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: 09/06/2024 08:11 AM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20051079

Reportability/AmbiguousTerminology: Because there is a caveat in the SEER PCM, 3rd edition to ignore adverbs such as "strongly" when assessing reportability, should a term such as "likely" cancerous be reportable given than the expression "most likely" cancerous is reportable?

"Likely cancerous" is NOT reportable.

The CoC, NPCR and SEER have agreed to a strict interpretation of the ambiguous terms list. Terms that do not appear on the list are not diagnostic of cancer.

 2005
20051078 Surgery of Primary Site--Melanoma: If the surgical margins are greater than 1 cm for length and width but less than 1 cm for depth, do we code surgery in the 30-33 range? Yes, assign a surgery code from the 30-33 range when any margin is less than 1 cm. Since tumor thickness is an important prognostic factor for cutaneous melanoma, the deep margin is of particular importance. 2005
20051077 First Course Treatment--Unknown & ill-defined site: We have a case with an unknown primary site and the patient had chemoembolization into the hepatic artery. We don't know how to code this treatment. See Discussion. We were told to code as surgery (10) and chemo (01). However an unknown primary automatically gets a (98) surgery code & the chemo is coded (01) but we can't code as systemic therapy. This is an edit. Chemo coded but no date of systemic therapy.

Effective for cases coded prior to the change in policy made on January 9, 2008, code chemoembolization of a metastatic site as 1 [nonprimary surgical procedure performed] in Surgical Procedure of Other Site.

Surgery of Primary Site code 98 is assigned to all cases with an unknown primary.

In the case of a liver primary, it would be coded 10 [local tumor destruction, NOS] in Surgical Procedure of Primary Site.

 2005
20051076 Chemotherapy--Breast: In the absence of more specific information, is the insertion of a port-a-cath one month after mastectomy enough documentation to code chemotherapy to 88 [Recommended]? Assign chemotherapy code 88 [Chemotherapy was recommended, but it is unknown if it was administered]. Be sure to confirm whether or not treatment was administered and update this code accordingly. 2005
20051075 CS Extension--Breast: How is this field coded when path describes dermal lymphatic invasion of the nipple? See Discussion.

Example

Multicentric infiltrating lobular carcinoma of left breast treated with MRM. Microscopic summary: Blood/lymphatic Vessel Invasion: present. Path final diagnosis: Angiolymphatic invasion present, including dermal lymphatic invasion in nipple. Micro: There is angiolymphatic invasion, including dermal capillary invasion identified in sections of the nipple.

The path report describes multiple breast tumors, none of which is located adjacent to the nipple.

This answer was provided in the context of CSv1 coding guidelines. The response may not be used after your registry database has been converted to CSv2.

Assign CS Extension code 20 [Invasion of subcutaneous tissue...] based on the final diagnosis on the path report. There is "dermal lymphatic invasion in nipple." In this case, the stage will be determined by the tumor size.

 2005
20051074 CS Extension/CS Lymph Nodes--Colon: What codes are used when large vessel invasion (V2 grossly evident) is stated to be present on a pathology report? See Discussion.

Example

Cecum, right hemicolectomy: poorly differentiated invasive adenocarcinoma of the cecum. Large vessel invasion (V2-grossly evident) is present. Microscopic description: The grossly described matted lymph node tissue shows an irregular nuclear contour and is classified as V2, grossly evident venous invasion based on staging criteria of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, 6th Edition.

Per note 2 in the coding scheme for CS-Extension, a nodule with irregular contour in the pericolic adipose tissue should be coded in CS-Extension to code 45. Is the large vessel invasion described in the path report the same process as a tumor nodule in pericolic fat? Should note 2 be used and CS-Extension coded to 45?

This answer was provided in the context of CSv1 coding guidelines. The response may not be used after your registry database has been converted to CSv2.The description of large vessel invasion and irregular nuclear contour from the example above describes grossly matted LYMPH NODE tissue. Do not code this in the CS Extension field. Code the CS Lymph Nodes field appropriately based on the rest of the information for this case.

When large vessel invasion and irregular nuclear contour is used to describe a "tumor nodule," rather than a recognizable lymph node, code it in the CS extension field.

 2005
20051073 Reportability/Behavior--Colon: Is a final diagnosis of "mucosal carcinoid" of the colon reportable with a behavior code 2 [in situ] or 3 [invasive] if the microscopic description states that a "malignancy is not appreciated"? See Discussion.

2002 carcinoid case. Path final diagnosis: sigmoid colon polyp, bx-- sm mucosal carcinoid (1.5mm) w/crush artifact in a colonic polyp showing assoc inflammatory and hyperplastic changes. Micro: due to prominent crush artifact, histologic detail is compromised; however, significant atypia or malignancy is not appreciated.

Our state registry requests that this case be abstracted using the histology code 8240/3 because it is a mucosal carcinoid.

AJCC states TIS as being confined w/i basement membrane w/no extension through muscularis mucosae into submucosa. SEER-EOD codes as invasive: mucosa, lamina propria and muscularis mucosae. Our pathologist goes along with AJCC while we are having to code with SEER rules.

1) Assign /3 to mucosal carcinoid, unless stated to be in situ in the final diagnosis. ICD-O-3 is the reference for assigning the behavior code, not AJCC, EOD or CS.

2) The ICD-O-3 code for carcinoid of the sigmoid colon is C187 8240/3. This is reportable to SEER based on the final diagnosis above. Use the histology stated in the final diagnosis.

 2005
20051072 Primary Site/CS Extension--Lymphoma: Should CS Extension be coded to 22 [Involvement of spleen PLUS lymph node(s) BELOW the diaphragm] or 32 [Involvement of spleen PLUS lymph node(s) on both sides of the diaphragm] for the biopsy proven lymphoma in a retroperitoneal mass and a CT of the chest with nodes described as "indeterminate" or "calcified"? See Discussion.

It was diagnosed on CT-guided biopsy of retroperitoneal mass: obtained access to the posterior aspect of the lesion adjacent to the left side of the spinal column at approx the level of the kidney.

CT Abdomen/Pelvis: Large low attenuation & smooth walled regions in hilum of the spleen & into the splenic parenchyma w/assoc smaller lesions in the spleen. Associated adenopathy on left side of aorta between the superior mesenteric artery & renal vein.

Body of report: Soft tissue mass 4.4 x 4.8 x 7cm adjacent to the left side of the aorta & spanning the distance betw superior mesenteric vein inferiorly to level of left renal vein, appears to be matted adenopathy.

CT Chest: indeterminate nodes in pretracheal region w/calcified nodes in infracarinal region, right perihilar region & calcifications in pulmonary parenchyma of right lung. Calcified nodes & other structures suggest healed granulomatous process. However, with the infarct/mass lesion in the spleen & left periaortic adenopathy, extension of this process to the mediastinum can't be excluded.

This answer was provided in the context of CSv1 coding guidelines. The response may not be used after your registry database has been converted to CSv2.Code the primary site C772 [Intra-abdominal lymph nodes]. Assign CS extension code 22 [Involvement of spleen plus lymph nodes below diaphragm]. The description from the chest CT is not sufficient to code lymph node involvement above the diaphragm.

 2005
20051070 CS Lymph Nodes--Breast: Which category has priority when both apply, "Regional lymph nodes, NOS" or "Stated as N_, NOS"? See Discussion. Example: When there is a clinical diagnosis of axillary lymph node metastasis for a breast primary on a physical exam "Enlarged axillary lymph nodes suspicious for metastatic involvement", as well as a clinical N1 designation, do we code as 60 [Axillary LNS, NOS] or 26 [Stated as N1, NOS]?

This answer was provided in the context of CSv1 coding guidelines. The response may not be used after your registry database has been converted to CSv2.For the example provided, assign code 25 [Movable axillary lymph node(s)...] for "Enlarged axillary lymph nodes suspicious for metastatic involvement." Code 60 [Axillary/regional lymph node(s), NOS] is the least specific and would not be used in this case because axillary nodes are defined in code 25. Code 26 is for cases in which "N1, NOS" documented by the physician is the only information available.

 2005
20051069 CS Extension/CS Mets at Dx--Pineal Gland: In Collaborative Stage, how is positive cerebral spinal fluid coded?

This answer was provided in the context of CSv1 coding guidelines. The response may not be used after your registry database has been converted to CSv2.Assign CS Mets at DX code 40 [Distant metastases] for a pineal gland primary with positive cerebral spinal fluid.

 2005