CS Eval--Colon: Should 1 [No surgical resection done...] or 3 [Surgical resection performed...] be used to correctly reflect this field when a surgical observation is "adherent to duodenum" but the extension per the pathology is stated to be to the "subserosal tissue"? See Discussion.
7/2/04 Op Findings 5 cm mass in mid transverse colon involving also the right colon; mass was adherent to duodenum without obvious invasion. 7/2/04 Path: Rt & Transverse Colon: 6x5 cm mass, micro: MD Adenoca with invasion of subserosal tissue; margins neg. 17/17 colic LNs negative.
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 case described above, code extension as 46 [Adherent to other organ...no microscopic tumor found in adhesion]. Code CS TS/Ext eval as 3 [Surgical resection performed...].
Surgery was performed for this case. The fact that the adherence to the duodenum was proven not to be tumor involvement should be coded as 3 in CS TS/Ext Eval. By using eval code 3, the case will map to a pathologic T indicating that the patient had resective surgery. Eval code 1 would map to a clinical T, incorrect for this case.
CS Eval--Colon: When the surgical resection occurs after radiation or chemo, how is the tumor size/extension evaluation field coded when there is no mention of the tumor size or extension in the surgical resection pathology report? See Discussion.
6/30/04 CT Scan abd/pelvis: 7.5x7.2 cm large rectal mass with l cm nodular densities in perirectal region probably adenopathy; irregularity of perirectal soft tissue which could be due to tumor infiltration. 7/26/04 Patient has radiation therapy and 5FU. 10/19/04 LAR: MD Adenoca rectum with regional node mets (3/8).
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.Based on the information provided above, code CS Tumor Size and Extension from CT scan. Code CS TS/Ext eval 5 [Surgical resection performed with pre-surgical treatment...size based on clinical evidence].
Code CS lymph nodes using information from resection. Code CS Reg Nodes eval 6 [Regional LN removed...with pre-surgical treatment...based on pathologic evidence].
CS Tumor Size--Rectum: Should the tumor size be coded to 080 from the colonoscopy size or 075 from the CT scan size? See Discussion.
6/29/04 Colonoscopy with biopsy: near obstructing circumferential friable mass extending from 8 to 16cm above anal verge. 6/30/04 CT Scan Abdomen/Pelvis: 7.5X7.2cm large rectal mass. The patient had radiation with concurrent 5-FU. Surgery is done after treatment.
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 tumor size as 080 (8cm). Code the largest pretreatment size recorded when there is preoperative systemic treatment.
CS Tumor Size--Bladder: Is tumor size coded to 080 when the bladder mass is described as "greater than 8 cm in diameter"?
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.Based on the information provided above, code CS tumor size 080 [8 cm]. Code the information that is avaliable. Since size of tumor is not used to stage bladder cancer, an approximation is adequate.
Primary Site--Soft Tissue: How is the primary site coded for a PNET found in the groin when the Tumor Board states the primary is unknown but the SEER site/histology validation table does not allow a site of C809 or C76x to be coded in combination with the histology of 9473/3?
Code site to C495 [connective tissue of pelvis, groin].
This was not called metastatic PNET and no other site of disease is noted. PNET is a broad classification of a group of tumors that usually occur in the CNS and can also occur in soft tissue (neuroblastoma, extra-osseous Ewing sarcoma).
Histology (Pre-2007)--All Sites: How are "malignant cells" in a cytology or "probably malignancy" in a CT scan coded?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Assign code 8001/3 [Tumor cells, malignant] when the only information available is a cytology report stating "malignant cells."
Assign code 8000/3 [Neoplasm, malignant] when then only information available is a CT report stating "probable malignancy."
See ICD-O-3 page 27 for an explanation of "cancer" [8000] and "carcinoma" [8010].
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.
Surgery of Primary Site--Colon: In the absence of detailed operative or pathology report descriptions of the specific segment(s) of the colon removed, should a hemicolectomy be coded if stated by the surgeon to be such?
Yes, code hemicolectomy as stated by the surgeon when there is no conflicting or additional information avaliable.
Histology (Pre-2007): What is the difference between code 8244/3 composite carcinoid (combined carcinoid and adenocarcinoma) and 8245/3 adenocarcinoid tumor?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Assign code 8244/3 [composite carcinoid] when there is a combination of adenocarcinoma and carcinoid tumor.
Assign code 8245/3 [adenocarcinoid] when the diagnosis is exactly "adenocarcinoid."
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.
Collaborative Staging--Hematopoietic, NOS: Which Collaborative Staging schema is used for a connective, subcutaneous and soft tissue primary of the pelvis [C495] with the morphology of Langerhans cell sarcoma [9756/39]? See Discussion.
On page C-411 of the SEER manual for the connective, subcutaneous, and other soft tissues schema it lists exceptions for certain morphologies and the above is not listed as an exception. On the Hematopoietic scheme it lists the above morphology.
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.Use the hematopoietic schema on page C-709 of the 2004 SEER manual. The histologically defined schemas have priority over the site schemas when both apply. See page 115 of the 2004 SEER manual.
The morphology codes listed on page C-411 pertain to the SEER Site Specific Guidelines.
Chemotherapy/Immunotherapy: Which drugs changed categories when SEER*Rx came out?
Please refer to http://seer.cancer.gov/tools/seerrx/
SEER*Rx is effective for cases diagnosed 1-1-2005 and forward. It replaces all previous references. It is neither required nor recommended that cases treated prior to 2005 be recoded.
The following drugs in the 5/17/02 Book 8 update changed from immunotherapy to cytostatic chemotherapy in SEER*Rx:
alemtuzumab/Campath
bexarotene/Targretin
bevacizumab/Avastin
bortezomib/Velcade
pegaspargase/Oncaspar
rituximab/Rituxan
trastuzumab/Herceptin
asparaginase
The following drugs may have been coded as monoclonal antibodies but are radioisotopes in SEER*Rx:
epratuzumab/LymphoCide
ibrituzumab
tiuxetan/Zevalin
tositumomab/Bexxar
Any other monoclonal antibodies either remained as monoclonal antibodies or it was a local decision to code them as immunotherapy.
There were no drugs that changed from chemotherapy to immunotherapy.
An official website of the United States government
Home