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.
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.
Reportability/Primary Site--Head & Neck: If a wedge resection/shield resection is performed on the lower lip for SCCA and the path report refers to "lip, NOS" with no mention of vermilion border, is this case reportable?
Review the operative and pathology reports, and the physical exam for mention of "mucosal surface" (reportable) or "skin" (not reportable). If neither are mentioned, lip, NOS is reportable per the ICD-O-3 code of C009.
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.
Histology (Pre-2007)--Ovary: What codes are used to represent "mixed papillary serous and clear cell carcinoma" and "papillary serous carcinoma with focal clear cell features" of the ovary?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Assign code 8323 [Mixed cell adenocarcinoma] to "mixed papillary serous and clear cell carcinoma." This is histology coding rule 3 in the 2004 SEER manual under single tumor (page 86). There is no other code for this mixture.
Example 1: 8323
Example 2: 8461 (clear cell is not coded according to Rule 6, page 87, because it is not the majority of the tumor).
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.
Priorities/CS Extension--Lung: In the absence of a physician TNM, is there a hierarchy associated with coding extension when multiple imaging studies demonstrate different degrees of extension? See Discussion.
CT of the lung showing primary lesion and other nodules in another lobe or contralateral lung, subpleural nodules, etc. The PET scan did not show activity for the other nodules. What is our "hierarchy" for imaging studies when there is no physician staging?
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.
There is no hierarchy among the various imaging studies. Assign CS extension based on the report documenting the greatest extension.
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.
Surgery of Primary Site--Breast: How is the surgery field coded when an excisional biopsy that is originally stated to be negative is later determined to be positive on ROS and a mastectomy with negative findings is performed 2 years later? See Discussion.
Hospital 'A' performed a breast biopsy and found only atypia. Two years later Hospital 'B' re-read the first biopsy as multifocal ductal carcinoma in situ, cribriform type. A mastectomy at Hospital 'B' followed and all specimens from this were negative.
Do we report the procedure at Hospital 'A' an excisional biopsy, despite the negative findings at the time?
For hospital A, follow the instructions in the 2004 SEER Manual on page 5, #4. For hospital B, the case is not reportable.
The diagnosis date is the date of first excision. Code the breast excision from Hospital A as surgery, first course treatment. The mastectomy was not part of first course treatment.
CS Extension--Cervix: How are "positive pelvic washings" coded for a cervical primary?
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.
According to the CS Steering Committee, positive pelvic washings for primary cervical cancer are not part of the staging criteria in the collaborative staging system (nor in TNM and FIGO). Document positive pelvic washings in a text field. The CS steering committee will add a statement to CS extension to clarify this for cervix uteri.
Primary Site/Histology (Pre-2007)--Rectum: How are rectal biopsies with the histology of "poorly differentiated carcinoma with mixed basaloid and squamous features" coded if, per the SEER site/histology validation table, the histology 8094/3 [basosquamous carcinoma] histology cannot be coded to the rectum for the primary site?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Code primary site C209 [rectum] and histology 8094/3 [basosquamous carcinoma]. As of 6/9/2003, this is no longer an impossible site/histology combination.
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