CS Tumor Size/CS Eval--Breast: How are these fields coded when there is a clinical size recorded but the tumor size is not specified on the pathology report associated with a subsequent resection? See Discussion.
4/8/04 excisional biopsy of 1.5 cm palpable mass. Path: gives a specimen size only and states that there is a nodular firm area that correlates with the clustered microcalcification on radiograph. No pathologic tumor size is given. Would the size be coded to the clinical size of 1.5 cm? The patient did have surgery but the only size available is a clinical one. Because the size is clinical, is the CS Eval field coded to 0 [No surgical resection done. Evaluation based on PE...]?
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.
Clinical size can be coded when the patient has had surgery. For the case above, code the tumor size as 015 [1.5 cm] using the clinical information. The CS Tumor Size/Extent Eval field refers to both tumor size and extension. In this case, record the eval field as 0 or 1 (which ever is appropriate). The tumor size sets the T category unless the resection shows skin or chest wall or dermal lymphatic involvement.
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 Lymph Nodes--Breast: Is it better to code to 26 [Stated as N1, NOS] or 28 [Stated as N2, NOS] instead of 60 [Axillary/regional lymph nodes, NOS; Lymph nodes, NOS] when the only information in the medical record is the TNM N1 or N2 physician stage?
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.
Yes. When the only indication of lymph node involvement is the physician's N category from TNM, code the numerically lowest equivalent CS Lymph Nodes code for that N category.
In the breast schema, CS Lymph Nodes code 26 corresponds to N1, NOS and code 28 corresponds to N2, NOS.
Histology (Pre-2007)--Melanoma: How is histology coded for a final pathology diagnosis of "malignant melanoma, NOS" that is clinically described as a nevus?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
Code 8720 [malignant melanoma]. Assign the histology code based on the histology stated in the final diagnosis on the pathology report. The pathology report must say melanoma arising in junctional nevus to use the code 8740/3 [Malignant melanoma in junctional nevus].
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.
2004 SEER Manual Errata/CS Site Specific Factor: Does SEER plan to incorporate the "Recording Tumor Markers in Collaborative Staging System Site-Specific Factors" document that was prepared for the CS Task Force Training Materials into the 2006 SEER Manual?
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 are no plans at this time to incorporate the Recording Tumor Markers document into the SEER manual. This document is not part of the Collaborative Staging manual. This is a stand-alone reference endorsed by the Collaborative Staging Steering Committee for use in coding site-specific tumor markers.
Date of Diagnosis/Histology--Hematopoietic, NOS: How are these fields coded if a 3/17/03 bone marrow biopsy diagnosis of "malignant proliferative disorder" is subsequently confirmed to be a "low grade lymphoma" per a bone marrow biopsy in early 2006? See Discussion.
3-17-03: Bone marrow biopsy from rt iliac crest: Hypercellular marrow (90%) with extensive involvement by lymphoproliferative disorder (see description). Micro: The bone marrow is diffusely (>90%) involved by a malignant lymphoproliferative disorder. This consists of small lymphocytes,histiocytes, and large atypical cells with prominent nucleoli.
12-22-05 Extensive bone marrow involvement by lymphoproliferative disorder, bone biopsy from femur.
1-27-06 Hem/Onc Physician Note:
following pt for a lymphoproliferative disorder. ...bone marrow biopsy 2003, suggestive of, but not truly diagnostic, a lymphoproliferative disorder. Therefore, I elected not to do anything, but just follow her.
3-23-06 Hem/Onc Note:
pt with a history of an apparently low-grade lymphoma involving the marrow, as well as, I believe, the liver and recently pathologically diagnosed as a T-cell-rich B-cell lymphoma. ...followed in the past by Dr. ___ and has never actually had any treatment for this lymphoma, although it is documented even three years ago by bone marrow biopsy.
For cases diagnosed prior to 1/1/2010:
Code the diagnosis date to 3/17/03. The histology code is 9970/3 [Malignant myeloproliferative disorder]. The bone marrow biopsy confirms a "Malignant" lymphoproliferative disorder. Apply ICD-O-3 rule F and assign /3 to histology code 9970.
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.
CS Site Specific Factor--Breast: If there are two ER/PR tests, one positive and one negative, which result should be coded in the SSF fields 1 and 2? See Discussion.
SINQ #20021074 states that for cases up to 2003, if there are differences in ER/PR results, to code the positive findings over the negative findings. Does this hold true for coding SSF1 & SSF2 for breast?
Scenario: 10/19 Breast bx: ER + PR -; No date/specimen: ER/PR -; 12/3 Partial Mast: ER/PR +
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 cases diagnosed prior to January 1, 2007, according to the CS Steering Committee, record the pathologist's interpretation of the assay value for the most representative tumor specimen. This may require conversation with the pathologist when specimen size is not specified.
Chemotherapy--Breast: Is chemotherapy administered for inflammatory breast cancer also coded as therapy for an in situ tumor in the contralateral breast?
Yes. Because chemotherapy would likely affect both primaries, code it as treatment for both the in situ and the inflammatory breast cancers.
Behavior--Head & Neck: Should the SEER IF_Morph_3 edit be modified because it does not allow a behavior code 2 with histology 8941 [carcinoma in a pleomorphic adenoma] for a parotid primary?
Code the behavior as 2 and over-ride the edit. The edit is there to flag unusual combinations. Once you have verified that the behavior is coded correctly, over-ride the edit.
The surgeon stage of T2 is based on size of tumor, the TIS is based on behavior. Code according to pathologically confirmed TIS.
An official website of the United States government
Home