Multiple Primaries/Histology (Pre-2007)--Colon: Would one primary be reported when adenocarcinoma arising in a polyp NOS [8210/3] and adenocarcinoma arising in a tubulovillous adenoma [8263/3] were simultaneously diagnosed in the sigmoid colon (first 3-digits of the histology are different)?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Code as one primary. Code the Histology field to 8263/3 [Adenocarcinoma in tubulovillous adenoma].
Count as a single primary and code the more specific term when simultaneous lesions are present and one lesion is an "NOS" term and the other is a more specific term. "Polyp" is an NOS term. Adenoma is an associated term, but is more specific (Tubulovillous adenoma is more specific than "polyp").
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.
Reportability: Is "Castleman's Disease" reportable?
For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:Castleman's Disease is not reportable to SEER. Synonyms for this disease process include: Castleman-Iverson Disease, benign giant lymph node hyperplasia, and angiofollicular mediastinal lymph node hyperplasia. Castleman's Disease is a rare disorder characterized by non-cancerous growths that may develop in the lymph node tissue throughout the body. The plasmacellular form of this disease may progress to lymphoma or plasmacytoma.
For cases diagnosed 2010 forward, refer to the Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Neoplasm Case Reportability and Coding Manual and the Hematopoietic Database (Hematopoietic DB) provided by SEER on its website to research your question. If those resources do not adequately address your issue, submit a new question to SINQ.
EOD-Extension--Head & Neck: How much information is needed for a head and neck primary in order to code extension to localized versus unknown? What code is used to represent this field when the only information for a buccal cavity primary is a positive aspiration of the buccal mass?
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
Code the EOD-Extension to 99 [Unknown] for this case until more information is received. The available information does not describe the primary site and there is a complete lack of staging information.
Head and neck cancers spread early and often to nodes. Do not code the EOD-Extension to localized when the information is as limited as it is for this example.
Histology: What code is used to represent the histology for the abbreviation "ca"? See discussion.
The abbreviation "ca" results in inconsistency when coding histology by a group of coders. Many abbreviation guides list both cancer (8000/3) and carcinoma (8010/3) as definitions for "ca." Page 261 of the SEER Self Instructional Manual, Book 5 lists carcinoma as the definition for "ca."
Example: What histology is used for a case with a clinical diagnosis of "recently diagnosed uterine ca" with metastasis to the pelvic lymph nodes?
For uterine primaries, code the abbreviation "ca" to 8010/3 [carcinoma, NOS].
When coding death certificate only (DCO) cases, if the site is coded to an unknown primary and no specific histology information is available other than the abbreviation "ca," interpret ca as cancer (8000/3) per NAACCR Procedure Guidelines for Registries, Series V; Resolving Death Clearance Issues, page V-15.
Grade, Differentiation--Bladder: What codes are used to represent this field for the four bladder cases described in the discussion section that have a combination of grades mentioned in the pathology reports? See discussion.
1) Final path diagnosis: papillary transitional cell carcinoma, high grade. Micro description states: High grade, poorly differentiated carcinoma.
2) Well to moderately differentiated papillary transitional cell carcinoma, grade 1-2/3.
3) Urothelial carcinoma, high grade (poorly differentiated, grade 3 of 3).
4) High grade papillary urothelial carcinoma (papillary transitional cell carcinoma, grade 3 out of 4).
For cases diagnosed January 2004 and forward:
1) Grade 4. High grade is coded 4. Code the grade stated in the final diagnosis.
2) Grade 3. Grade 1-2/3 is coded 3. Use the three-grade conversion table in the 2004 SEER manual.
3) Grade 4. Grade 3 of 3 is coded 4. Use the three-grade conversion table in the 2004 SEER manual.
4) Grade 3. "Grade 3 out of 4" is coded 3 and is more precise than "high grade."
EOD-Extension--Head & Neck: How do you code extension for a supraglottic larynx primary with "pre-epigolottic space" invasion?
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
Code the EOD-Extension field to 65 [Pre-epiglottic tissues]. Extension to "pre-epiglottic space" is equivalent to extension to "pre-epiglottic tissue."
EOD-Size of Primary Tumor--Colon: When an adenocarcinoma is stated to be arising in an adenoma and the "tumor size" stated in the final pathologic diagnosis is the same size as the mass described in the gross description, should we assume that the entire polyp has been totally/near totally replaced by tumor and code the tumor size stated in the final path diagnosis?
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003:
Code the EOD-Size of Primary Tumor field as stated by the pathologist in the final pathologic diagnosis. If the size of the tumor is the same as the size of the polyp, assume the polyp was completely replaced by tumor.
Grade, Differentiation--Breast: Is "histological grade" another way of saying "tubule formation" which would result in the following case having a Bloom-Richardson (BR) score of 7 which would be coded to grade 2? See discussion.
Final path diagnosis stated: Invasive ductal ca, histological grade 3/3, nuclear grade 2/3, mitotic index-moderate.
Yes. Code the Grade, Differentiation field to 2 [Grade 2] for this case. This case has a BR score of 7 which converts to a grade of 2. This pathologist seems to be describing the three parts of the BR system: tubule formation, mitotic activity and nuclear grade.
Histology (Pre-2007)--Breast: What code is used to represent the histology "ductal carcinoma in situ with comedo necrosis"? See discussion.
SEER distributed breast questions to the Advisory Group made up of pathologists from different SEER regions. One question dealt with the terms comedo type, comedo necrosis and comedocarcinoma. Per the Advisory Group, "Do not code comedo necrosis. These three phrases each represent a different level of diagnosis and can't be compared. "Comedocarcinoma" is an established diagnosis of in situ carcinoma and should be coded as such. "Comedo type" refers to a type of intraductal cancer; whether it is considered to be a true diagnosis is probably still equivocal. "Comedo necrosis" refers to a description of cellular pathological events that occasionally occur within an intraductal tumor of comedo type, which should not be coded at all."
Per the SEER preferred answer: Comedo type = comedocarcinoma. Ignore comedo necrosis.
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Code the Histology field to 8500/2 [ductal carcinoma in situ].
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.
An official website of the United States government
Home