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: 10/08/2026 15:08 PM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Cancer Site Category Data Item Category Year
20031010 EOD-Lymph Nodes--Lung: Are positive "neck nodes" coded to 7 [Distant lymph nodes, other than above (including cervical lymph nodes)] in this field because we do not have a specific lymph node chain named or are they coded to 6 [Contra lateral hilar or mediastinal (incl. bilateral); supraclavicular (transverse cervical), ipsilateral or contralateral; scalene, ipsilateral or contralateral] because this code represents the lowest possible code for involved neck nodes? For cases diagnosed 1998-2003: Code EOD-Lymph Nodes as 7 [Distant lymph nodes, other than above (incl. cervical neck nodes)]. Lymph nodes in the "neck" are distant, rather than regional, for lung. Lung N/A 2003
20071088 Type of Multiple Tumors--Lung: Is this field coded to 40 [Multiple invasive] or 80 [Unk in situ or invasive] when only one nodule is biopsied of multiple existing nodules for a reported single lung primary? See Discussion.

The right lung has 4 tumor nodules in the upper lobe. Biopsy of one tumor is positive for moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma. No other work up performed.

Should code 40 be used because we dont know the behavior of the other nodules?

 The best code to use in this case is 40 [multiple invasive]. For lung only, it is assumed that all of the tumors are the same histology and that all are invasive. Lung N/A 2007
20000270

EOD-Lymph Nodes--Lung: What code is used to represent this field when the only information is a description of:

1. "hilar mass"

2. "mediastinal mass"

3. "enlarged" or "greater than 1 cm" used to describe any of the lymph nodes listed under code 2 in the EOD Lymph Nodes field?

For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:

Code EOD-Lymph Nodes fields as follows for the examples given:

1) 9 [Unknown; not stated] for a "hilar mass"

2) 2 [Mediastinal] for a "mediastinal mass"

3) 2 [Mediastinal] for "enlarged" or "greater than 1 cm," if used to describe any of the named lymph nodes listed under code 2 in the EOD-Lymph Nodes field.

 Lung N/A 2000
20230043

Solid Tumor Rules/Histology--Lung:  What is the histology code for a lung tumor diagnosed as “Minimally invasive adenocarcinoma, mixed mucinous and non-mucinous, grade 1, lepidic-predominant”?  See Discussion.

The resection pathology report final diagnosis indicates this is both mixed mucinous and non-mucinous with a lepidic predominant component. The pathologist notes this is “Lepidic: 75%. Acinar: 25%.”  The percentage of the mucinous component is not documented.

Rule H1, Note 1, states “When mucinous carcinoma is mixed with another histology, such as adenocarcinoma and mucinous carcinoma, code mucinous ONLY when mucinous is documented to be greater than 50% of the tumor.” While mixed invasive mucinous and non-mucinous carcinoma is included in Table 2 (Combination/Mixed Histology Codes) without a required percentage, it is unclear whether one should move past Rule H7 and use Rule H8 to code this combination histology code. Rule H7 would instruct one to code the histology to lepidic adenocarcinoma (adenocarcinoma, lepidic predominant) based on the percentage of the lepidic component in the tumor. However, this does not address the mixed mucinous and non-mucinous diagnosis. Which H Rule and histology apply to this case?

Assign histology code 8254/3 (mixed invasive mucinous and non-mucinous adenocarcinoma) to this lung tumor using Lung Solid Tumor Rules, Rule H4. This is a new code/term approved by IARC/WHO for ICD-O. Rule H4 instructs one to code the histology when only one histology is present. In this case, the pathologist indicates the tumor is mixed mucinous and non-mucinous histologies. The non-mucinous carcinoma that is seen in this mixed histology may be identified as: Adenocarcinoma in situ, minimally invasive adenocarcinoma, or lepidic predominant adenocarcinoma. In this case it is lepidic predominant adenocarcinoma. Lepidic is a recognized histology in lung. It is not unusual for the pathologist to indicate mixed non-muncinous and mucinous adenocarcinoma AND also list the non-mucinous subytpe. It is important to capture both mucinous and non-mucinous histologies which drives treatment, etc. 

 Lung Histology 2023
20200048

Solid Tumor Rules/Multiple Primaries--Lung: How many primaries are accessioned when a patient is diagnosed with right lower lobe invasive acinar adenocarcinoma (8551/3) in 2018 and treated with lobectomy, followed by a 2019 right middle lobe cancer (NOS, 8000/3) diagnosed as new stage 1 primary by cancer conference? See Discussion.

Lung Rule M14 appears to be the first rule that applies to this case and instructs the user to abstract a single primary. However, we were hoping for confirmation that a cancer (NOS) or malignancy (NOS) would not be a distinctly different histology that may qualify for Lung Rule M8. Currently, these histologic terms are not included in the Table 3 options or mentioned in the preceding notes.

Use M14 and code a single primary. Per our SME, carcinoma or cancer, NOS is not an acceptable diagnosis which is why 8000 and 8010 were not included in the tables or rules. We assume there was no tissue diagnosis for the 2019 diagnosis. We recommend searching for more information or better documentation on this case.

 Lung N/A 2020
20000553 EOD-Size of Primary Tumor--Lung: Can tumor size of 002 [Malignant cells present in bronchopulmonary secretions] be used when there is a lung mass seen but the diagnosis is from a positive bronchopulmonary secretion?

For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:

EOD-Size of Primary Tumor code 002 [Malignant cells present in bronchopulmonary secretions] is used only when there is no visible primary lung tumor and bronchopulmonary secretions are positive for lung malignancy.

Even if the diagnosis was made by cytology of broncho-pulmonary secretions, if there is a visible mass, code the size of the mass if known, code 999 if size is unknown.

 Lung N/A 2000
20130093 MP/H Rules/Histology--Lung: What histology code is used for an adenocarcinoma in situ/bronchioloalveolar carcinoma (BAC) of the lung? See Discussion.

Classification of lung malignancies has undergone a change. The bronchioloalveolar carcinoma histology is being replaced by adenocarcinoma in situ and minimally invasive adenocarcinoma, using an evaluation of lepidic growth pattern in the tumor.

The final diagnosis is "adenocarcinoma in situ/BAC" and the comment states, "The findings in the current biopsy are most compatible with low grade malignant lesions which, in this sample, shows features of adenocarcinoma in situ (former bronchioloalveolar adenocarcinoma), given the proliferation of pneumocytes is limited to the alveolar lining with no evidence of invasion. However, classification of the lesion depends, per reference guidelines (Travis et al. J THOR ONCOL 2011 6,(2):244-275), on its size and its overall histologic features, to rule out the presence of an invasive component and therefore can only be performed upon examination of it in its entirety, upon resection." The radiation oncologist staged this T1N0M0, stage 1 BAC.

Code the histology to 8140/2 [adenocarcinoma in situ, NOS].

The comment for this case is consistent with information from the CAP protocol, which says, "The diagnosis of bronchioloalveolar carcinoma requires exclusion of stromal, vascular, and pleural invasiona requirement that demands the tumor be evaluated histologically in its entirety. It is therefore recommended that a definitive diagnosis of bronchioloalveolar adenocarcinoma not be made on specimens in which the tumor is incompletely represented."

This tumor was not completely resected. Therefore, code to adenocarcinoma in situ based on the information provided.

Lung Histology 2013
20051059

Behavior/Date of Diagnosis--Lung: If the term "Pancoast tumor, NOS" is malignant by definition, should the date of diagnosis be coded to the date of the clinical diagnosis when the clinical diagnosis is made prior to the histologic confirmation of the malignancy?

Yes, Pancoast tumor is by definition malignant. It is defined as a lung cancer in the uppermost segment of the lung that directly invades into the brachial plexus (nerve bundles) of the neck, causing pain. If a Pancoast tumor was identified on imaging prior to the biopsy, the date of diagnosis should be linked to the Pancoast tumor report.

 Lung Behavior, Date of diagnosis 2005
20071028 MP/H Rules--Lung: Why the term "nodule" is not included as an equivalent term along with tumor, mass, lesion and neoplasm in the 2007 lung multiple primary rules?

Answer revised July 2008

For cases diagnosed 2007 or later:

For the purpose of applying the Lung MP/H rules, the word "Nodule" can be used interchageably with "Tumor," "Mass," "Lesion" and "Neoplasm." HOWEVER, this does NOT apply to casefinding or staging.

This revision will be added to the next version of the MP/H rules. Sinq question 20071028 will be revised.

 Lung N/A 2007
20180035

Solid Tumor Rules (2018)/Multiple Primaries--Lung: How many primaries should be abstracted in this 2018 lung case? See Discussion.

CT chest findings: 1. There is a dominant 1 cm. nodule in the left mid lung. 2. In addition, there is a new rather dominant bilobed nodule in the left lung base. 3. Distant metastases are not identified. Four months later, a doctor's note says routine follow-up visit status post Cyber Knife stereotactic body radiation therapy for synchronous early stage non-small cell carcinomas of the left upper and left lower lobes, both Stage IA. He is medically inoperable. This situation is described as a second primary tumor in AJCC8 page 438. However, by the 2018 Lung Solid Tumor rules, this would be a single primary, per rule M7. Is that correct?

Abstract one primary per Rule M7. Follow the Lung Solid Tumor Rules to determine the number of primaries. The AJCC TNM manual is used for staging. Do not apply AJCC instructions to determine the number of primaries.

 Lung N/A 2018