Physician states this patient has radiation therapy-related AML due to radiation received as treatment for a prior prostate cancer. The bone marrow and other immunophenotyping do not state this is therapy-related AML. Should the histology be coded AML, NOS [9861/3] or therapy-related AML [9920/3]? | For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.
Code the histology as therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia, NOS [9920/3] when the physician states this is a therapy-related AML.
The therapy-related diagnosis may be either clinically or pathologically stated to code the histology to 9920/3. In this case, the physician is aware of the previous chemotherapy, hormone therapy or radiation and adds that knowledge to the histologic findings of AML. The pathology report did not include this clinical, historical information as part of the final diagnosis. However, one can code therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia because clinically it was stated.
We recommend that you clearly document in the abstract that you are coding a clinical histology.
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 |
|
|
20130146 | Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: What is the histology code for a diagnosis of myeloproliferative neoplasm/myelodysplastic syndrome overlap? | For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.
Code the histology to 9975/3 [myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasm, unclassifiable]. Per the Definition section in the Heme DB, this neoplasm has the, "Clinical laboratory and morphological features of myeloproliferative neoplasm but fails to meet the criteria for a specific myeloproliferative neoplasm; or presents with features that overlap two or more MPN 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 | |
|
|
20130216 | Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Need help determining primary site for Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma 9680/3 confirmed pathologically in right ovary and soft tissue left adnexa. No lymph nodes examined pathologically. Patient treated outside and no access to notes. See discussion. |
CT A/P massively enlarged uterus with no distention between the vagina, cervix or proximal to mid uterus identified. Highly concerning for malignancy though distinct etiology not clear. Ovarian not favored though not excluded given lack of clearly defined fat planes between uterus and either ovary. Extensive bilateral iliac chain and periaortic/pericaval lymphadenopathy.
Trying to work through Module 7 in the Hem DB. According to the ovary site, regional lymph nodes include the iliac and the para-aortic lymph nodes. This makes me think I should use Rule PH35 (organ and regional nodes). However, using Appendix C in the Hem DB, the iliac lymph nodes are part of the pelvic C775 while the para-aortic (periaortic) are intra-abdominal C772. This makes me wonder if I should go with rule PH36 present in organ and nodes that are not regional. |
Use Rule PH25 and code primary site to C569.
First determine if the iliac and para-aortic lymph nodes are regional for Ovary. Use AJCC TNM or Collaborative Stage. Per AJCC 7th edition, regional lymph nodes for ovary include iliac and para-aortic (pg. 419). Therefore, this case involves an organ and its regional lymph nodes. Use appendix C to determine how to code a lymph node primary. It should not be used to determine whether lymph nodes are regional for a specific organ. |
2013 |
|
|
20130222 | MP/H Rules/Histology--Bladder: How is the histology coded for a single bladder tumor showing invasive urothelial carcinoma with extensive divergent differentiation including small cell carcinoma, micropapillary carcinoma, and squamous cell carcinoma features? See Discussion. | MP/H rules seem to lead to Rule H8 which indicates that one use the numerically higher ICD-O-3 code. If one applies Rule H8, the histology is coded to 8131/3 [micropapillary urothelial carcinoma]. That would ignore the small cell carcinoma, which seems prognostically more significant. | Code the histology to 8045/3 [mixed small cell carcinoma], a combination of small cell with other types of carcinoma. There is currently no rule in the urinary site MP/H Rules for this combination of histologies. This will be included in the next revision of the MP/H Rules. | 2013 |
An official website of the United States government
