Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Cancer Site Category | Data Item Category | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20081046 | MP/H Rules--Corpus uteri: How is histology coded for an endometrial tumor described as an "endometrioid adenocarcinoma with prominent squamous metaplasia"? | For cases diagnosed 2007 or later: Endometrioid adenocarcinoma with squamous metaplasia is coded 8570 [Adenocarcinoma with squamous metaplasia]. This falls under the Histology Coding Rules for Other Sites, rule H17. The code for Endometroid adenocarcinoma is 8380. The code for Adenocarcinoma with squamous metaplasia is 8570. The histology with the numerically higher ICD-O-3 code is Adenocarcinoma with squamous metaplasia -- 8570. |
Corpus uteri | N/A | 2008 | |
|
|
20071104 | Reportability--Bladder: Is a "high grade papillary urothelial neoplasm with focal superficial invasion into lamina propria" reportable? |
Yes, this case is reportable. It is invasive (invasion into the lamina propria). According to the WHO Classification of Urinary System Tumours, "Most pT1 cancers are papillary, low or high grade." |
Bladder | N/A | 2007 | |
|
|
20100088 | Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned when a patient has 2005 diagnosis of multiple myeloma diagnosed returns in 2010 with extramedullary plasmacytoma and a bone marrow biopsy showing plasma cell dyscrasia that is clinically stated to "consistent with a relapse of myeloma"? See Discussion. | Patient was diagnosed in 2005 with multiple myeloma and following stem cell transplant 2005 was in complete remission.
On 2/1/10 an excisional biopsy of a soft tissue right flank mass showed plasmacytoma. On 3/2/10 the bone marrow biopsy was stated to be consistent with plasma cell dyscrasia. An outside attending physician stated the bone marrow biopsy was consistent with a relapse of myeloma. There was no radiologic evidence of disease elsewhere as of Feb 2010, only the soft tissue right flank mass. Patient initially presented for post-op radiation to the right flank and was treated 3/29/10. On 8/6/10 a biopsy of a right perinephric mass was positive for plasmacytoma. Subsequent xray on 8/16/10 of the right tibia and fibula showed lytic lesion consistent with progression of myeloma.
Using the Hematopoietic Database, the plasmacytoma in 2/1/10 is a second primary. How do the rules apply to the perinephric soft tissue disease and right tibia lesion? Are they separate new primaries? Or is all of this simply a recurrence of the original 2005 diagnosis as the attending physician states? |
For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.
Accession a single primary with the histology coded to 9732/2 [multiple myeloma]. The disease discovered in 2010 represents further advancement of former disease. Per the Abstractor Notes section in the Heme DB, it states that bone marrow involvement, lytic bone lesions, and bone tumor masses of plasma cells are common. Under the Recurrence and Metastases section in the Heme DB it further states that extramedullary (in tissue other than the bone) involvement is a generally a manifestation of advanced disease. This case is an example of such a situation.
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. |
Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms | N/A | 2010 |
|
|
20071127 | Multiplicity Counter--Breast: How should the multiplicity counter be coded for a 3.8 cm infiltrating duct carcinoma with two "satellite nodules" measuring 5 mm and 7mm that are not described as either metastases or multiple foci? | Include these nodules in the multiplicity counter because they are measured and are part of the final diagnosis on the pathology report. | Breast | N/A | 2007 | |
|
|
20020003 | EOD-Size of Primary Tumor: Can you code the tumor size if you have the aggregate size given for two or more tumor masses? | For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
No. Never code the aggregate size in the Size of Primary Tumor field when the pieces removed come from TWO OR MORE tumors. If there is a clinical statement regarding the size of two or more tumors, code this field to the size of the largest tumor.
The aggregate size can only be used to code the Size of Primary Tumor field when the PATHOLOGIST estimates the size of the tumor from the pieces of ONE tumor removed by the surgeon. |
N/A | N/A | 2002 | |
|
|
20140034 | Reportability--Ovary: Can you clarify when widely metastatic borderline histologies of the ovary and various other sites are reportable? See discussion. |
SINQ 20130176 states that an adult granulosa cell tumor of the ovary with metastases is malignant. However, SINQ 20091087 states that a borderline tumor of the appendix with metastasis is not reportable.
The first statement of 20130176 “though granulosa cell tumor is coded 8620/1, the presence of peritoneal or lymph node metastases indicate the tumor is malignant and coded as /3” does not coincide with the second statement of “the behavior of borderline/LMP ovarian epithelial tumors is determined by the ovarian primary, even though there may be peritoneal implants or metastatic disease in the lymph nodes”. If the ovarian metastases do make this a reportable malignancy, can this line of thinking be used to determine reportability for borderline histologies for other sites such as the appendix? |
The case in 20130176 is adult granulosa cell tumor. The answer points out an important difference in the way "metastases" from this histology should be interpreted versus low malignant potential ovarian epithelial tumors. Metastases from adult granulosa cell tumor of the ovary indicates a malignant primary. So-called metastases from a LMP epithelial tumor do not indicate a malignant primary when the metastatic deposits are also LMP/borderline in behavior.
Do not apply instructions for ovarian cases to other primary sites including appendix. |
Ovary | N/A | 2014 |
|
|
20041029 | Ambiguous Terminology/Reportability: Are the terms "bordering on" and "may represent" diagnostic of cancer? See Discussion. |
Pathology report states "...florid micropapillary hyperplasia, focally atypical with features bordering on low grade micropapillary ductal carcinoma in situ." |
The terms "bordering on" and "may represent" are not diagnostic of cancer. These terms are not on the list of ambiguous terms that constitute a diagnosis of cancer. The diagnosis in the example above is not reportable to SEER. |
N/A | N/A | 2004 |
|
|
20130073 | Reportability--Brain and CNS: Is Rosai-Dorfman disease a neoplastic reportable disease process if it occurs in the brain? See Discussion. |
The pathology report diagnosis is: Cranium, right temporal area, resection of intradural, extra-axial mass: Severe acute and chronic inflammation, histiocytic reaction, and proliferative fibrosis. See comment. Comment: Among potential alternative considerations are an infectious process, or non-infectious inflammatory CNS lesions such as inflammatory pseudotumor, Rosai-Dorfman disease, plasma cell granuloma, idiopathic hypertrophic pachymeningitis, and inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor. The clinicians discuss this and review other chart information and conclude the patient has a clinical diagnosis of Rosai-Dorfman disease. This is a rare disorder characterized by proliferation of histiocytes. |
Updated May 2026 This case is not reportable for cases diagnosed prior to 2021. Rosai-Dorfman disease is not listed in the ICD-O-3. To be reportable, a neoplasm must be listed in the ICD-O-3 and originate in a reportable brain/CNS site. For cases diagnosed 2021+, Rosai-Dorfman disease is reportable as 9749/3. |
Brain and CNS | N/A | 2013 |
|
|
20130069 | Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is chronic myeloproliferative neoplasm reportable? See Discussion. | The Heme DB indicates myeloproliferative neoplasm is reportable, but does not indicate whether chronic myeloproliferative neoplasm is. Does the word "chronic" make this non-reportable? | For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.
Chronic myeloproliferative neoplasm is reportable. The preferred term is myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasm, unclassifiable (MPN). Chronic myeloproliferative neoplasm is listed in the Heme DB under the Alternate Names section for this neoplasm.
The term chronic does not affect the reportability of this neoplasm. The newer terms are myeloproliferative neoplasm or myeloproliferative disorder and chronic is not used in most diagnoses.
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. |
Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms | N/A | 2013 |
|
|
20140036 | MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries--Prostate: Is duct carcinoma of the prostate the same as an adeno/acinar carcinoma of the prostate? Specifically, does rule M3 apply when there is an adenocarcinoma of the prostate followed by a duct carcinoma of the prostate or a duct carcinoma followed by adenocarcinoma? |
Rule M3 does not apply to adenocarcinoma followed by duct carcinoma of the prostate or vice versa. Rule M3 pertains to cases of adenocarcinoma and acinar carcinoma. These two terms, adenocarcinoma and acinar carcinoma, are equivalent for the purpose of applying the MP/H rules to prostate cases. See page 77 of the Other Sites Terms and Definitions, http://www.seer.cancer.gov/tools/mphrules/mphrules_definitions.pdf
|
Prostate | N/A | 2014 |
An official website of the United States government
