Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20000269 | Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007): Is an in situ tumor followed by another in situ tumor in the same location a new primary? See discussion. |
Example: Six months after an in situ lesion was excised from the buccal mucosa, another in situ lesion was excised from the same area of the buccal mucosa with no mention of it being recurrent. |
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007: Code as a second primary if the second in situ tumor occurred more than 2 months after the first, and it is not referred to as recurrent by the clinician or pathologist. There are no special rules for determining the number of primaries when an in situ lesion follows an in situ. 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. |
2000 |
|
|
20190041 | Reportability/Primary Site--Gastrointestinal (GI) Tract: Is a gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) with a single nodule in the small intestine (C17_) and a nodule in the stomach (C16_) reportable per the 2018 SEER Coding Manual reporting instructions for GIST due to the multiple foci or do the multiple foci need to be in the same organ to be reportable? See Discussion. |
Example: Small intestine wedge resection with GIST, 1.8 cm in mid small intestine, single nodule. Stomach nodule biopsy: GIST, 0.3 cm. Pathology report comment section indicates the gastric GIST is not staged due to the small size and incidental nature. |
Report the GIST in the small intestine. The 2018 SEER Manual says to report GIST when there are multiple foci and to code the primary site to the site where the malignancy originated. Use text fields to record the details, including the stomach nodule. |
2019 |
|
|
20210077 | First Course Therapy/Neoadjuvant Treatment: How are Neoadjuvant Therapy--Clinical Response and Neoadjuvant Therapy--Treatment Effect coded when the neoadjuvant therapy was not completed? Does the entire course of neoadjuvant therapy need to be completed before we can code these fields? See Discussion. |
Example: The neoadjuvant therapy was started, the patient progressed, the treatment plan was altered, and a new course of systemic therapy was started; surgery was cancelled. 01/25/21 Bile duct brushing: Malignant cells present, adenocarcinoma 01/26/21 Surgical oncology consult: Currently unresectable; recommend neoadjuvant chemo 02/22/21-3/29/21 Neoadjuvant Gemzar & Abraxane, two cycles, discontinued due to disease progression 04/17/21 Surgical oncology re-eval: CT positive for disease progression, need to change Rx 04/26/21 Second change of treatment due to progression: Irinotecan, Oxaliplatin, and 5FU 07/16/21 Surgical oncology re-eval: Unresectable, advise 4-6 months of chemo followed by radiation |
Assign code 3 (Progressive disease (PD)(per managing/treating physician statement) for Neoadjuvant Treatment--Clinical Response and code 7 (Neoadjuvant therapy completed and planned surgical resection not performed) for Neoadjuvant Treatment--Treatment Effect. These are the best choices under the circumstances. Use text fields to record the details. |
2021 |
|
|
20000280 | Primary Site--Breast: Is there a hierarchy for coding subsite for breast cases when there is conflicting information in the physical exam, mammogram, operative and pathology reports as to the exact location of the primary? See discussion. | Example: Two mammograms were performed. One report indicates the lesion is at 12:00 and the other indicates it is in the upper central quadrant. However, the pathology report from the modified radical mastectomy specimen indicates the mass is in the UIQ.
According to one of our physicians, when a pathologist has a mastectomy specimen with attached axillary contents, the location of the lesion (subsite) is very accurate. |
Code the Primary Site field to C50.2 [upper inner quadrant]. In general, the priority for using information is pathologic, operative, and clinical findings. The pathology report would take precedence in this case. The 2004 SEER Program Code manual will include the following instructions for determining breast subsite. Priority Order for Coding Subsites Use the information from reports in the following priority order to code a subsite when the medical record contains conflicting information: 1 Pathology report 2 Operative report 3 Physical examination 4 Mammogram, ultrasound If the pathology proves invasive tumor in one subsite and insitu tumor in all other involved subsites, code to the subsite involved with invasive tumor. |
2000 |
|
|
20230026 | Solid Tumor Rules/Multiple Primaries--Prostate: How many primaries should be abstracted, and which M rule applies when a patient is diagnosed with intraductal carcinoma of the prostate on biopsy followed by invasive adenocarcinoma on radical prostatectomy more than 60 days later? See Discussion. |
Example: A prostate core biopsy showed intraductal carcinoma in 09/2022, which is an in situ tumor. A core biopsy again showed intraductal carcinoma in 12/2022. The subsequent radical prostatectomy in 04/2023, revealed multiple foci of invasive prostate adenocarcinoma with extensive intraductal carcinoma. Per Solid Tumor Rules, Other Sites, Rule M3, acinar adenocarcinoma of the prostate is always a single primary. Note 4, this rule applies to subtype variants of acinar adenocarcinoma listed in Table 3, which has intraductal/ductal as a variant subtype of acinar adenocarcinoma. Does rule M3 apply to incidence cases (an invasive tumor following an in situ tumor)? |
Rule M1 applies because we don't know if there are separate tumors or separate foci within a single tumor. This is a single primary coded 8140/3. The prostate rules will be reviewed for an addition to cover this situation. |
2023 |
|
|
20220009 | First Course Therapy/Reason for No Surgery of Primary Site: What code should be used for Reason for No Surgery of Primary Site in 2020 in situations affected by the pandemic when abstracting all sites? See Discussion. |
Example: Patient scheduled for left nephrectomy on 3/10/20 due to left renal papillary renal cell carcinoma diagnosed on 2/11/20 via needle core biopsy. Abstract indicated surgery was cancelled due to the pandemic. Abstract also indicated the surgery was not rescheduled. |
There is no available code that fits this situation. We recommend assigning code 6 (Surgery of the primary site was not performed; it was recommended by the patient’s physician, but was not performed as part of the first course of therapy. No reason was noted in patient record.) and documenting the situation in a text field. |
2022 |
|
|
20150013 | Surgery of Primary Site: What is the most extensive, invasive or definitive surgical procedure when the second surgical procedure performed has a lower surgery code? See discussion.
|
Examples
8/xx/13 TURBT with path specimen (27): Papillary Urothelial Carcinoma, HG 9/xx/13 Bladder fulgeration w/o path specimen (12)
5/xx/14 Segmental Mastectomy(24): Ductal carcinoma with <1mm marg 6/xx/14 Breast Re-excision (23): Residual ductal carcinoma 1.5mm, marg neg |
The code in Surgical Procedure of Primary Site should correspond to the most invasive, extensive, or definitive surgery when the patient has multiple surgical procedures of the primary site even if there is no residual tumor found in the pathologic specimen from the more extensive surgery. The timing of the procedures does not affect the code choice.
Assign code 27 for the first example. Assign code 24 for the second example. |
2015 |
|
|
20031192 | EOD-Extension--Breast: How is this field coded when the diagnosis includes both invasive and in situ disease, and the pathology report stated the tumor size may or may not include the size of the in situ portion of the tumor? See Description. | Examples:
1. Invasive ductal carcinoma well differentiated, 1.2 cm, gross tumor size, ductal carcinoma in situ.
2. Gross tumor size 3.2 x 2.5 x 2.3 cm. well differentiated to moderately differentiated invasive ductal ca, accompanying component well differentiated ductal carcinoma in situ, solid, cribiform. |
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003: Use extension codes 16, 26, or 36 depending on extent of involvement. These codes indicate that invasive and in situ components are present, the size of the entire tumor is coded in Tumor Size, the size of the invasive component is not stated, and the proportions of in situ and invasive are not known. Both examples above measure the entire tumor including invasive and in situ components. Assign extension code 16, unless there is evidence of further involvement. |
2003 |
|
|
20200013 | Solid Tumor Rules (2018)/Multiple primaries--Colon: Solid Tumor Rules 2018, Colon Rule M7, bullet 3 indicates that (if neither bullet 1 or 2 apply) a new tumor at the anastomotic site must be stated to arise in the mucosa (confirmed in SINQ 20190096) to qualify as a new primary. However, there is often no clear statement of tumor arising from or involving mucosa (unless the new tumor is limited to the mucosa) noted by pathologists in our region. Do any of the following examples imply a new tumor arising in mucosa per Rule M7, bullet 3? See Discussion. |
Examples: 1) New tumor at the ileocolic anastomosis, described as a, Circumferential centrally ulcerated mass with raised borders. Tumor extension: Tumor invades through muscularis propria into subserosal adipose tissue, no involvement of the serosal surface identified. The only mention of mucosa on the resection is the uninvolved enteric mucosa or uninvolved colonic mucosa in the otherwise uninvolved portions of the ileum/colon. If neither bullet 1 or 2 apply, is this a new primary per M7 bullet 3? 2) Right colon with anastomosis site. Tumor site: Anastomosis. Tumor extension: Tumor invades through the muscularis propria. Gross description does not describe mucosa, only noting, at the central area of anastomosis is an ill-defined, slightly raised, tan-brown to purple mass measuring 2.2 x 2 cm, which is nearly circumferential, causing obstruction at the site of anastomosis. If neither bullet 1 or 2 apply, is this a new primary per M7 bullet 3? 3) Polyp at ileocolonic anastomosis, polyp biopsy final diagnosis was, Invasive moderately differentiated colonic adenocarcinoma in association with adenoma. No mention of mucosa on the biopsy final diagnosis or gross description. Clinical info indicates, There is an ulcerated 5 cm mass at the ileo-colonic anastomosis that was biopsied. If neither bullet 1 or 2 apply, is this a new primary per M7 bullet 3? |
Following the 2018 Colon Solid Tumor Rules M7 and M8: Example 1: Assuming the first and second tumors are not different histologies or they occurred less than or equal to 24 months apart (M7 Bullets 1 and 2 do not apply), abstract a single primary as the pathology states uninvolved enteric mucosa or uninvolved colonic mucosa (no involvement noted). Example 2: Assuming the first and second tumors are not different histologies or they occurred less than or equal to 24 months apart (M7 bullets 1 and 2 do not apply), abstract a single primary as there is no mention of mucosal involvement. Example 3: Assuming the first and second polyps/tumors are not different histologies or they occurred less than or equal to 24 months apart (M7 bullets 1 and 2 do not apply), abstract a single primary as there is no mention of mucosal involvement. Of note in the case of the polyp, tumors coded as adenocarcinoma in a polyp, should be treated as adenocarcinoma (8140) for cases prior to 2018. Also, if the pathologist states the new tumor/polyp originated in the mucosa, it is a new primary. The rules which address "recurrence or new tumor at the anastomosis were created with the input of several gastrointestinal expert pathologists (CAP, AJCC, and WHO). Pathologists should be following CAP reporting guidelines and include information such as mucosal involvement in the final diagnosis and/or synoptic report. We can revisit this question that all polyps start in the mucosa and if needed, revise the rules to state this. |
2020 |
|
|
20220035 |
Solid Tumor Rules/Histology--Bladder: How is histology coded for a transurethral resection of the bladder (TURB) diagnosis with multiple components? See Discussion. |
Examples: Bladder TURB: Invasive high grade urothelial carcinoma with poorly differentiated (40%), lipoid (5%), and sarcomatoid (55%) components. Bladder tumor base TURB: Invasive high grade urothelial carcinoma with poorly differentiated (65%) and sarcomatoid (30%) components. The Urinary Sites Solid Tumor Rules, histology coding rules, say to code the most specific histology or subtype/variant, regardless of whether it is described as majority, minority, or component. Poorly differentiated (8020) and sarcomatoid (8122) are both urothelial subtypes, but there is no rule to instruct how to code a tumor/tumors with multiple urothelial subtypes. |
Code histology as 8120/3 in the two examples using Note 1 in the Urinary Sites Solid Tumor Rules, instruction 1 of the Coding Histology section. The subtypes/variants or components must describe a carcinoma or sarcoma in order to code a histology described by those terms. |
2022 |
An official website of the United States government
