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: 07/08/2024 12:20 PM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20130189

Reportability--Brain and CNS: Are the terms 'mass' and 'lesion' reportable terms for accessioning brain and CNS primaries? See Discussion.

With respect to reportability, the SEER Manual mentions 'tumor' and 'neoplasm,' but not 'mass' or 'lesion.' The SEER MP/H Manual states tumor, mass, lesion and neoplasm are equivalent terms for determining multiple primaries, but does this apply to reportability? If not, what is the distinction?

'Mass' and 'lesion' are not reportable terms for benign/borderline brain and CNS tumors.

Reportable terms for benign/borderline brain and CNS primaries are 'tumor' and 'neoplasm.' These terms appear in the ICD-O-3. 'Lesion' and 'mass' do not appear in the ICD-O-3. Do not use the MP/H Manual to determine reportability; page 2 of the SEER Manual is the correct source for reportability instructions.

 2013
20130188 Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is plasma cell neoplasm reportable? See Discussion. A previously submitted question in 2012 stated this was reportable, but recent answers seem to indicate this is not reportable. Please clarify whether this is reportable or not.

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

Plasma cell neoplasm is not reportable.

We apologize for the confusion that this has caused. The term "plasma cell neoplasm" was not included in the 2010 Heme DB and Manual. It was added to the 2012 Heme DB and Manual after repeated questions were received regarding this diagnosis. After further investigation, this term is being removed from the Manual and DB.

According to WHO, 'Plasma cell neoplasm' is an umbrella term that includes MGUS, plasma cell myeloma, solitary plasmacytoma of bone, immunoglobulin deposition diseases, extraosseous plasmacytoma, and osteosclerotic myeloma. Of these, only plasma cell myeloma, solitary plasmacytoma of bone, and extraosseous plasmacytoma are reportable. Physicians may use the term 'plasma cell neoplasm' when they are not sure what the specific disease is. Plasma cell neoplasm is not reportable; however, follow up on these types of patients is recommended because continued evaluation is likely to determine a more specific disease. A reportable neoplasm may be diagnosed at a later date.

Cases of plasma cell neoplasm diagnosed 2010 or later are not reportable. This change should not have taken place as a result of the update in the 2012 Manual. At this time SEER is not requiring registries to go back and review plasmacytoma or multiple myeloma cases that were collected based on this terminology.

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.

2013
20130187 Reportability: Is a clinically diagnosed Stage III malignant thymoma reportable when the post-neoadjuvant resection showed spindle cell thymoma? See Discussion. A thymoma is described by the medical oncologist at the time of the initial diagnosis as a malignant thymoma, Stage III. The patient had neoadjuvant CAP chemotherapy followed by a resection. Following the resection, the pathologist stated the diagnosis was spindle cell thymoma. A malignant thymoma is reportable. Based on the information provided, a reportable diagnosis (malignant thymoma) was made by a physician and the patient was treated for this diagnosis. Because there is no mention of the initial diagnosis being amended based on the resection specimen's pathology report, assume the initial diagnosis is still valid. 2013
20130186

Grade: Can the FIGO grade be used to code the morphologic grade? See discussion.

FIGO Grade is coded in CS SSF 7 in the Corpus Uteri schema. The SEER Manual does not address using FIGO grade for coding grade in morphology.

Do not use FIGO grade to code the grade field. See the sentence below the table in Instruction #6 in the Grade Coding Instructions for cases diagnosed 2014 and later, http://seer.cancer.gov/tools/grade/

2013
20130185

Reportability/Behavior: Is HGSIL (high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion) of the vulva or vagina reportable and is it a synonym for histology code 8077/2 [squamous intraepithelial neoplasia, grade III]?

For cases diagnosed 2018 and later

HGSIL of the vulva or vagina is reportable. HGSIL is a synonym for squamous intraepithelial neoplasia, grade III.

 2013
20130184

Reportability--Appendix: Are low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasms reportable?

For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2022

A low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm (LAMN) is not reportable. The WHO classification designates LAMN with the behavior code /1 [uncertain whether benign or malignant].

 2013
20130183

Reportability--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Is a peripheral blood finding consistent with involvement by monoclonal, lambda-restricted mature B cell population with co-expression of CD5 and CD23 reportable if, immunophenotypically, the case is consistent with a chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma? See Discussion.

Peripheral blood: Final diagnosis: Leukocytosis absolute lymphocytosis monoclonal, lambda restricted B-cell population w/co-expression of CD5 and CD23 absolute increase in CD4=helper T cells. See comment.

Comment: Peripheral blood findings are consistent with involvement by monoclonal, lambda-restricted mature B cell population with co-expression of CD5 and CD23, which is immunophenotypically consistent with a chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma immunophenotype. However, the absolute monoclonal population is only 3.02k/ul.

According to WHO criteria, in the absence of extramedullary tissue involvement, the monoclonal lymphocyte population must be greater than or equal to 5.0 k/ul. Therefore, in the absence of clinical evidence of extramedullary tissue involvement, the diagnosis is most consistent with a monoclonal B cell lymphocytosis. Review of initial analysis reveals well-defined groups of cells within lymphocyte, monocyte and granulocyte gates as defined by CD45 and sid-scatter characteristics (%'s are listed). Overall, peripheral blood findings are consistent with involvement by monoclonal, lambada-restricted B cell population with a chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma immunophenotype.

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

This case is reportable. Code histology to 9823/3 [CLL/SLL].

Ambiguous terminology is used to accession cases (determine reportability) because it has been used for over 30 years to do so. Any deviation from using ambiguous terminology to determine case reportability would cause the reporting of incidence counts to vary. In this case, there was a reportable, ambiguous terminology diagnosis on peripheral blood that is "consistent with" involvement by chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) immunophenotype.

The ambiguous terminology "consistent with" in the flow cytometry report is acceptable to determine reportability. Given that it is the only reportable histology mentioned in the scenario, it is also used to code histology. The instruction "Do not code histology based on ambiguous terminology" is intended to be used when there is a reportable NOS histology and reportable more specific histology stated in the diagnosis. Ambiguous terminology cannot be used to report the more specific diagnosis in cases of Heme & Lymphoid neoplasms.

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.

 2013
20130182 Primary site--Head and Neck: How is primary site coded if a floor of mouth biopsy reveals microinvasive squamous cell carcinoma but the definitive resection of the tongue and floor of mouth unifocal lesion reveals only in situ squamous cell cancer? See Discussion.

Patient with overlapping lesion of tongue and floor of mouth. Initial biopsy of floor of mouth reveals microinvasive squamous cell cancer. Definitive resection reveals in situ squamous cell cancer. Pathology report states unifocal tumor. The tumor site on pathology report is documented as involving the tongue and floor of mouth.

Should the primary site be coded to floor of mouth because it is the site of invasive disease? Or is primary site C148 [overlapping sites of lip, oral cavity and pharynx] because invasion should not be used to determine primary site?

Code the primary site to C068 [overlapping lesion of other and unspecified parts of the mouth]. Based on the information provided, this is a tumor described as a "book-leaf" lesion a lesion that overlaps the floor of the mouth and the underside of the tongue. 2013
20130181 Multiple Primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: Should Rule M4 or the Heme DB be used to determine whether diffuse large B-cell lymphoma of the large intestine and peripheral T-cell lymphoma of the bone marrow represents one or two primaries? See Discussion.

The Heme DB identifies these as new primaries:

10/12/12 Large intestine, biopsy: Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

10/12/12 Bone marrow biopsy: Peripheral T-cell lymphoma.

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

Per Rule M15, accession two primaries. According to Rule M15, use the multiple primaries calculator to determine the number of primaries for all cases that do not meet the criteria of M1-M14. Per the calculator, this scenario represents two primaries.

Assuming the only area of involvement is the large intestine, code the histology to 9680/3 [diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma] and per Rule PH24 code the primary site to C189 [colon, NOS]. According to PH24, one is to code the primary site to the organ when lymphoma is present only in an organ.

Rule PH26 applies to the second primary. Assuming the only area of involvement is the bone marrow, code the histology to 9702/3 [peripheral T-cell lymphoma] and code the primary site to C421 [bone marrow]. According to PH26, one is to code the primary site to bone marrow (C421) when lymphoma is present only in the bone marrow.

Rule M4 does not apply for this case. Rule M4 applied when you have two or more types of non-Hodgkin lymphoma in the same anatomic location. That is not the case in this scenario.

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.

2013
20130180 Histology--Pancreas: What is the difference between pancreatic endocrine neoplasm (PanNETs) [8240/3] and the new ICD-O-3 terms pancreatic endocrine tumor, benign [8150/0] and pancreatic endocrine tumor, malignant [8150/3]? See Discussion. SEER Inquiry 20120035 discusses the reportability of pancreatic endocrine neoplasm (PanNETs) tumors.

The difference is that 8150 is for islet cell tumors. The preferred name was changed by WHO/IARC to reflect the current language used by pathologists to describe islet cell tumors [8150].

The 8240 histology code added the neuroendocrine tumor, grade 1, low or well differentiated terms to the carcinoid ICD-O name.

Islet cell tumors are more aggressive than the pancreatic NET tumors. Treatment and prognosis are determined by the histologic type. While the histology code 8150 is not new, the histology name has been updated.

2013