Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Cancer Site Category | Data Item Category | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20110007 | MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries--Bladder: How many primaries are to be abstracted and how are the histologies coded when a bladder resection demonstrates tumor with invasive small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma [8041/3], high grade papillary urothelial carcinoma in situ [8130/2], adenocarcinoma in situ [8140/2], and multifocal flat urothelial carcinoma in situ? See Discussion. | Are the areas of in situ tumor to be ignored or would MP/H Rule M9 apply? |
Ignore the in situ histologies. This is a single primary. Code the histology to invasive small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma [8041/3]. | Bladder | N/A | 2011 |
|
|
20110008 | MP/H Rules/Histology--Vulva: How is histology coded for VIN III with focal invasion? See Discussion. | Per SINQ 20000442, the histology for CIN III with microinvasion is coded to 8077 [squamous intraepithelial neoplasia, grade III] per the matrix system rules, with a behavior code of /3 [malignant]. Coding the histology to 8077/3 per the matrix principle causes IF25_3 and MorphICDO3_P1 edits to fail. Flagging the first error resolves any reporting issue. How is the MorphICDO3_P1 edit resolved? | Assign 8076/3 [squamous cell carcinoma, microinvasive] for VIN III with focal invasion. This applies to all terminologies listed under 8077/2. The SINQ question from 2000 will be retired. | N/A | Histology | 2011 |
|
|
20110009 | Diagnostic confirmation/Date of diagnosis--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How are these fields coded for a 2/11/10 negative bone marrow biopsy with cytogenetic abnormalities if the physician makes a clinical diagnosis of refractory cytopenia with multilineage dysplasia on 2/25/10? See Discussion. |
2/11/10 bone marrow biopsy revealed "mild trilineal dysplastic changes in conjunction with chronicity of cytopenias is worrisome for MDS." Cytogenetics are positive for 5q deletion. Clinicopathologic correlation required for final diagnosis. On 2/25/10 the physician confirms a diagnosis of refractory cytopenia with multilineage dysplasia.
Is the date of diagnosis 2/11/10 with diagnostic confirmation of 3 or 2/25/10 with diagnostic confirmation of 8?
|
The date of diagnosis is 2/25/10 and diagnostic confirmation is coded to 8 [clinical diagnosis only].
As the cytogenetics state, you need clinicopathologic correlation to get confirm a reportable diagnosis. There is no reportable diagnosis from the bone marrow biopsy. The cytogenetics were done (the pathologic part) and then the physician confirmed refractory cytopenia with multilineage dysplasia [9985/3] (the clinical part). The diagnostic process and the determination of a reportable diagnosis were completed when the clinician made the statement that this is refractory cytopenia with multilineage dysplasia.
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 | Date of diagnosis, Diagnostic confirmation | 2011 |
|
|
20110010 | Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is a recently diagnosed granulocytic sarcoma followed by a diagnosis of AML two primaries? See Discussion. |
6/10/10 Axillary lymph node biopsy was compatible with AML. The physician noted that the patient was diagnosed with granulocytic sarcoma [9930/3] in the axillary node. 6/15/10 Bone marrow biopsy compatible with AML FAB M1 [9873/3]. After induction, a second bone marrow biopsy on 6/30/10 shows persistent/refractory AML. The physician noted that the second biopsy is compatible with AML FAB M7 [9910/3]. Is the granulocytic sarcoma a chronic form of the disease? If so, do we have one primary diagnosed 6/10/10 with primary site coded to C42.1 and histology coded to 9873/3? Does the second biopsy on 6/30/10 represent the same primary even though the persistent disease is now FAB M7? |
Updated May 2026 Granulocytic sarcoma does not transform into AML. Per the Abstractor Notes section in the Heme DB under the term "granulocytic sarcoma," it indicates that "Myeloid sarcoma (also known as granulocytic sarcoma) may occur de novo; it may precede or coincide with AML or represent an acute blastic transformation of myelodysplastic syndromes." This means that when granulocytic/myeloid sarcoma is seen with AML, it represents a solid manifestation of the systemically involved AML. In other words, it is all the same disease process (coded to AML) if it occurs simultaneously (i.e., within the initial clinical workup). Apply Rule M3 to this case which states to abstract a single primary when a sarcoma is diagnosed simultaneously or after a leukemia of the same lineage. Code the primary site to C421 [bone marrow] with histology coded to 9873/3 [acute myeloid leukemia, M1]. The FAB category is an older classification that is seldom used. Changes from FAB 1 to FAB 7 do not constitute a new primary. |
Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms | N/A | 2011 |
|
|
20110012 | Reportability--Sarcoma: Is "atypical lipomatous tumor/well-differentiated liposarcoma" reportable? See Discussion. | The final diagnosis for a soft tissue excision is, "atypical lipomatous tumor/well-differentiated liposarcoma". The Comment section states, "Atypical lipomatous tumor/well differentiated liposarcoma has a significant risk for local recurrence, but no metastatic potential."
Per the 2010 SEER Manual, page 3, example 4: The pathologist makes the final decision about the behavior for a particular case. In this case, the pathologist uses both a reportable and a non-reportable term in the final diagnosis and in the comment section of the pathology report. Does the pathologist's comment impact the behavior and reportability of this tumor? |
For cases diagnosed 1/1/2014 and later: Atypical lipomatous tumor (8850/1) is not reportable. If the pathologist uses the term "well-differentiated liposarcoma" (8851/3) report the case. Use of this terminology indicates a less favorable prognosis. | N/A | N/A | 2011 |
|
|
20110013 | MP/H Rules/Histology--Testis: Which MP/H rule applies in coding the histology described as a "malignant mixed germ cell tumor with the following features: Histologic type: embryonal carcinoma (97%) and yolk sac tumor (3%)"? See Discussion. |
Per MP/H rule H16, code the appropriate combination/mixed code (Table 2) when there are multiple specific histologies or when there is a non-specific histology with multiple specific histologies. The combination embryonal carcinoma and yolk sac tumor is not listed in Table 2, even though the pathology report indicates this is a mixed germ cell tumor.
Should rule H17 be applied and the numerically higher histology code be used? |
As of 2016: Code histology to 9085/3 [mixed germ cell tumor]. Combine 9065 and 9085 for analysis purposes. |
N/A | Histology | 2011 |
|
|
20110014 | MP/H Rules/Histology--Corpus Uteri: Which MP/H rule applies in coding histology for a "high grade endometrioid adenocarcinoma with squamous differentiation (adenosquamous carcinoma)"? See Discussion. | Is the pathology describing a specific histology, adenosquamous carcinoma [8560/3]? Or is this a combination/mixed histology code per rule H16? The Rule H16 instruction is to code a mixed histology code, 8323/3 [mixed cell adenocarcinoma] from Table 2 when two or more of the histologies are present (i.e., endometrioid and squamous in this case). | For cases diagnosed 2007 or later: Endometrioid adenocarcinoma with squamous differentiation is coded to 8570 [Adenocarcinoma with squamous metaplasia].
The following row needs to be added to Table 2 in order to be able to correctly use the MP/H rules to reach this conclusion.
Column 1: Endometrioid adenocarcinoma Column 2: Squamous metaplasia Squamous differentiation Column 3: Adenocarcinoma with squamous metaplasia Column 4: 8570
The change will be made in the next revision of the rules. |
Corpus uteri | Histology | 2011 |
|
|
20110016 | Behavior--Brain and CNS: Can hemangioblastomas occurring in the CNS be coded as /3 (malignant) based on a radiologic or clinical diagnosis by the physician? See Discussion. | Hemangioblastomas are borderline (/1) according to ICD-O. The standard matrix rule in ICD-O directs registrars to change the behavior code to malignant when a malignant (/3) behavior is stated by a physician for a morphology code that appears in ICD-O with a non-malignant behavior code. The "malignant" hemangioblastomas we see are not pathologically confirmed; they are radiological or clinical diagnoses confirmed when renal cell carcinoma is a disease process listed in the malignant differential diagnoses. | The behavior code for hemangioblastoma can be coded to /3 when a pathologist indicates that the behavior is malignant. The behavior code should be based on a pathologist's opinion. It is usually not possible for a radiologist or patient care physician to make this determination clinically.
The histologic appearance of hemangioblastoma may resemble metastatic renal cell carcinoma; therefore, one will often see renal cell carcinoma listed as a possible diagnosis. This does not indicate that the hemangioblastoma is malignant. Do not code the behavior as /3 based on a differential diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma. |
Brain and CNS | Behavior | 2011 |
|
|
20110017 | Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are reported if a patient originally diagnosed with CLL is subsequently diagnosed several months later on a bone marrow biopsy with Richter's syndrome that transformed into a large cell lymphoma? See Discussion. |
Per reviewed resources, the described condition is rare. Should the histology remain CLL or be changed to large cell lymphoma? |
Updated May 2026 This case is accessioned as two primaries per Rule M10 which states to abstract multiple primaries when a neoplasm is originally diagnosed as a chronic neoplasm and there is a second diagnosis of an acute neoplasm more after the initial clinical workup of the chronic disease is completed. The first primary is CLL [9823/3] and it is a chronic neoplasm. The second primary is diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) [9680/3] and it is an acute neoplasm. Richter syndrome (RS) is a complication of B cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or hairy cell leukemia (HCL) in which the leukemia changes into DLBCL. There is also a less common variant in which the CLL changes into a Hodgkin lymphoma. Richter's transformation affects about 5% of CLL patients. Richter syndrome is listed under the Alternate Names section in the Heme DB for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [9680/3]. |
Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms | N/A | 2011 |
|
|
20110018 | Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are to be abstracted for a case with a history of follicular lymphoma, grade 2 and a subsequent splenectomy diagnosis of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma? See Discussion. |
The patient was treated over a period of time for follicular lymphoma, grade 2. The oncologist thought the spleen was congested and removed it. The diagnosis was DLBCL. |
Updated May 2026 This case is accessioned as two primaries per Rule M10 which states to abstract multiple primaries when a neoplasm is originally diagnosed as a chronic neoplasm and there is a second diagnosis of an acute neoplasm after the initial clinical workup of the chronic disease is completed. The first primary is follicular lymphoma, grade 2 [9691/3] and it is a chronic neoplasm. The second primary is diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) [9680/3] and it is an acute neoplasm |
Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms | N/A | 2011 |
An official website of the United States government
