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: 12/22/2025 14:19 PM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20130080 Primary site/Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How are the primary site and histology coded when a right neck mass and spinal mass both show B-cell lymphoma, favor Burkitt lymphoma? See Discussion.

2/5/11 Right neck swelling. Biopsy of mass B-cell lymphoma, favor Burkitt lymphoma.

7/5/11 Hemi-laminectomy, L2-L5 spinal mass: Malignant lymphoma, B-cell phenotype, favor Burkitt lymphoma.

Should the primary site be C779? Is the correct histology Burkitt lymphoma [9687/3] or malignant lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell [9680/3]?

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

Code the primary site to C779 [lymph nodes] per Rule PH22 and the histology to 9591/3 [B-cell lymphoma, NOS].

Code the primary site to C779 [lymph nodes, NOS] when lymphoma is present in an organ and lymph nodes that are not regional for that organ and the origin cannot be determined even after consulting the physician. The patient has involvement of a lumbar spine mass and cervical lymph nodes. Cervical lymph nodes are not regional to the lumbar area of the spine.

Do not use ambiguous terminology to code histology for hematopoietic neoplasms. "Favor" is ambiguous terminology. Therefore, the histology must be coded to B-cell lymphoma and not to diagnosis which is "favored" (Burkitt lymphoma). Remember that ambiguous terminology is only used to determine case reportability, not to code histology for hematopoietic 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
20130198 MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries--Rectosigmoid: How many primaries are accessioned for a synchronous diagnosis of neuroendocrine carcinoma and a separate adenocarcinoma arising in a villous adenoma when both arise in the rectosigmoid junction? See Discussion. Total colectomy showed neuroendocrine carcinoma of the rectosigmoid junction, as well as a separate adenocarcinoma arising in a villous adenoma of the rectosigmoid junction. Is this a single primary per Rule M13 (a frank adenocarcinoma and an adenocarcinoma in a polyp) or Rule M16 (adenocarcinoma and a more specific adenocarcinoma)? Or are these two primaries?

Accession two primaries per Rule M17, neuroendocrine carcinoma [8246/3] of the rectosigmoid junction [C199], and adenocarcinoma in a villous adenoma [8261/3] of the rectosigmoid junction [C199]. There are two tumors with ICD-O-3 histology codes that differ at the third number.

Rule M13 does not apply to neuroendocrine carcinoma. Rule M16 does not apply to this case because there are two specific histologies.

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
20130132 Diagnostic confirmation--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: What is the diagnostic confirmation code for a death certificate only (DCO) diagnosis of acute myeloid leukemia?

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

Always code diagnostic confirmation to 9 [Unknown whether or not microscopically confirmed; death certificate only] for DCO cases.

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
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
20130197 MP/H Rules/Histology--Urinary System: What is the histology code for a 2007 and later diagnosis of papillary carcinoma of the urinary system organs? See Discussion.

Will histology code 8050 [papillary carcinoma, NOS] be used for cases diagnosed 2007 and later? The MP/H Rule H4 for urinary primaries states to code papillary carcinoma to code 8130, but Rule M6 includes tumors coded to 8050.

The IARC publication Pathology and Genetics of Tumours of the Urinary System and Male Genital Organs uses code 8130 only for papillary carcinoma.

Code the histology to 8130 [papillary transitional cell carcinoma] for cases of papillary carcinoma of the urinary system diagnosed 2007 and later.

Histology code 8050 [papillary carcinoma, NOS] should not be used for papillary carcinoma of the urinary system diagnosed starting in 2007. Rule M6 includes this histology to take pre-2007 cases into consideration.

2013
20130120 Primary site--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: What is the primary site for a Langerhans cell Sarcoma of the lower extremity?

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

If the bone is involved, code the primary site to bone. Langerhans more commonly starts in the bone and extends to the soft tissue.

If bone is not involved, code primary site to C492, Connective, subcutaneous and other soft tissues of lower limb and hip.

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
20130067 Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How is histology coded for a pathology report final diagnosis of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (50%) and follicular lymphoma, 3A (50%)?

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

Code the histology to diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [9680/3] per Rule PH11.

Code the histology to 9680/3 [diffuse large B-cell lymphoma] when DLBCL and any other non-Hodgkin lymphoma (follicular lymphoma, grade 3 in this case) are present in the same anatomic location. DLBCL is coded because it is the more aggressive histology.

NOTE: This answer assumes these two histologies are present simultaneously in the same anatomic location. Per Rule M4, this is a single 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
20130201 Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are reported for a patient with a 6/5/12 RUL biopsy that is positive for MALT lymphoma and a 6/7/12 cervical lymph node biopsy that is positive for follicular lymphoma?

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

Per Rule M15, abstract two primaries for this case. According to M15, use the Heme DB Multiple Primaries Calculator to determine the number of primaries for all cases that do not meet the criteria of M1-M14. The result is two primaries, MALT lymphoma [9699/3] and follicular cell lymphoma [9690/3].

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
20130148 Reportability--Brain and CNS: Are "spinal" schwannomas reportable if stated to be extradural, vertebral nerve sheath, or of specific vertebrae? See Discussion.

Are any of the following cases reportable?

Example 1: Clinical Diagnosis: Extradural spinal cord tumor compatible with schwannoma. What assumptions should be made about reportability if the tumor is described as being extradural? The extradural spinal cord includes epidural fat surrounding the thecal sac and exiting nerve roots. Does this mean there are not nerve roots in the extradural spinal cord?

Example 2: Final Pathologic Diagnosis: Designated "C3-4 nerve sheath tumor" excision: Morphologic and immunohistochemical findings consistent with cellular schwannoma. When stated to be a "nerve sheath tumor" does that mean peripheral nerve (C47_) involvement or nerve root (C72_) involvement?

Example 3: Final Pathologic Diagnosis: T-8 vertebral tumor resection: Schwannoma with degenerative changes (calcification, cyst formation) - ganglion and nerve are identified. There is no mention clinically or pathologically whether this tumor is "intradural" or "of the nerve root." In the absence of information about whether the location of the tumor is intradural or involving the nerve root, is it assumed that it does involve this part of the spinal cord when a specific vertebrae is removed?

Extradural schwannomas are not reportable. Neither vertebral nerve sheath nor a location of/on a specific vertebrae confirm the origin as being either extradural or intradural. Do not report a schwannoma if it cannot be determined to be "intradural" or "of the nerve root." 2013