Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Cancer Site Category | Data Item Category | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20051083 | Multiple Primaries--Lymphoma: How many primaries should be reported when there is a marginal zone B-Cell lymphoma [9699/3] diagnosed in 2000, and the clinician states that the diffuse large B-Cell type lymphoma [9680/3] diagnosed in 2004 was a transformation of the prior primary? See Discussion. |
The Single Versus Subsequent Primaries of Lymphatic and Hematopoietic Diseases table indicates they are most likely "D" different disease processes. As any low grade lymphoma can transform, we suspect this represents a transformation (the clinician is regarding this as transformed). How many primary/ies should be coded? And, how? |
For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010: Report this case as one primary according to the physician's opinion. Code the histology as 9699/3 [marginal zone B-Cell lymphoma, NOS] and code the date of diagnosis as 2000. Code the physicians opinion regardless of whether or not it agrees with the Single Versus Subsequent Primaries of Lymphatic and Hematopoietic Diseases table. Use the table when the physician does not state whether or not there is a new primary. For cases diagnosed 2010 forward, refer to the Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Neoplasm Case Reportability and Coding Manual and the Hematopoietic Database (Hematopoietic DB) provided by SEER on its website to research your question. If those resources do not adequately address your issue, submit a new question to SINQ. |
Lymphoma | N/A | 2005 |
|
|
20081053 | Multiple primaries--Lymphoma: Is a splenectomy done for non-Hodgkin lymphoma diffuse large B-cell of the spleen a composite histology and a single primary if a perihilar lymph node with Hodgkin lymphoma classic type is found at the time of this surgery? |
For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:This is two primaries -- Non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) in the spleen and Hodgkin lymphoma (HD) in a lymph node. Composite lymphoma is NHL and HD both in a single lymph node. For cases diagnosed 1/1/10 and later, refer to the Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Neoplasm Case Reportability and Coding Manual and the Hematopoietic Database (Hematopoietic DB) provided by SEER on its website to research your question. If those resources do not adequately address your issue, submit a new question to SINQ. |
Lymphoma | N/A | 2008 | |
|
|
20150009 | Multiple Primaries/Behavior--Lung: When a patient has an invasive lung primary, how do in situ tumors of the lung affect the determination of multiple primaries? See discussion. |
How many primaries should be reported when a 12/19/14 RUL lung wedge resection shows: 2.0 cm invasive adenocarcinoma (8140/3) and an additional RUL wedge resection during the same procedure shows: multifocal adenocarcinoma in situ (bronchioloalveolar carcinoma), non-mucinous type (8252/2) size: 1 mm – 2 mm; followed by a 2/12/15 left upper lobectomy also showing Adenocarcinoma, invasive at several foci, with a prominent bronchioloalveolar (in situ) component….tumor focality: multifocal (10 cm mass, 6 cm mass and numerous smaller foci)? |
Most often when the invasive tumor and the in situ component are in the same lung and are the same histology, rule M12 (example 3) applies and this is a single primary. If the first wedge resection included part of the tumor and the in situ was not separate from the tumor, it is a single primary. We suspect that the margins were positive on the first wedge specimen which prompted the second wedge resection where the in situ was found. In addition, terminology for lung malignancies is undergoing change: what was called BAC (invasive) is now called adenocarcinoma in situ. |
Lung | Behavior | 2015 |
|
|
20210039 | Multiple primaries/Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms--Lymphoma: Is a 2021 right tongue base biopsy showing diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) (9680/3) a new primary following a prior history of hairy cell leukemia-variant (HCL-v) (9591/3) in 2011? See discussion. |
Patient was diagnosed with low-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma in 2011, later classified as hairy cell leukemia-variant. Right cervical node biopsy in 2020 proved HCL-v and a subsequent 2021 right tongue base biopsy showed DLBCL. The tongue base biopsy path includes the comment, patient has history of HCL-v, but the morphology and flow cytology features are different from the patient's previous right cervical node biopsy. This DLBCL likely represents a second de novo lymphoma, but cannot exclude an unusual transformation of the prior HCL-v. Per Heme Rule M7, abstract a single primary when a more specific histology is diagnosed after an NOS if the Heme DB confirms the same primary. The histology code for HCL-v, 9591/3 is a non-specific code, but it seems like a specific histology. The Heme Calculator does say 9591 and 9680 are the same primary, but we are unsure if that is correct for this case of HCL-v followed by DLBCL. |
UPDATED JUNE 2026 Abstract two primaries. This is a transformation from a chronic disease (the Hairy Cell Variant) to an acute disease (DLBCL). Per the abstractor notes for 9591/3 (which includes the term Hairy cell leukemia variant) "Hairy cell leukemia variant (pleomorphic, prolymphocytic, thrombocytic) can transform to Diffuse Large B-cell lymphoma (9680/3)." |
Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms, Lymphoma | N/A | 2021 |
|
|
20020058 | Multiple Primaries/Histology (Pre-2007)--Colon: Would one primary be reported when adenocarcinoma arising in a polyp NOS [8210/3] and adenocarcinoma arising in a tubulovillous adenoma [8263/3] were simultaneously diagnosed in the sigmoid colon (first 3-digits of the histology are different)? |
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007: Code as one primary. Code the Histology field to 8263/3 [Adenocarcinoma in tubulovillous adenoma]. Count as a single primary and code the more specific term when simultaneous lesions are present and one lesion is an "NOS" term and the other is a more specific term. "Polyp" is an NOS term. Adenoma is an associated term, but is more specific (Tubulovillous adenoma is more specific than "polyp"). 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. |
Colon | Histology | 2002 | |
|
|
20170026 | Multiple Primaries/Histology Rules/Multiple primaries--Kidney, renal pelvis: Are tumors diagnosed more than three years apart multiple primaries according to Rule M7 in a case with metastasis? See Discussion. |
5/27/02 Transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT)--papillary transitional cell carcinoma, +lamina propria, no muscle invasion. All urine cytologies in 2011 and 2012 (only follow up received) show no malignancy. 3/11/15 Lung fine needle aspirate--poorly differentiated carcinoma consistent with urothelial carcinoma. 4/30/15 Renal pelvis biopsy--low grade papillary urothelial carcinoma, no lamina propria invasion, no muscularis propria invasion. |
Rule M7 applies. Abstract the bladder diagnosis and the renal pelvis diagnosis as separate primaries. The lung diagnosis is metastatic. The MP/H rules do not apply to metastatic tumors. |
Kidney, renal pelvis | N/A | 2017 |
|
|
20150010 | Multiple Primaries/Histology--Colon: What is the correct histology code and MP/H Rule when a colectomy final diagnosis is adenocarcinoma with colloid and signet ring cell features? See discussion. |
The MP/H Equivalent Terms and Definitions for Colon indicate that type, subtype, predominantly, with features of, major, or with ___ differentiation are all equivalent in terms of coding histology. However, this is not indicated in the General Instructions (e.g., Histologic Type ICD-O-3 or General Instructions Histology Coding Rules). It also is not included as a Note under the Rules where one would expect to use these terms, for example, Rule H7. Is this an oversight or error in the Manual?
In this case, Rule H7 seems to be the first (and most appropriate) rule that applies to this mixed histology tumor. However, the specific histology terms that an invasive tumor may be identified as, are only listed under Rule H13. Can these same terms be used when applying rules for which they are not specifically noted? It would seem logical to use the equivalent histology terms to code a mixed histology tumor identified as a subtype or with features, etc., despite the fact that the specific terms are not listed under Rule H7.
|
Rule H7 applies. Assign code 8255. H13 does not apply as mucinous/colloid/signet are not NOS histologies. They are specific histologies. This will be addressed in the upcoming revisions to the rules. |
Colon | Histology | 2015 |
|
|
20130142 | Multiple primaries/Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are reported if a 2010 inguinal lymph node biopsy diagnosis of follicular lymphoma, grade 1 is subsequently diagnosed in 2012 with a 50% follicular, grade 3 and 50% diffuse large B-cell via a biopsy of an axillary mass? |
In 2010 a left inguinal lymph node biopsy revealed follicular lymphoma, grade 1. There were no other suspicious lymph nodes in the body. In 2012 a biopsy of a large axillary mass revealed a a 50% follicular, grade 3 and 50% diffuse large B-cell. According to the rules, the transformation to a B-cell is new primary. Is the mixed cell neoplasm a single primary? |
For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph. There are two reportable primaries for this case -- follicular lymphoma in 2010 and DLBCL in 2012. First determine the histologies needed to to determine the number of primaries to report. We determined the histologies are follicular lymphoma, grade 1 for 2010 and DLBCL for 2012 as follows:
Per the Hematopoietic database, follicular lymphoma (all types are chronic) transforms to DLBCL (acute). Per Rule M 10 instructions, "Abstract as multiple primaries when a neoplasm is as a neoplasm there is a of an neoplasm after the chronic diagnosis." Therefore, abstract the DLBCL as a second primary. 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 | Histology | 2013 |
|
|
20100037 | Multiple primaries/Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries should be accessioned for a patient diagnosed with essential thrombocythemia [9962/3] in 2002 who had a 2010 biopsy consistent with the fibrotic stage for a chronic myeloproliferative disorder that "suggests the patient is transforming to an acute myeloid leukemia"? See Discussion. |
Patient had a diagnosis of essential thrombocythemia [9962/3] in 2002 and was treated with Hydroxyurea. In 2010, the patient was admitted with severe bone pain and a diagnosis described as, "The overall features of the biopsy are consistent with a fibrotic stage of a chronic myeloproliferative disorder. The presence of up to 15% CD34+ immature cells seen in the biopsy suggests that the patient is transforming to an acute myeloid leukemia." In addition, cytogenetic studies and molecular testing for JAK2 were ordered. These findings confirmed a myeloproliferative disorder. JAK2 mutation was not detected. The patient died within 2 weeks. Is this a new primary?
Was this patient diagnosed with AML (which requires 20% or more blasts and this is only 15%)? If this is a new primary, is the histology 9861/3 [AML, NOS] or 9895/3 [AML with myelodysplasia-related changes]? Was the second diagnosis of AML definitively diagnosed? |
Updated May 2026
This case is a single primary, essential thrombocythemia [9962/3] in 2002. The 2010 diagnosis is chronic myeloproliferative disorder [9960/3].
According to Rule M15, the Multiple Primaries Calculator is to be used to first determine the number of primaries. Per the calculator, essential thrombocythemia and chronic myeloproliferative disorder are the same primary. (Acute myeloid leukemia is not used as the second histology because it is preceded by a non-reportable ambiguous term, "suggests." "Suggests" is not on the list of reportable ambiguous terms in the Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Neoplasm Coding Manual.
In 2010, this patient was in a late stage of ET. When any of the specific MPN neoplasms such as ET are in the late stage of disease, the characteristics of the specific disease (ET) will no longer be detectable. Accordingly, for this patient the diagnostic testing was positive for MPN, unclassifiable. In this case, do not change the diagnosis from the more specific disease (ET) to the NOS (MPN, unclassifiable) |
Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms | Histology | 2010 |
|
|
20120011 | Multiple primaries/Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is there a timing rule used to recode histology should a more specific diagnosis of refractory anemia with excess blasts (RAEB) be confirmed after an initial diagnosis of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS)? How many primaries are abstracted if RAEB subsequently evolves toward an acute myeloid leukemia? See Discussion. |
Facility A: 4/8/2010 Bone Marrow biopsy: Features most compatible with MDS. (No treatment administered.) 7/2/2010 Peripherial Blood: Transforming Myelodysplastic Syndrome (MDS). COMMENT: Clonal abnormality compatible with MDS/acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in all metaphases examined. (Still no treatment administered.) Facility B: 10/6/2010 Patient now presents for evaluation and treatment. Patient started on Vidaza. 10/07/10 Bone Marrow biopsy: Refractory anemia with excess blasts (RAEB-2) COMMENT: Evolution towards AML with myelodysplasia related changes considered; cytogenetic analysis reveals abnormalities most compatible with MDS and/or AML. Based on the Heme Manual and DB, the 4/8/2010 diagnosis of MDS, NOS (9989/3) is the first primary. Should the 7/2/2010 diagnosis of transforming MDS to AML (9861/3) be a new, second primary? Based on the Abstractor Note for MDS in the Heme DB for MDS, "If the characteristics of a specific subtype of MDS develop later in the course of the disease, change the histology code to the more specific diagnosis." Based on this note, should the MDS histology code [9989/3] be changed to refractory anemia with excess blasts (RAEB-2) [9983/3] from the biopsy taken on 10/7/2010 (one day after treatment began) that revealed RAEB-2 with evolution towards AML? |
For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph. There is no time limit set to update histology to a more specific disease process if a patient has an initial NOS histology identified. Unlike solid tumors, hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms may take a year or more to manifest the specific disease. This is simply a part of the "disease characteristics." Abstract a single primary per M2, a single histology represents a single primary. Code the histology to 9983/3 [MDS/RAEB-2.] The Heme DB guidelines were interpreted correctly. MDS/RAEB can transform to AML and would be two separate primaries there had also been a reportable diagnosis of AML. The 7/2/2010 peripheral blood showed MDS and a clonal abnormality that was "compatible with MDS/AML." The 10/7/2010 bone marrow biopsy showed only RAEB-2 with "evolution towards AML with myelodysplasia related changes." Ambiguous terminology is only used to help determine reportability; it not used to code a more specific histology. In this case, there was only ambiguous terminology used to describe the AML. It is important to understand the implication of incorrectly assigning histology codes for hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasm using ambiguous terminology. Using this case as an example, the patient was not treated until three months after the 7/2/2010 peripheral blood diagnosis of MDS compatible with MDS/AML. The medical literature indicates that AML, if left untreated, is usually fatal within 1-3 months. The treatment given 10/6/2010, 3 months after the "compatible with" diagnosis, was a drug used to treat MDS and not AML. The other issue with this case is that the bone marrow examination, which is more reliable than peripheral blood, showed only "evolution towards AML." This means that the bone marrow is exhibiting the changes seen in the final stages of MDS prior to progression to AML. Wait for a definitive diagnosis of AML and/or treatment for AML before abstracting the second primary. 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 | Histology | 2012 |
An official website of the United States government
