System Guide
Back to Search Results

Search Results

Display Options
Display Options
Select Fields
Export Results to CSV Create Report 0
+ Add all results to report

Report Produced: 08/01/2024 10:12 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20071104

Reportability--Bladder: Is a "high grade papillary urothelial neoplasm with focal superficial invasion into lamina propria" reportable?

Yes, this case is reportable. It is invasive (invasion into the lamina propria).

According to the WHO Classification of Urinary System Tumours, "Most pT1 cancers are papillary, low or high grade."

 2007
20150047

Reportability--Bladder: Is a positive UroVysion test alone diagnostic of bladder cancer? See discussion.

The UroVysion website says that standard procedures, e.g., cytology, cystoscopy, take precedence over the UroVysion test. The Quest Diagnostics website says that "A positive result is consistent with a diagnosis of bladder cancer or bladder cancer recurrence, either in the bladder or in another site within the urinary system. A negative result is suggestive of the absence of bladder cancer but does not rule it out." Would we pick up the case if the UroVysion test was positive but the standard procedures were negative or non-diagnostic?

Do not report the case based on UroVysion test results alone. Report the case if there is a physician statement of malignancy and/or the patient was treated for cancer.

2015
20150002

Reportability--Bladder: Please explain the reportability of UroVysion for bladder cancer in the following circumstances.

1. Patient has positive UroVysion test and follow up biopsy is negative. Is this case reportable with a diagnosis date the date of the UroVysion?

2. Patient has positive UroVysion test and follow up biopsy is positive for cancer. Is the diagnosis date of the date of the positive UroVysion or the date of the positive biopsy? Thank you.

Do not report a case based on UroVysion test results alone. Report a case when there is positive histology, a physician statement of malignancy, and/or the patient was treated for cancer.

1. Do not report the case.

2. Report the case based on the positive biopsy.

2015
20170029

Reportability--Bone: Are giant cell tumors (GCT) of the bone that metastasize to the lung reportable? See Discussion.

Patient had radical resection of pelvic giant cell tumor of bone in August 2012. Final diagnosis clarified that no features to suggest a frankly malignant giant cell tumor were identified.

July 2013 left upper lobe nodules were removed and found to be consistent with multifocal metastatic lung involvement with a previous pelvic giant cell tumor of bone. However, the pathology report comment specifies there are no histological high-grade features to suggest a malignancy:

While SINQ 20091087 may apply, these metastases clearly arrived in the lung by hematogenous spread. The previous SINQ note refers to a case where the implants/metastases can seed the surrounding pelvic and abdominal structures by rupture of the tumor or intraoperative tumor spillage. That type of spread is not quite the same as the current case showing tumor cells leaving the primary tumor/site and travelling through the blood to implant in the lungs.

This case is not reportable. According to the WHO Classification of Bone Tumors, pulmonary metastases from GCTs are "very slow-growing and are thought to represent pulmonary implants that result from embolization of intravascular growths of GCT. Some of these benign pulmonary implants can regress spontaneously. A small number, however, exhibit progressive enlargement and can lead to the death of the patient." The pathologist for this case is very clear that no malignancy was found in the lung or in the bone.

 2017
20160055

Reportability--Bone: Is an "atypical cartilaginous tumor" reportable? See Discussion.

Patient had a core needle biopsy of the right acetabulum. Final diagnosis on the path report is: Atypical cartilaginous tumor (formerly chondrosarcoma, grade 1).

Is this cell type reportable? If so, is it reportable only because the pathologist recorded clarifying text in parentheses? If the text in the parentheses was not available, is the histology "atypical cartilaginous tumor" reportable?

Atypical cartilaginous tumor of bone is not reportable. The WHO terminology is "atypical cartilagenous tumor/chondrosarcoma grade I." WHO classifies this entity as low malignant potential (behavior code /1).

Chondrosarcoma grade II or grade III is reportable based on the WHO classification of malignant (behavior code /3).

2016
20130194

Reportability--Brain and CNS: Are blood vessel tumors arising in CNS sites reportable? See Discussion.

Previous instructions from the CDC (Cancer - Collection and Coding Clarification for CNS Tumors - NPCR) stated that non-malignant blood vessel tumors in CNS sites are reportable and should be coded to the CNS site in which they arose. SINQ 20081113 also states that a blood vessel tumor, cavernoma/cavernous hemangioma, in the brain is reportable. However, SINQ 20120034 contradicts this previous answer stating the site should be coded to C490 [blood vessel] for a blood vessel tumor (venous angioma) in the brain.

If blood vessel tumors arising in a CNS site are no longer reportable, please specify the site/histology codes for these non-reportable tumors and when this change took place.

Vascular tumors of the CNS are reportable when they arise in the dura or parenchyma of the CNS and should be coded accordingly. The instructions in the CDC book regarding primary site coding are not the most current instructions.SEER assumed responsibility for brain and CNS reporting instructions in 2007.

The tumor in SINQ 20120034 is not reportable because it arises in a blood vessel. The cavernous hemangioma in SINQ 20081113 is reportable because the primary site is the white matter of the cerebral cortex.

 2013
20170002

Reportability--Brain and CNS: Are cavernous sinus meningiomas reportable? See Discussion.

 

Per SINQ 20160068, sphenoid wing meningiomas are reportable (unless stated to be intraosseous) because they arise from the meninges overlying or along the sphenoid wing/sphenoid bone. These are intracranial and not intraosseous meningiomas.

Therefore, wouldn't this logic also apply to cavernous sinus meningiomas? These are tumors that arise from the meninges of an intracranial space, not from bone or soft tissue. The cavernous sinus is a "true dural venous sinus" within the skull. While not specifically about meningiomas, SINQ 20071095 states a benign tumor in the cavernous sinus is coded to C490. This SINQ would still seem valid for a benign tumor like a blood vessel tumor, but not for a meningioma that doesn't arise from soft tissue or blood vessels.

Cavernous sinus meningiomas are reportable, as the meningioma arises in the meninges unless stated otherwise. This is similar to sphenoid wing meningiomas.

2017
20130001

Reportability--Brain and CNS: Are hemangioma, NOS (9120/0), cavernous hemangioma (9121/0) or venous hemangioma (9122/0) reportable when they arise in the brain or CNS?

 

Hemangioma, NOS (9120/0) and cavernous hemangioma (9121/0) arising in the dura and parenchyma of the brain/CNS are reportable.

Venous angiomas (9122/0) are not reportable wherever they arise. The primary site for venous hemangioma arising in the brain is blood vessel (C490). The combination of 9122/0 and C490 is not reportable. This is a venous abnormality. Previously called venous angiomas, these are currently referred to as a developmental venous anomalies (DVA).

2013
20210031

Reportability--Brain and CNS: Are lipomas of the spinal column reportable as a benign tumor of the central nervous system (CNS)? This is seen occassionally at our pediatric facility.

Spinal cord tumors (including lipomas) are reportable when they arise in the spinal dura or nerve root. The tumor must be of the spinal cord itself or within the spinal cord dura. Spinal cord tumors are reportable when they arise in the intradural space. A reportable intradural tumor can be either intramedullary or extramedullary. Extramedullary intradural spinal tumors are reportable. A spinal tumor originating in the extradural space is not reportable. If it is outside the dura, it is not reportable because it would be outside the CNS. They are not reportable when they arise in the peripheral nerves.

 2021
20160068

Reportability--Brain and CNS: Are sphenoid wing meningiomas reportable? See discussion.

It's my understanding that true intraosseous meningiomas are very rare. It's also my understanding that cranial meninges DO cover the sphenoid wing, so I'm wondering if it's possible to have a meningioma of the sphenoid wing on imaging that arises from the meninges NOT the bone. Is that the deciding factor on reportability? It's been suggested to me that meninges cells do lie within the bone, but again if a meningioma is described as being located at the sphenoid wing on imaging, without bone involvement - and no surgery is performed - I do not understand why it is specifically excluded as non-reportable.

This answer pertains to cases diagnosed prior to 2018. For 2018 and later cases, refer to the Non-Malignant CNS Solid Tumor Rules.

Note: This answer updates previous answers which have been removed from the SEER Inquiry System.

Intraosseous meningiomas are not reportable. You are correct, these are rare meningiomas originating in bone. The term "sphenoid wing meningioma" is sometimes used for an intraosseous meningioma of the sphenoid bone. Yes, it's possible to have a meningioma of the sphenoid wing on imaging that arises from the meninges NOT the bone. Read the available information carefully. When the site of origin is described as "along the sphenoid wing" or "overlying the sphenoid wing" report the meningioma. These descriptions indicate that the meningioma originates from the meninges covering bone rather than the bone itself. Meningioma arising in bone is rare enough, that when present, we would expect it to be clearly stated as such. In the absence of a statement indicating origin in bone, the meningioma is most likely arising from meninges covering the bone.

 2016