Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20220019 | Solid Tumor Rules/Histology--Thyroid: What is the correct histology code for a papillary carcinoma, encapsulated with columnar cell features? See Discussion. |
There is an ICD-O histology code for papillary carcinoma, columnar cell (8344/3) as well as papillary carcinoma, encapsulated (8343/3). Per Rule H13, the terms “with features of” may be used to identify a subtype. Considering these two subtypes, and knowing there is no specific histology code for this combination, is the first rule that applies H17 (code the numerically higher histology code)? |
Code to papillary carcinoma, encapsulated (C73.9) (8343/3) using Solid Tumor Rules, Other Sites, Rule H11, code the histology when only one histologic type is identified. The usage of features is describing the cellular architecture of the encapsulated papillary carcinoma and does not necessarily indicate a specific histologic type. We consulted with our endocrine specialist pathologist who agrees and indicated terminology used in thryoid neoplasms is inconsistent. |
2022 |
|
|
20220018 | Solid Tumor Rules/Histology--Thyroid: What is the correct histology code for the following thyroid primary with multiple tumors abstracted as one primary diagnosed prior to 2021? See Discussion. |
2016 Total thyroidectomy, Multifocal -Dominant Tumor: Right Lobe, Papillary thyroid carcinoma (8260/3) -Tumors two through five: Three tumors Papillary thyroid carcinoma (8260/3), and one tumor Papillary thyroid carcinoma, follicular variant (8340/3) -An additional tumor: Non-invasive follicular thyroid neoplasm with papillary-like nuclear features (8343/2) |
Code this multifocal thyroid carcinoma, single primary, as papillary thyroid carcinoma, follicular variant (8340/3) using Solid Tumor Rules, Other Sites, Rule H13 that says to code the most specific histologic term. We consulted with our endocrine specialty pathologist and when there is a mix of papillary and follicular variants, assign 8340. Non-invasive follicular thyroid neoplasm with papillary-like nuclear features is coded as 8349/1 beginning in 2021. According to the WHO Classification of Endocrine Organs, 4th edition, it was formerly classified as non-invasive encapsulated follicular variant of PTC (FVPTC) (8343/2) but was reclassified based on extremely low malignant potential. |
2022 |
|
|
20220038 | Solid Tumor Rules/Histology--Thyroid: What is the histology code for sclerosing mucoepidermoid carcinoma with eosinophilla in the left thyroid and papillary thyroid carcinoma in the right thyroid? See Discussion. |
The left thyroid lobectomy/isthmusectomy returned a diagnosis of sclerosing mucoepidermoid carcinoma with eosinophina, 6.5 cm, replacing nearly the entire left lobe of the thyroid. The patient has a completion thyroidectomy of the right lobe and returned the diagnosis of papillary thyroid carcinoma, 0.5 mm, in maximum dimension. The endocrinologist describes it as "co-exsisting" and states the tumor is iodine non-avid. |
Abstract two primaries and assign code 8260/3 (papillary adenocarcinoma, NOS) to the right thyroid using Solid Tumor Rules, Other Sites, Rule H14, and 8430/3 (mucoepidermoid carcinoma) to the left thyroid as these are separate tumors with different histology types according to WHO Classification of Tumors of Endocrine Organs, 4th edition. |
2022 |
|
|
20230048 | Solid Tumor Rules/Histology--Uterine Corpus: How is histology coded for an epithelioid and myxoid leiomyosarcoma of the myometrium? See Discussion. |
Patient had a total abdominal hysterectomy-bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy performed in January 2023 with final diagnosis of myxoid and epithelioid leiomyosarcoma. Diagnosis comment states: The tumor is 15 cm per report. It grows in nests and poorly formed interanastomosing trabeculae and cords that are separated by abundant myxoid background. The cells have an epithelioid morphology with eosinophilic cytoplasm, large nuclei, and very prominent nucleoli. The mitotic activity is overall low ranging from 1 to 3/10 HPFs. Immunohistochemical stains performed at the outside hospital showed diffuse positivity for SMA, desmin, caldesmon, and PR. They are negative for CD10, claudin-4, calretinin, HBM45, MART1 (rare weakly positive cells), PANCK, and SOX10. This immunohistochemical profile supports a smooth muscle derivation of this neoplasm. As this tumor is extensively myxoid, diagnostic criteria differ from the spindle cell leiomyosarcoma. Per Solid Tumor Rules Other Sites, Table 16: Uterine Corpus Histologies, Epithelioid Leiomyosarcoma (8891/3) and Myxoid Leiomyosarcoma (8896/3) are both subtypes of Sarcoma, NOS (8800/3). Per Rule H21, use a combination code when there are multiple specific histologies AND the combination is listed in Table 2 OR there are coding instructions for the combination in the applicable histology Tables 3-21 OR you receive a combination code from Ask A SEER Registrar. Since there is no combination listed in Table 2 and there is no instruction for the combination in Table 16, how should the histology be coded for this tumor? |
Assign code 8891/3 (epithelioid leiomyosarcoma) as cells were described as have an epithelioid morphology; whereas, myxoid was used as a descriptive term and not a specific histologic type. |
2023 |
|
|
20250020 | Solid Tumor Rules/Histology--Vulva: Can instructions and descriptions from registry manuals be used to determine p16 status for the human papillomavirus (HPV)-related histology codes in the Solid Tumor Rules (STR)? Does it have to state that p16 is “positive” or “over-expressed” only? See Discussion. |
The STR states that p16 can be used to code HPV-associated and HPV-independent histologies for selected sites depending on diagnosis year but contains no instructions about how to interpret p16 staining results on pathology reports. These are often stated in various ways in our area, depending on the pathology lab and different pathologists. The SSDI Manual and SEER Coding and Staging Manual each have some instructions and code definitions for p16, including: - Code 0 for p16 expression of weak intensity or limited distribution - Code 0: p16 Negative; Nonreactive - Code 1: p16 Positive; Diffuse, Strong reactivity - IHC for p16 expression is a surrogate marker for HPV infection Example: 2023 squamous cell carcinoma of the vulva, partial vulvectomy; pathology states vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia-3, p16 immunohistochemistry demonstrates block-like expression, which supports the diagnosis. The next path report states invasive squamous cell carcinoma, stain for p16 is strong and diffuse in the lesion, supporting the above diagnosis. Neither path report specifically states "HPV-related," so are p16 "expression" and "strong and diffuse" staining enough to code the histology as 8085/3 for this case? |
Refer to the College of American Pathologists (CAP) protocols to determine how to interpret p16 staining results on pathology reports. Per the Vulva CAP Protocol, p16 positive is defined as diffuse or block-like expression. Since the pathology report states "block-like expression," code the histology as 8085/3 (invasive squamous cell carcinoma, HPV-associated). |
2025 |
|
|
20250018 | Solid Tumor Rules/Histology/Behavior--Brain and CNS: How are histology and behavior coded when the Integrated Diagnosis is "Meningioma, WHO Grade 2," and the Histological Classification is "Meningioma with elevated mitotic activity, hypercellularity, necrosis, and sheeting architecture?" See Discussion. |
We are increasingly seeing pathologists use this terminology to describe WHO G2 meningiomas, but the histology term "Atypical meningioma" is not being used, and a more specific "Histological Classification" of other WHO Grade 2 meningiomas (i.e., chordoid or clear cell meningioma) is not given. Can the combination of meningioma, WHO Grade 2 plus the histological classification listing multiple features of an atypical meningioma be used to code morphology to 9539/1? Or is this just a meningioma, NOS 9530/0 despite the WHO Grade 2 classification? |
Code meningioma, NOS (9530/0) based on the integrated diagnosis and histological classification. WHO Classification of Central Nervous System Tumors, 5th edition, states that brain invasion is a criterion for the diagnosis of CNS WHO grade 2 meningioma, and there is no statement of brain invasion, atypical meningioma, or other WHO grade 2 lesions. WHO has not proposed behavior codes based on WHO grade alone. |
2025 |
|
|
20240022 | Solid Tumor Rules/Histology: When should the designation of “poorly differentiated” be used to further specify histology for carcinoma, NOS (8010) as undifferentiated carcinoma (8020)? See Discussion. |
The term “poorly differentiated carcinoma (NOS)” is listed as related to “undifferentiated carcinoma (NOS)” in the ICD-O 3.2. It is also listed in the Solid Tumor Rules for Urinary Table 2 (Urinary subtypes), Other Sites Table 16 (uterine corpus primaries) and Table 19 (vulvar primaries). Are these the only sites in which one should code “poorly differentiated carcinoma (NOS)” as 8020 (undifferentiated carcinoma)? How is histology coded if the only microscopic confirmation is from a metastatic site showing “poorly differentiated carcinoma” (NOS) or “invasive carcinoma, poorly differentiated” (NOS)? Example 1: Primary pancreatic cancer diagnosed on imaging and confirmed with liver mets core biopsy showing “poorly differentiated carcinoma.” Immunostaining pattern was non-specific. No further workup or treatment was planned. Other Sites - Table 11 (Pancreas Histologies) includes undifferentiated carcinoma (8020/3) as a valid histology; however, the synonyms/subtypes/variants do not mention poorly differentiated carcinoma. How should histology be coded for this case? Example 2: Hemicolectomy with cecal tumor final diagnosis of “invasive carcinoma, poorly differentiated” and synoptic summary listing “Histologic type: Invasive carcinoma. Histologic grade: G3 of 4: poorly differentiated.” Colorectal Table 1 (Specific Histologies and Subtypes/Variants) includes undifferentiated adenocarcinoma/carcinoma 8020 as a subtype of adenocarcinoma NOS. There is no mention of poorly differentiated in this context. How should histology be coded for this case? |
Assign code 8020/3 when the histologic type specifically includes the term of poorly differentiated, dedifferentiated, undifferentiated, or anaplastic undifferentiated carcinoma along with carcinoma as terms vary depending on the primary site. When the term poorly differentiated is included in the grade section only of the pathology report or only mentions poorly differentiated carcinoma without further substantiation from a pathology report as in examples 1 and 2, do not use code 8020/3. The histology code 8020/3 and terms may be used for selected primary sites as included in the Solid Tumor Rules, WHO Classification of Tumors series (latest versions), and the Site/Morphology Validation List including Nasal cavity Nasopharynx Salivary glands Urinary sites Colon, rectosigmoid, rectum Esophagus Stomach Gallbladder and extrahepatic bile duct Pancreas Thyroid Ovary Uterine corpus Vagina Uterine cervix (also referred to as unclassifiable in WHO Classification of Female Genital Tumors, 5th ed.) For sites other than those listed, if the diagnosis is poorly differentiated carcinoma, code 8010/3 and poorly differentiated in the grade field. |
2024 |
|
|
20230072 | Solid Tumor Rules/Multiple Primaries--Bladder: How many primaries and what M Rule applies to a diagnosis of non-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder in 1996, followed by multifocal non-invasive papillary urothelial carcinoma involving bladder, prostatic urethra, and left ureter in 2022? See Discussion. |
An argument could be made to apply Rule M10 (timing rule which may result in reporting the case as an additional primary) because the 2022 primary included multiple non-invasive urothelial carcinoma tumors in both the bladder and other urinary sites (coded to site C689, not C679) following a long disease-free interval. While Rule M10 excludes multiple bladder tumors, does that also apply when new, multifocal urothelial tumors arise in both bladder and other urinary sites? Does the presence of any subsequent bladder tumor rule out the use of M10 and one must use M11 that indicates reporting this disease process is a single primary? |
Abstract as a new primary per rule M10, as the subsequent tumors are not limited to the bladder. Code the primary site to C689, per Instructions for Coding Primary Site, #4: "Code Urinary System NOS C689 when there are multiple non-contiguous tumors in multiple organs within the urinary system", and following Note: "The physician subject matter experts (SME) discussed the issue of coding primary site for multifocal/multicentric urinary tract carcinoma. Although the SMEs understood and acknowledged the importance of coding a specific primary site, there is no literature or criteria for determining the organ of origin for multiple tumors involving multiple urinary sites". |
2023 |
|
|
20240063 | Solid Tumor Rules/Multiple Primaries--Bladder: How many primaries and what M Rule applies for a diagnosis of noninvasive micropapillary urothelial carcinoma (8131/2) in 2019, followed by a diagnosis of noninvasive papillary urothelial carcinoma (8130/2) in 2024? |
Abstract two primaries using Urinary Solid Tumor Rules, Rule M12. The histologies include non-invasive papillary urothelial carcinoma (8130/2) and non-invasive micropapillary urothelial carcinoma (8131/3). The two histology codes are listed as subtypes of Papillary urothelial (transitional cell) carcinoma in column 3 of Table 2. WHO Classification of Urinary and Male Genital Tumors, 5th edition classifies micropapillary urothelial carcinoma as an aggressive subtype of urothelial carcinoma with carcinoma in situ present in more than half of all micropapillary carcinomas. Rule 7 Note 3 of the Urinary Solid Tumor Rules states that there are no /2 subtypes for urothelial carcinoma with the exception of papillary urothelial carcinoma and applies to multiple occurrences of /2 urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Rule 8 applies to 8131/3 and 8120/3. |
2024 | |
|
|
20240073 | Solid Tumor Rules/Multiple Primaries--Bladder: Urinary Sites Solid Tumor Rules (STRs), Rule M6, says to abstract multiple primaries when an invasive tumor occurs more than 60 days after an in situ tumor. Does that 60-day interval apply to the original diagnosis date, or to the latest recurrence? See Discussion. |
10/2017 Bladder cancer diagnosed as invasive papillary urothelial bladder carcinoma (8130/3) (submucosal invasion). 12/2017 Surveillance scope and transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) finds “recurrent” bladder tumor, non-invasive papillary urothelial bladder carcinoma (8130/2) - same primary per 2007 Multiple Primaries/Histology, Rule M6, (both papillary urothelial bladder carcinomas). 4/2018 Radical nephrectomy found focally invasive urothelial carcinoma (8120/3) in the renal pelvis. Is this a new primary per 2018 and forward STR, Rule M6, because it was more than 60 days since the 12/2017 in situ bladder recurrence? Or would one compare the 2018 diagnosis to the original invasive bladder tumor in 10/2017, and continue on to Rule M11, which says to abstract a single primary for urothelial carcinomas in multiple organs, regardless of behavior? SINQ #20120080 said to compare to the original diagnosis and disregard intervening recurrences, but that pertained to the 2007 MP/H rules. Does this still apply for 2018 forward? STR, Rule M10, Note 3, states when there is a recurrence within three years of diagnosis, the “clock” starts over. The time interval is calculated from the date of last recurrence. Comparing each recurrence for urothelial carcinomas using Rule M6 could result in over-counting them. Can the instructions on how to calculate the 60-day interval be clarified in Rule M6? |
Abstract a single primary for this scenario based on Urinary Sites STRs. 10/2017 and 12/2017 bladder diagnoses: Single primary (Rule M15: Abstract a single primary when synchronous, separate/non-contiguous tumors are on the same row in Table 2 in the Equivalent Terms and Definitions). This interval is not indicative of recurrence as there is no clinically disease free period on follow-up. Use the Multiple Primary Rules as written to determine whether a subsequent tumor is a new primary or a recurrence as stated in the General Instructions. The only exception is when a pathologist compares slides from the subsequent tumor to the “original” tumor and documents the subsequent tumor is a recurrence of the previous primary. Never code multiple primaries based only on a physician’s statement of “recurrence” or “recurrent.” 12/2017 (bladder) and 4/2018 diagnoses (renal pelvis): Single primary (Rule M11: Abstract a single primary when there are urothelial carcinomas in multiple urinary organs; behavior is irrelevant.) |
2024 |
An official website of the United States government
Government Funding Lapse
Because of a lapse in government funding, the information on this website may not be up to date, transactions submitted via the website may not be processed, and the agency may not be able to respond to inquiries until appropriations are enacted. The NIH Clinical Center (the research hospital of NIH) is open. For more details about its operating status, please visit cc.nih.gov. Updates regarding government operating status and resumption of normal operations can be found at OPM.gov.
