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 08:26 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Cancer Site Category Data Item Category Year
20031106

Reportability--Appendix: Is an appendiceal carcinoid with one periappendiceal lymph node positive for metastatic carcinoid tumor reportable to SEER? See Discussion.

The patient had an appendectomy followed by a hemicolectomy. No residual carcinoid tumor was identified but there was one lymph node positive for metastatic carcinoid tumor.

Yes, this carcinoid is reportable to SEER. This carcinoid is malignant by virture of the lymph node metastasis. Code the behavior as /3.

N/A N/A 2003
20041003 EOD-Size of Tumor: How is this field coded when the only description is "greater then 10 cm?" For cases diagnosed 1998-2003: When the only information available is a statement such as "Greater than 10 cm," code tumor size 101 [10.1 cm]. N/A N/A 2004
20000527

Radiation: Is "consolidated" radiation therapy coded as part of first course therapy when there is no documentation of "planned treatment" and the radiation is done 4 months after the initiation of treatment?

Yes, "consolidation" treatment is part of a planned treatment regimen. A treatment regimen may consist of the four following phases:

1. Induction (remission induction)

2. CNS preventive therapy

3. Consolidation/intensification

4. Maintenance

 N/A Radiation Therapy 2000
20031012 EOD-Lymph Nodes/Extension: How does one code these fields if the clinical level of disease extension prior to neoadjuvant treatment is greater than demonstrated on pathology at time of resection? See discussion. Breast case described clinically as a "breast mass and nodal metastases" which is treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and at surgery the lymph nodes are pathologically negative.

For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:

Use the combination of clinical and pathologic information to code EOD for primary site, extension and lymph nodes. Code the more extensive disease. If lymph nodes are positive clinically and not positive after neoadjuvant treatment, code lymph node involvement. If lymph nodes are negative clinically and positive on path, code lymph node involvement. When neoadjuvant treatment is administered because of a clinical statement of stage or involvement, code EOD based on this clinical information, even if later pathologic information would lead to a lesser EOD. General guideline number 6 (page 1 of SEER EOD-88 3rd ed.) points out that clinical information must be considered when coding EOD. However, do not code EOD based on clinical information disproved by pathologic findings in the absence of intervening treatment. The scenario above: The clinical involvement of the nodes justifies the neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Therefore, code EOD based on the clinical lymph node involvement.

 N/A N/A 2003
20041082 Date of Diagnosis: When a 4/04 clinical impression indicates the appearance of a carcinoma that is contradicted by a negative 4/04 biopsy but is confirmed by a 5/04 resection, should the diagnosis date be coded to April or May? See Discussion.

4/04 colonscopy: irregular fungating mass that has appearance of carcinoma. 4/04 Bx: high grade dysplasia. 5/04: LAR. 5/04 Path: 3.2 X 2.5 cm mass wd adenoca with invasion of muscularis propria.

Should the diagnosis date be 4/04 based on the clinical impression during the colonoscopy OR 5/04 since the path for the bx was negative?

 The date of diagnosis for the example above is 05/04 -- the date of the pathology report confirming malignacy. The biopsy in 04/04 negated the 04/04 clinical statement. N/A Date of diagnosis 2004
20170031

MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries--Penis: How many primaries should be reported for a diagnosis of invasive squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the penis in 6/2011, treated with excision and fulguration followed by 10/2014 penile lesion found to be SCC with basaloid features focally highly suspicious for invasion? Clinically, the 2014 tumor is stated to be in situ and recurrent penile cancer and follow-up in 2/2015 indicates there was no evidence of tumor following treatment. Subsequently, in 3/2016 the patient has another penile lesion biopsy showing SCC in situ suspicious for invasion, clinically stated to be recurrent. See Discussion.

At the central registry, we have accessioned this scenario as three primaries per Multiple Primaries/Histology (MP/H) Rule M10 (diagnosed more than 1 year apart), as the patient was stated to be disease free between each occurrence. However, the diagnosing/treating facility is not reporting these cases due to clinical statements of recurrent disease.

This is an example of a case type identified on casefinding audits conducted by our central registry in which we have learned SEER's expectation of MP/H rule application does not match hospital reporting. Can the 2018 version of the MP/H rules more clearly address how this type of clinically recurrent (multiple times) case should be handled?

Accession three tumors as the tumors were each diagnosed more than one year apart according to the MP/H Rule M10 for Other Sites. And, as you have noted, the patient was free of disease after each diagnosis.

The MP/H rules have very clear instructions regarding the word "recurrence." See page 10, specifically A.7., https://seer.cancer.gov/tools/mphrules/2007_mphrules_manual_08242012.pdf

SEER will evaluate the MP/H rules in the upcoming revision.

 N/A N/A 2017
20041022 Primary site/Histology (Pre-2007)/Behavior: What is the correct site and histology/behavior for the following diagnosis: "mucinous cystadenoma of the appendix with perforation and pseudomyxoma peritonei." This was diagnosed at e-lap for a separate adenocarcinoma of the ascending colon.

For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:

The appropriate code for mucinous cystadenoma of the appendix with perforation and pseudomyxoma peritonei is C18.1 8470/0. It is not reportable to SEER. According to our pathologist consultant, mucinous cystadenoma is a legitimate term for such appendiceal tumors. They may implant all over the peritoneum as pseudomyxoma peritonei, especially in the face of perforation, without being histologically malignant.

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 Behavior, Histology, Primary site 2004
20031009 Reportability/Behavior Code--Soft Tissue: Is a final diagnosis of a forearm mass diagnosed as "Angiomatoid malignant fibrous histiocytoma [see note]" reportable? The NOTE reads "Angiomatoid malignant fibrous histiocytoma is a low grade borderline lesion with a tendency for local recurrence, but a very low potential for distant metastases." Is behavior /1 or /3? Angiomatoid malignant fibrous histiocytoma is reportable with a behavior code of /3 according to ICD-O-3. The Final Diagnosis takes precedence over the "note." N/A Behavior 2003
20010052 Grade, Differentiation--Unknown Site: Is grade coded to 9 [Cell type not determined, not stated or not applicable] for all unknown primaries? Most unknown primaries would be coded to grade 9 [Cell type not determined, not stated or not applicable] in the Grade, Differentiation field unless the case is coded to one of the histologies for which the grade is implied, such as undifferentiated carcinoma, NOS [802034]. N/A N/A 2001
20010134 Diagnostic Confirmation--Testis: How do you code this field when a testicular mass is confirmed to be cancer on physical exam and testicular antigen, but the orchiectomy specimen was negative and yet the final signout diagnosis on the medical record was "testicular cancer"? Code the Diagnostic Confirmation field to 5 [Positive laboratory test/marker study] because the disease was confirmed both clinically and by a positive marker. Code 8 [Clinical diagnosis only] is used when the diagnosis is based on information other than that coded in 5, 6, or 7 [positive lab test/marker study, visualization, and radiography or other imaging techniques]. Code 8 is rarely used. N/A Diagnostic confirmation 2001