EOD-Extension--Melanoma: Is "erosion" synonymous with "ulceration" for melanoma cases?
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
No, do not interpret the term "erosion" as a synonym for "ulceration" when coding the EOD-Extension field for melanoma. According to AJCC's melanoma curator, erosion is not necessarily the same as ulceration.
EOD-Extension--Meninges: How do you code extension for a malignant meningioma that invades into the adjacent brain tissue?
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
Code the EOD-Extension field to 60. Code 60 is defined as a brain tumor that extends into the meninges. It is also the appropriate code to use for a tumor that extends from the meninges to the brain.
EOD-Extension--Mycosis Fungoides: Explain the difference between extension codes 25 [% of body surface not stated, no tumors] and 30 [skin involvement, NOS; extent not stated, no tumors. Localized, NOS]?
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
For mycosis fungoides: Use code 25 when skin involvement is present but only a general location/site is mentioned (i.e., face, legs, torso, arms).
Use code 30 when there is skin involvement but there is no mention of location/site.
EOD-Extension--Ovary: What code is used to represent this field for an ovarian primary presenting with "spread to the omentum"?
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
Code the EOD-Extension field to 75 [Peritoneal implants, NOS] because the size of the implants on the omentum is not known.
Note 6 was added to the EOD scheme which states that both direct extension and discontinuous metastasis to the omentum are coded in the range 70-75 depending on how the peritoneal implants are described.
EOD-Extension--Pancreas: Can you explain the difference between code 10 [confined to pancreas] and code 30 [Localized, NOS]. See discussion.
For example, a CT scan mentions no extension beyond the head, body or tail of the pancreas and there is no surgical resection. Should we code extension to 10 or 30?
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
Code the EOD-Extension field to 10 [confined to pancreas] because a scan supported the finding of no extension beyond the pancreas.
If the abstractor reviewing the medical record has scans, op reports, and/or pathology reports stating that the tumor is confined to the pancreas, code extension to 10 [confined to pancreas].
However, if the medical record only provides a patient history from a physician stating that the patient had localized pancreas, code extension to 30 [localized, NOS]. The NOS codes are used only when there is not enough information to code the specific codes (in this case, 10 or 20).
EOD-Extension--Pancreas: How do you code extension when CT scan shows a mass in the head of the pancreas "encompassing" the hepatic branch of the celiac artery? See discussion.
We do not code the term "encompasses" as involvement. However, should we code this case as extension to the peripancreatic tissue, NOS or as unknown?
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
Code the EOD-Extension field to 40 [Extension to peripancreatic tissue, NOS]. There has to be extension to peripancreatic tissue if the mass encompasses the celiac artery.
EOD-Extension--Pancreas: How do you code extension when a mass is described on exploratory laparotomy as compressing the duodenum, arising in the head of the pancreas, "extending around" the superior mesenteric vein and artery, and "encasing" the portahepatis?
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
Code the EOD-Extension field to 40 [extension to peripancreatic tissue, NOS]. Neither of the terms "extending around" nor "encasing" are interpreted as involvement with tumor by SEER.
EOD-Extension--Pancreas: How would you code extension for the following non-surgically treated pancreas primaries? None of these cases has TNM staging to assist with classifying the extent of disease. See discussion.
1) CT scan: Cystic lesion in body of pancreas. Discharge dx: pancreas ca.
2) Discharge dx: CBD obstruction due to probable early ca in head of pancreas.
3) CT scan: mass involves the head and body of the pancreas. No evidence of abdominal mets. Discharge dx: Locally advanced pancreatic ca.
4) H&P: Pt with splenomegaly probably secondary to splenic vein thrombosis and a large ca of the tail of pancreas. Imp: Advanced pancreatic ca of the tail of pancreas. Would you code extension to splenic vein [56]?
5) H&P: Pancreatic ca with extension or mets into porta hepatis. (Would you assume direct extension or mets?)
6) CT scan: Pancreas ca. Significant peritoneal implants. (Would you assume the implants to be related to the pancreas primary and code as involvement?)
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
The information provided for these pancreatic primary examples is very limited. Additional information should be sought. If not available, code the EOD-Extension field to:
1) 10
2) 10
3) 10
4) 99
5) Assuming primary in head, body or tail of pancreas, 76
EOD-Extension--Pancreas: If the tumor involvement for a case falls between two different regional extension codes, should we code to the lesser of the two codes or should we code extension as unknown? See discussion.
Example 1: CT scan description: Mass in the head of the pancreas. The duodenum is "surrounded" by tumor. Should we code extension to 40 [peripancreatic tissue extension, NOS] or 99 [unknown] because the extension code could be further than 40. It could be 44 [extension to duodenum].
Example 2: CT scan description: Mass in region of pancreatic head and "root" of superior mesenteric artery consistent with pancreatic cancer. Should we code extension to 40 [peripancreatic tissue extension, NOS] or 99 [unknown] because the extension code could be further than 40? It could be 54 [extension to major blood vessels].
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
In both examples, code the EOD-Extension field to 40 [peripancreatic tissue extension, NOS]. Choose the lowest of a known possible extension code over an unknown code.
An official website of the United States government
Home