Home
| Report | Question ID | Question | Discussion | Answer | Year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20000437 | EOD-Extension--Lymphoma: Should "bilateral" inguinal lymph node involvement by lymphoma be two chains for the purpose of coding EOD? |
Yes. Bilateral inguinal lymph nodes are coded as two chains/regions. |
2000 | |
|
|
20000265 | EOD-Extension: General instructions, page 7, note 3 states: " Extent of disease information obtained after treatment with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, hormone or immunotherapy has begun may be included." Because the SEER manual does not mention radiation treatment, can we use information from a lobectomy to code EOD if a patient has neoadjuvant radiation therapy? | Radiation therapy was inadvertently omitted from the list. Please see SINQ 20031012 answer as to when the surgical information can be used to stage the case. | 2000 | |
|
|
20000277 | Ambiguous Terminology: Should SEER's lists of ambiguous terminology be modified to reflect how pathologists and radiologists actually use these terms? See discussion. | Pathologists and radiologists say the term "suggestive" is used to describe a lesion that may be malignant, and the term "suspicious" is not used to describe lesions that may be malignant. According to the physician director of our Breast Center the FDA governs the use of terminology, and the term "highly suggestive" instead of "highly suspicious" must be used if there is a greater chance that a mass is malignant. | We recognize that the way clinicians and registrars speak is often different, and that the differences vary from region to region.
Our Medical Advisory Board reviewed the lists of ambiguous terminology before they were included in the third edition of the SEER EOD and the SEER Program Coding and Staging Manual 2004. Since that time, specific terminology has been mandated for describing mammography results. We know some of these terms are discrepant with our ambiguous terminology list.
As of 2007, the standard setters (CoC, NPCR, SEER and CCCR) all use the same ambiguous terminology list. Changes to the list must be approved by the NAACCR Uniform Data Standards Committee. |
2000 |
|
|
20000515 | Multiple Primaries (Pre-2007)--Ovary/Endometrium: Is endometrioid adenocarcinoma occuring simultaneously in the left ovary and the endometrium one primary or two? See discussion. |
Pathology Final Diagnosis: Left Ovary: Moderately differentiated endometrioid adenocarcinoma squamous differentiation grade 2 (scale of 3) Uterus: Moderately differentiated endometrioid adenocarcinoma with squamous differentiation, grade II (scale of III). Focal, very superficial invasion to inner third myometrium with extension to lower uterine segment. Endocervix, cervix, right ovary and fallopian tubes negative for tumor. |
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007: Code the case you describe as two primaries. The endometrioid adenocarcinoma can arise in the endometrium without a concomitant ovarian carcinoma. 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. |
2000 |
|
|
20000436 | Histology (Pre-2007)--Colon: What code is used to represent the histology "adenocarcinoma arising in a papillary adenomatous polyp"? See discussion. |
Is "adenocarcinoma arising in a papillary adenomatous polyp" equivalent to adenocarcinoma in a villous adenoma [8261/3] or adenocarcinoma in an adenomatous polyp [8210/3]? |
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007: Code the Histology field to 8261/3 [adenocarcinoma in a villous adenoma]. In describing colon polyps, papillary and villous are equivalent terms. 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. |
2000 |
|
|
20000420 | Date of Diagnosis--All Sites: Is it better to estimate the month in the date of diagnosis field using the re-excision pathology report date or code the month to unknown if the only available information is the re-excision date? See discussion. | The only available information is the following pathology report:
On 7/18/00 a wide excision of the primary lesion is done. The report reads, "Lesion approximately 1 cm. Residual superficial spreading malignant melanoma with deepest penetration 4 mm." |
Code the Date of Diagnosis field to 07/2000 for this case. Estimate the month of diagnosis whenever possible.
Given the usual delay between the initial excision of the lesion and a wide excision for a melanoma, estimate the month of diagnosis as July. |
2000 |
|
|
20000474 | Date of Diagnosis: If a clinician states his current diagnosis of malignancy is based on a CT scan done at an early date that contained a diagnosis of only "neoplasm" or "worrisome for carcinoma" should the date of diagnosis be the date of the scan? | Yes. Code the Date of Diagnosis field to the date of the scan. The physician's clinical impression upon reviewing the earlier scan, is that the malignancy was confirmed by the scan. If there is a medical review of a previous scan that indicates the patient had a malignancy at an earlier date, then the earlier date is the date of diagnosis, i.e., the date is back-dated. | 2000 | |
|
|
20000851 | Primary Site: What site code is used to classify a femur biopsy with pathologic diagnosis of "Ewing sarcoma/primitive neuroectodermal tumor (PNET)"? See discussion. | ICD-O-3 lists PNET as being site specific to C71._. The pathology report states "some authors consider both Ewing sarcoma and PNET to be the same histologic entity given that they share the same translocation between chromosomes 11 and 23." | Code the Primary Site field to C40.2 [femur] based on Rule H in the ICD-O-3 that states, "Use the topography code provided when a topographic site is not listed in the diagnosis. This topography code should be disregarded if the tumor is known to arise at another site." | 2000 |
|
|
20000248 | Date of Diagnosis: When doing follow-back at nursing homes on DCO cases, we find it difficult to code diagnosis date because the nursing home records are often vague or incomplete. Should the diagnosis date be coded as unknown (excluded from SEER database), the date of death, or the approximate date of diagnosis as reported on the death certificate? | If the nursing home record indicates that the patient had cancer, use the best approximation for date of diagnosis.
If the record says the patient had cancer when admitted, but it does not provide a date of diagnosis, use the date of admission as the date of diagnosis.
If there is no mention of cancer in the nursing home record and/or all work-up in the record is negative, assume the cancer was discovered at autopsy. Use the date of death as the date of diagnosis, and leave as a Death Certificate Only case. |
2000 | |
|
|
20000421 | Surgery of Primary Site/Reconstruction-First Course--Breast: If the plan is to "reconstruct" the breast 6 months after an ipsilateral modified radical mastectomy, is the time span a problem or should it be coded in the Surgery of Primary Site field because it was planned? | For cases diagnosed 1/1/2003 and after: Code the Surgery of Primary Site field to 55 [Modified radical mastectomy WITHOUT removal of uninvolved contralateral breast, Implant]. The time span is not a problem as long as the reconstruction was planned as first course, which is indicated by tissue expander insertion at the time of the original surgery. | 2000 |
An official website of the United States government
