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: 10/07/2026 06:41 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Cancer Site Category Data Item Category Year
20041095 Primary site: How is this field coded for a malignancy described as a "intracranial squamous cell carcinoma (8070) arising in a previous epidermoid cyst"? See Discussion.

4-5-02 MRI Brain: Enhancing mass is probably a recurrence of the original tumor resected in 1983 (benign). 4-8-02 Gross resection. Lesion was coming up against her brain stem: Removed it grossly.

Path: 4-8-02 Brain tumor, left temporal: SCC arising from a previous epidermoid cyst of the brain. XRT began 4-25-02.

Path states: "Squamous lesions suspicious for malignant transformation of old epidermal cyst (1983). It has been reported in literature that epidermoid cysts in the brain can undergo a malignant transformation which is what happened in this case."

It appears the patient has an intracranial epidermoid cyst that is now

giving rise to SCC. Squamous cell carcinoma (8070) of the brain (C71_) fails the edit Primary Site, Morphology-Imposs ICDO3 (SEER IF38).

 Code the primary site to C760 [Ill-defined site; Head, face or neck, NOS]. There is an intracranial malignancy arising from a previously resected epidermoid cyst. Squamous cell carcinoma, primary of the brain, is a non-overridable edit error. N/A Primary site 2004
20010154 Grade, Differentiation--All Sites: What code is used to represent this field when there are invasive and in situ components in a tumor, but only the in situ component is graded (e.g., Invasive ductal carcinoma with high grade ductal carcinoma in situ)? Code the Grade, Differentiation field to 9 [Cell type not determined, not stated or not applicable]. The grade is taken from the invasive component only. N/A N/A 2001
20021188 Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007)--Testis: How many primaries should be reported when seminoma is diagnosed simultaneously in both testicles and both tumors are encapsulated?

For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:

Report this cases as two primaries, unless there is information in the record confirming one primary.

For tumors diagnosed 2007 or later, refer to the MP/H rules. If there are still questions about how this type of tumor should be coded, submit a new question to SINQ and include the difficulties you are encountering in applying the MP/H rules.

 N/A N/A 2002
20140014 First course treatment/Surgery of Primary Site--Anus: Would infrared coagulation be coded as treatment for AIN III of the anus/anal canal? See discussion. SINQ 20051064 indicates infrared coagulation is not treatment for cancer. Internet search explains that infrared coagulation delivers heat to destroy the tissue so it can be removed. In our region it is currently used to treat internal and external anal low grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL) and high grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL). While it is understandable that this wouldn't be coded as treatment for an invasive anal primary, could it be treatment for an in situ tumor? If it is treatment, should it be coded under Surgery code 15

Updated September 2026

Code infrared coagulation as cancer-directed treatment if the physician states IRC was used to treat AIN III. In this situation, code as A100 (Local tumor destruction, NOS) using the 2026 SEER Manual, Appendix C, Anus Surgery Codes.

The answer to SINQ 20050164 no longer applies.

N/A First course treatment, Surgery of Primary Site 2014
20091098 MP/H Rules/Histology: How is histology coded for a partial vulvectomy showing "vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia III, basaloid type"? See Discussion. Is this VIN III (8077/2) or basaloid squamous cell carcinoma (8083 and change the behavior code from 3 to 2)? It seems that H4 and H6 both lead to 8083.

For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, assign 8077/2 [Squamous intraepithelial neoplasia, grade III] for VIN III diagnoses, regardless of the type. According to the WHO Classification of Tumours (page 319), "VIN is predominately of the warty or basaloid types...."

Use the multiple tumors module to determine the histology code for VIN. Rule H21 applies.

 N/A Histology 2009
20031171 Reportability: Is pseudomyxoma peritonei always reportable? See Description.

In the ICD-O-3, pseudomyxoma peritonei has a behavior code of 6, indicating that it is malignant. Does this imply that pseudomyxoma peritonei is always a reportable malignancy? In the past, our pathologist consultant told us that pseudomyxoma peritonei is only a reportable malignancy if the underlying tumor is malignant. A benign cystadenoma of the appendix, for example, can rupture causing pseudomyxoma perionei. Does SEER agree with our pathologist consultant?

Example: Patient was found to have psuedomyxoma peritonei. Right hemicolectomy was done. Path reported an appendix with mucinous cystic tumor of undetermined malignant potential. A definite diagnosis of cancer can not be rendered.

Reportability is determined from the behavior of the primary tumor and the behavior of implants. If either are malignant, the case is reportable.

The case example does not seem to be reportable, based on the available information. Cancer diagnosis has not been made according to the pathology report.

 N/A N/A 2003
20021003 Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007): Whenever two hollow organs are diagnosed simultaneously with the same histology, one being invasive and the other in situ, can one assume that mucosal spread has occurred and that this situation represents one primary? In the absence of a physician statement, how do you determine mucosal spread from one organ to another?

For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:

Yes, this type of situation represents one primary. A tumor that is breaking down can be invasive in the center with in situ cancer at the margins. Occasionally the in situ margin can move into a contiguous organ with the same type of epithelium.

Physicians may describe mucosal spread in various manners. You will see the terms "intramucosal extension," "in situ component extending to," or statements of an invasive component in one organ, with adjacent/associated in situ carcinoma in a contiguous organ with the same type of epithelium. A frequent example of this process is bladder cancer extending into the prostatic urethra via mucosal spread.

For tumors diagnosed 2007 or later, refer to the MP/H rules. If there are still questions about how this type of tumor should be coded, submit a new question to SINQ and include the difficulties you are encountering in applying the MP/H rules.

 N/A N/A 2002
20031093

Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007): Is a small bowel carcinoid diagnosed 10 years after the diagnosis of metastatic carcinoid of unknown primary site a new primary or a new recurrence? See Description.

A patient was diagnosed in 1991 with metastatic carcinoid to liver-no primary found. In 2001, the patient is diagnosed with small bowel carcinoid at another hospital. Hospital 2 has no other information.

For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:

Code as two primaries unless there is a physician's statement that the liver lesion is metastatic from the later small bowel carcinoid. Without such a statement regarding lesions 10 years apart, do not make an assumption that one is metastatic from the other.

For tumors diagnosed 2007 or later, refer to the MP/H rules. If there are still questions about how this type of tumor should be coded, submit a new question to SINQ and include the difficulties you are encountering in applying the MP/H rules.

 N/A N/A 2003
20031054 Grade, Differentiation: Is grade always coded to 4 for a diagnosis of Ewing's sarcoma?

Do not code the ICD-O-3 grade for Ewing sarcoma unless documented in the record.

In the TNM system, grade is required to place Ewing sarcoma into a stage group. For TNM staging purposes, Ewing sarcoma is classified as G4. Do not apply TNM rules to ICD-O coding.

 N/A N/A 2003
20240031

Reportability/Histology: Is a diagnosis of non-lung neuroendocrine tumorlet reportable? See Discussion.

Patient was diagnosed March 2023 with a neuroendocrine tumorlet of the rectum measuring 0.8 mm via excisional biopsy during colonoscopy.

Prior SINQ 20160011 (stomach specific) indicates microcarcinoid and carcinoid tumors are reportable. Microcarcinoid is a designation for neuroendocrine tumors of the stomach when they are less than 0.5 cm. in size.

Is the current rectal tumor a reportable gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumor if it is less than 5 mm (i.e., is a neuroendocrine tumorlet equivalent to a microcarcinoid)?

Do not report neuroendocrine tumorlet of lung and non-lung sites. Microcarcinoid and carcinoid tumors are reportable.

Tumorlet is a tumor of neuroendocrine differentiation, defined by size < 5 mm in diameter, mitotic count < 2 mitoses/2 mm², and absence of necrosis. Microcarcinoid is a designation for neuroendocrine tumors when they are less than 0.5 cm. in size. The term "tumorlet" is used in a number of other settings, referring to small tumors (usually < 0.5 cm), and does not necessarily mean carcinoid tumor.

The term microcarcinoid tumor is not equivalent to neuroendocrine tumorlet.

 N/A Histology 2024