Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20061055 | CS Lymph Nodes--Colon: What criteria is used to distinguish between code 30 [Regional lymph nodes, NOS] and 80 [Lymph nodes, NOS] when positive lymph nodes are removed during a colon resection but the lymph node location is not stated? See Discussion. | Example 1: Descending colon excision: Metastatic adenocarcinoma in 8 of 9 lymph nodes.
Example 2: Hepatic flexure and en bloc resection of liver. Adenocarcinoma in 3 of 10 lymph nodes. |
This answer was provided in the context of CSv1 coding guidelines. The response may not be used after your registry database has been converted to CSv2. Code positive nodes included with the resected specimen as regional lymph nodes, NOS when the location is not stated. See number 3.e under the general instructions for coding CS lymph nodes. Based only on the information provided, code CS lymph nodes 30 [Regional lymph nodes, NOS] for both examples. |
2006 |
|
|
20010164 | EOD-Size of Primary Tumor--Prostate: If you only have a biopsy and not a resection of the primary site, can you code the size of the prostate nodule demonstrated on digital rectal exam? See discussion. | Example 1: Digital rectal exam reveals 1 cm left side prostate nodule. TRUS-guided biopsy of left side of prostate shows adenocarcinoma. Right side biopsy is negative. Is size coded to 010 or 999?
Example 2: Digital rectal exam reveals 1 cm left side prostate nodule. Bone scan was positive for metastatic disease. Is size coded to 010 or 999? |
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
You need path confirmation that a malignancy exists in the prostate before you can code the size of the nodule seen clinically.
Example 1: Code the EOD-Size of Primary Tumor to 010 [1 cm], because the nodule in the prostate is confirmed as cancer by needle biopsy.
Example 2: Code the EOD-Size of Primary Tumor to 999 because there was no pathologic confirmation of malignancy. |
2001 |
|
|
20000484 | EOD-Size of Primary Tumor--Breast/Cervix: When coding tumor size, when do you use 997 for breast cases and 000 versus 999 for breast and other primaries? See discussion. | Example 1: Ductal carcinoma found in axillary lymph nodes. No tumor found in breast on physical exam or by pathological exam of the breast, but physician states that the breast is definitely the primary site.
Example 2: Paget disease for breast carcinoma with no underlying tumor.
Example 3: Inspection of the cervix shows no visible tumor; biopsy of the cervix reveals CIN III or squamous cell carcinoma, either invasive or in situ. |
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
Code the EOD-Size of Primary Tumor field as follows:
Example 1: Code to 000 [No mass, no tumor found, no Paget disease] when a tumor of a stated primary site is not found, but the tumor has metastasized.
Example 2: Code to 997 [Paget disease of nipple with no demonstrable tumor] if there is no underlying tumor and the patient presents with Paget of the breast.
Example 3: Code to 999 [Size not stated] when no size of tumor is given on the pathology report. Do not use 000 in the size field when a tumor is not visible on physical exam or by imaging, but tumor is found microscopically. |
2000 |
|
|
20190085 | Primary site/Histology: Are the 2018 ICD-O Histology Update topography codes intended to specify the most common sites for these new codes and can the histology be coded if they occur in other sites? See Discussion. |
Example 1: Endometrial biopsy final diagnosis is high-grade serous adenocarcinoma. Should we code this endometrial primary with histology 8441 (serous adenocarcinoma) because C54.X topography code is not listed in the applicable 2018 ICD-O-3 codes Histology Update for the new morphology, or should we apply the new histology code 8461 (high-grade serous carcinoma)? The NAACCR implementation guideline section 2.3 includes an important reminder that: Many of the new codes, terms, and behaviors listed in this update are site-specific and do not apply to all sites. Applicable C codes will be noted next to the term in bold font. However, this is followed by the more ambiguous instruction for edits that appear to imply the combination with non-listed sites is possible: These site- and histology-specific combinations will not be added to the Impossible combination edit. However, if a site other than the one listed with the morphology code is assigned, the result will be an edit requiring review. This is Interfield Edit 25. |
The NAACCR Guidelines for ICD-O-3 Histology Code and Behavior Update Implementation, effective January 1, 2018, state: Currently in ICD-O-3, when a topography (C code) is listed in parentheses next to the morphology term, it indicates morphology is most common to that site. It may occur in other sites as well. Many of the new codes, terms, and behaviors listed in this update are site-specific and do not apply to all sites. Please review the Comments to determine which histology codes are specific to sites. You may use sites not listed as the suggested site; however, it will generate an edit error for review and verification of the appropriate site. |
2019 |
|
|
20021060 | EOD-Size of Primary Tumor: The EOD Manual instructs us not to code the size of a cyst. Can we code the size of tumor lesions described as being multicystic, multiloculated, or as a complex mass with cystic areas? See discussion. | Example 1: Large multicystic ovarian mass lesion measuring 10 cm. Sections through the specimen show a multicystic and solid mass with abundant fluid exuding from the cut surfaces (Size of the solid portions is not stated).
Example 2: A brain MRI: 9-cm. complex mass with cystic areas. |
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
Yes, if the cystic mass is pathologically confirmed to be malignant, code the EOD-Size of Primary Tumor field based on the size of the mass in the absence of a more precise tumor size description. For the examples in the discussion section, code the EOD-Size of Primary Tumor field to: 1) 100 [10 cm]. 2) 090 [9 cm].
As a point of interest, the size of tumor for ovarian and brain primaries is not used in either analysis or as a prognostic indicator for survival. Therefore, spending time separating the cystic and solid portions of the tumor is unnecessary. |
2002 |
|
|
20061057 | CS Extension--Lung: Can extension be coded to 10 (Tumor confined to one lung) when either an autopsy or a CT scan describes the tumor as a mass of a specified size located in one lobe of the lung without any description of extension and no available TNM provided? See Discussion. | Example 1: Lung primary within the right lower lobe described clinically as greater than 3 cm on scan but was found to be 3 cm at autopsy. Example 2: CT scan February shows 2 cm mass in RUL. In both cases, the only tumor description was the size of tumor without any information regarding extension. |
This answer was provided in the context of CSv1 coding guidelines. The response may not be used after your registry database has been converted to CSv2. Yes, assign code 10 [Tumor confined to one lung] for a mass in one lobe when none of the descriptions in codes 11 to 80 are documented. |
2006 |
|
|
20061124 | Reportability: Is a tumor reported as "neoplasm" or "neoplasia" per the pathology report, which is subsequently clinically referred to as "carcinoma" reportable? See Discussion. |
Example 1: Lung-Wedge resection and subsequent left lower lobe lobectomy showed papillary epithelial neoplasia. Tumor board and subsequent reports state "nonsmall cell carcinoma of lung." Example 2: Kidney-Partial nephrectomy showed epithelial neoplasm, clear cells with low grade cytology. Subsequent urology clinic notes state that path revealed clear cell renal carcinoma. 2004 SEER manual states that "cases clinically diagnosed are reportable. If the physician treats a patient for cancer in spite of the negative biopsy, accession the case." Do we also accession the case if primary site has been resected? Would diagnostic confirmation be coded 8 (clinical diagnosis only)? |
Accession the case and code Diagnostic Confirmation as 8 [clinical diagnosis only]. Accession a case with negative pathology when the clinician is aware of the negative pathology and continues to refer to the case as malignant. |
2006 |
|
|
20021044 | Histology (Pre-2007)/Grade, Differentiation: Can histology and/or grade be coded from a metastatic site? See discussion. | Example 1: No pathology specimen is available from the primary site for a lung primary. Rib biopsy demonstrated "anaplastic adenocarcinoma."
Example 2: Lung tissue biopsy revealed "poorly differentiated non-small cell carcinoma" for a lung primary. Pleural effusion cytology was consistent with "adenocarcinoma". |
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Example 1: Code the Histology and Grade, Differentiation fields to 8140/39 [adenocarcinoma, NOS, grade not stated]. Because there was no microscopic examination of tissue from the primary site, the histology may be coded from the microscopic examination of the tissue from a metastatic site. Do not code grade from a metastatic site regardless of whether the involvement of the metastatic site is by direct extension or by discontinuous metastases.
Example 2: Code the Histology and Grade, Differentiation fields to 8046/33 [non-small cell carcinoma, poorly differentiated]. Because there is a microscopic examination of tissue from the primary site, that information should be used to code histology rather than a cytology of a metastatic site.
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. |
2002 |
|
|
20190068 | First course treatment/Scope of Reg LN Surgery--Breast: How is Scope of Regional Lymph Node Surgery coded when the operative report does not agree with the actual number and type of nodes removed? Are we attempting to capture the intended surgery or the type and number of nodes removed? See Discussion. |
Example 1: Operative report states the surgery is a right breast simple mastectomy. There is no lymph node removal documented or attempted; however, a single incidental intramammary node is found in the final pathology results. How should these nodes be captured in the Scope of Regional Lymph Node Surgery field? CAnswer Forum states to code Scope of Regional Lymph Node Surgery as 0 (No regional lymph nodes removed), see Scope LN surgery, incidental LN found on path, Breast. However, SEER Program Coding and Staging Manual 2018 instruction states: Code the removal of intra-organ lymph nodes in Scope of Regional Lymph Node Surgery. Example: Local excision of breast cancer. Specimen includes an intra-mammary lymph node. Assign code 4 (1 to 3 regional lymph nodes removed). The STORE 2018 Manual does not provide instruction for incidental nodes specifically, but does appear to be focused on capturing procedural intent. Example 2: Patient has bilateral breast primaries. Operative report states the surgery is bilateral simple/skin-sparing mastectomies with bilateral sentinel node biopsies and immediate reconstruction. However, pathology shows that the left breast specimens are labeled: (a) Left breast mastectomy, (b) Left sentinel lymph node biopsy, (c) Additional left lymph nodes biopsy, and (d) Left axillary contents biopsy. The total nodes removed for this case are: 2/2 positive SLN, 0/1 positive intramammary nodes, 1/1 positive additional lymph node, and 3/3 positive axillary contents nodes. How should these nodes be captured in the Scope of Regional Lymph Node Surgery field? |
Assign the best code in Scope of Regional Lymph Node Surgery to capture the type and number of nodes removed. Example 1: Code 4; 1 to 3 regional lymph nodes removed. There is no statement of the procedure being a SLNBx or dissection in the operative report; the pathology report identified one incidental regional lymph node. Coding instruction #4 example says to assign code 4 if there is a local excision of breast cancer and specimen includes an intra-mammary lymph node. Example 2: Code 6, Sentinel node biopsy and code 3, 4, or 5 at same time or timing not noted. The operative report describes sentinel node biopsies only and does not mention axillary lymph node dissection; however, the pathology report details other lymph nodes in addition to the SLNBx. In addition to the LSLNbx and left LN bx, the pathology report describes "Left axillary contents biopsy" and a total of seven lymph nodes removed. |
2019 |
|
|
20021089 | Primary Site--Ovary/Peritoneum: When ovaries are not found on a resection or if the ovaries removed are negative for malignancy, but the clinician refers to the adenocarcinoma in the pelvis as being an "ovarian" primary, should the primary site be coded as ovary, pelvic peritoneum or unknown? See discussion. | Example 1: Patient has a history of a BSO without an indication that it was done for malignancy. Pt has a resection. No ovarian tissue found. No site is mentioned in the pathology report. The clinician refers to the diagnosis of adenocarcinoma in the pelvis as an "ovarian" primary.
Example 2: Resected ovaries are negative. No specific site of origin is mentioned in the path. Again, the clinician refers to the diagnosis of adenocarcinoma in the pelvis as an "ovarian" primary. |
Code the Primary Site for both examples to peritoneum [C48.2]. When the physician refers to a case as "ovarian" even though the ovaries are negative or when the histology is an ovarian histology, such as papillary serous ca, the primary site should be coded to the peritoneum. Code the Primary Site to where it appears the disease is arising. | 2002 |
An official website of the United States government
