System Guide
Back to Search Results

Search Results

Display Options
Display Options
Select Fields
Export Results to CSV Create Report 0
+ Add all results to report

Report Produced: 09/12/2025 12:56 PM

Report Question ID Question Discussion Answer Year
20120050 Multiple primaries/Histology--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned and what histology codes apply if a patient has a 1998 diagnosis of essential thrombocythemia and a recent clinical diagnosis of secondary myelofibrosis? See Discussion. The patient has a history of essential thrombocythemia (ET) since 1998. This has been treated daily with aspirin. A recent bone marrow biopsy was consistent with myeloproliferative disorder with excess blasts, marked extensive reticulin marrow fibrosis with osteosclerosis, excess blasts (11%) in the marrow aspirate and peripheral blood. JAK2 mutation was present in a small minority of cells. The physician stated patient was, "considered to have secondary myelofibrosis and was started on Jakafi."

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

Per Appendix F, a secondary myelofibrosis is not a reportable case.

Secondary myelofibrosis is not listed as a synonym for primary myelofibrosis in the Heme DB. The term "secondary myelofibrosis" means that the myelofibrosis was caused by, in this case, the essential thrombocythemia.

The diagnosis "consistent with myeloproliferative disorder" is also not a new reportable diagnosis. "Myeloproliferative disorder" refers to a group of diseases (an NOS category) that includes essential thrombocythemia, which was originally diagnosed in 1998, prior to reportability for this disease type.

SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx.

2012
20120001 Multiple primaries/Recurrence--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are abstracted if a patient was diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in 2001 and was diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma involving the larynx in 2011? See Discussion. Does the medical oncologist's statement that this is a second malignancy, rather than a recurrence, given the length of the disease-free interval, affect the number of primaries abstracted?

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

Abstract a single primary per Rule M2; a single histology is a single primary diagnosed. The histology code for both the 2001 and 2011 diagnoses is 9680/3[diffuse large B-cell lymphoma]. Case is coded as diagnosed in 2001.

The hematopoietic physician experts say that the issue with lymphomas is that the patient may be disease-free then recur years later. Even though years have passed, this is still a recurrence or relapse. Currently, there are no molecular markers that are able to distinguish "new primaries" from recurrences. There are also no established criteria for timing rules that could be used to determine a new primary from a recurrence.

SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx.

2012
20120079 Reportability: Is positive urine cytology (ex: malignant cells interpreted as carcinoma) by itself reportable? If so, is the case coded to bladder by default or is is coded to C689, urinary system, NOS?

Urine cytology positive for malignancy is reportable. Code the primary site to C689 in the absence of any other information.

However, if a subsequent biopsy of a urinary site is negative, do not report the case.

For 2013 diagnoses and forward, report these cases when they are encountered. Do not implement new/additional casefinding methods to capture these cases.

As always, do not report cytology cases with ambiguous terminology.

2012
20120089 MP/H Rules/Histology--Colon: The final diagnosis on a path report for a colon specimen says: Is a colon specimen final diagnosis of carcinoma in situ in a serrated adenoma coded to 8010/2, 8210/2 or 8213/2?

For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, code the histology as 8213/2 [carcinoma in situ in a serrated adenoma].

The steps used to arrive at this decision are:

: Apply ICD-O-3 rule F (Matrix principle) and assign the behavior code /2 when the behavior assigned by the pathologist differs from the usual behavior as given in the ICD-O-3.

: Open the Multiple Primary and Histology Coding Rules Manual. Choose one of the three formats (i.e., flowchart, matrix or text) and go to the Colon Histology rules.

: Start at the SINGLE TUMOR module, Rule H1. The rules are intended to be reviewed in consecutive order within a module. Stop at rule H4. Code the histology as 8213/2.

Note: The histology 8213 (adenocarcinoma in serrated adenoma) will be added to rule H4 in the next revision.

2012
20120048 MP/H Rules/Primary site: Can you clarify how you interpreted the term "synchronous" to appropriately code the primary site to C68.9 [urinary tract] for SINQ 20110119 and did not use that code for SINQ 20100025 when both cases used MP/H Rule M8 to determine the number of primaries? See Discussion.

In SINQ 20100025 a patient was diagnosed with multiple urinary system tumors over a year apart. Rule M8 applies (single primary) and the primary site was left coded to the original primary site, C65.9 [renal pelvis]. In SINQ 20110119 a patient is diagnosed with multiple urinary system tumors within a month of each other, again rule M8 applies (single primary) and the primary site was coded to C68.9 [urinary system, NOS].

In both cases, rule M8 applies. However, the tumors were not diagnosed synchronously (e.g., one month apart in one case and greater than one year apart in the other). When the SINQ answer states, "same time" or "synchronous" does this mean during the same event? If not, what is the time range for "same time" or "synchronous"?

Please clarify when it is appropriate to code the primary site to C68.9 [urinary system, NOS] for Rule M8 and when it is not.

For the purpose of applying the MP/H rules, the term "synchronous" means that the two diagnoses occurred at the same time or less than or equal to 60 days apart.

The case in SINQ 20100025 was not synchronous. The first lesion in the renal pelvis [C65.9] occurred in 1/08 and the subsequent tumors were diagnosed in 5/09, more than one year apart. In this case, you do not go back to change the primary site code on the original abstract.

The case in SINQ 20110119 was diagnosed synchronously, the first lesion in the bladder [C67.9] was diagnosed in 11/09 and the second lesion in the renal pelvis [C65.9] was diagnosed in 12/09, less than 60 days apart. Because the lesions were synchronous, the primary site is coded urinary system, NOS [C68.9].

2012
20120063 Reportability--Pancreas: Are neuroendocrine "tumors" reportable and are they synonymous with neuroendocrine "carcinoma"? See Discussion. Example: Pancreatic mass that probably represents a neuroendocrine tumor is staged as cT2N0M0.

According to the World Health Organization (WHO) pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NET) are malignant. They are reportable.

For pancreas primaries, code NET, G1 (well differentiated) to 8240/3; NET G2 (moderately differentiated) to 8249/3; and nonfunctional NET, GI or G2 to 8150/3.

The histology code for neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) is 8246/3, large cell NEC is 8013/3 and small cell NEC is 8041/3.

2012
20120067 MP/H Rules/Histology--Thyroid: How is the histology coded for a poorly differentiated thyroid carcinoma with rhabdoid phenotype arising in a papillary carcinoma?

For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, code the histology as papillary carcinoma, poorly differentiated [8260/33].

The WHO classification lists grade III papillary carcinoma as one of the synonyms for poorly differentiated thyroid carcinoma.

The steps used to arrive at this decision are:

Open the Multiple Primary and Histology Coding Rules Manual. Choose one of the three formats (i.e., flowchart, matrix or text). Go to the Other Sites Histo rules because site specific rules have not been developed for this primary.

Start with the SINGLE TUMOR: INVASIVE ONLY module, rule H8. The rules are intended to be reviewed in consecutive order within a module. Per rule H13 "phenotype" is not a term used to code a more specific histology. Moving to Rule H14 the histology is coded 8260/3 [papillary adenocarcinoma].

2012
20120092 MP/H Rules/Multiple primaries/Recurrence -- Lung: How many primaries are accessioned if a diagnosis of squamous cell carcinoma of the lung is followed three years later by a diagnosis of adenocarcinoma of the lung if the pathologist reviews all the slides and states the subsequent diagnosis is a recurrence? See Discussion.

7/12/2007 Left upper lobe lung lobectomy: Squamous cell carcinoma.

3/09/2010 Left lung completion pneumonectomy: Adenocarcinoma, predominantly acinar. The diagnosis comment on the pathology report indicates the previous lobectomy specimen from 2007 was reviewed and "there are areas that appear histologically similar to the current neoplasm. Thus, the findings are most compatible with recurrence."

Despite the difference in histology, is this a single primary per the MP/H Coding Rules, General Information instruction 7 because the pathologist did refer to the 3/9/2010 diagnosis as a "recurrence" of the 7/12/2007 diagnosis after reviewing the slides?

For cases diagnosed 2007 or later, accession a single primary, left upper lobe squamous cell carcinoma diagnosed 7/27/2007.

The steps used to arrive at this decision are:

Go to the General Information notes for Determining Multiple Primaries for Solid Malignant Tumors in the Multiple Primary and Histology Coding Rules Manual.

General Information Rule 7 states "Use the multiple primary rules as written unless a pathologist compares the present tumor to the "original" tumor and states that this tumor is a recurrence of cancer from the previous primary."

Accession a single primary. Do not apply the Multiple Primary rules because the pathologist compared the 2007 and 2010 slides and determined this was a recurrence and not a new primary.

2012
20120055 Surgery of Primary Site--Kidney, renal pelvis: How do you code a laparoscopic renal mass core biopsy followed by cryoablation of the tumor? See Discussion. The note under the local tumor destruction codes states "No specimen sent to pathology from this surgical event 10-15." The patient had a pathologic specimen submitted from his core biopsy, but this was not a tumor excision or excisional biopsy [codes 20, 26-27]. Is the correct surgery code 13 [cryosurgery] because the tumor was only ablated and not excised, or surgery code 23 [any combination of 20 or 26-27 with cryosurgery] because a pathology specimen was submitted? Code for Surgery of Primary Site to 13 [Cryosurgery]. While the core biopsy provided a pathology specimen, it is not coded as surgery of the primary site. 2012
20120083 Multiple primaries--Heme & Lymphoid Neoplasms: How many primaries are accessioned if a patient is diagnosed with follicular lymphoma, grade 3 in 2006 and is subsequently diagnosed with follicular lymphoma, grade 2 in 2011? See Discussion.

June 2006, the patient was diagnosed with follicular lymphoma, grade 3 by cervical lymph node biopsy and bone marrow biopsy. The patient refused treatment but was followed.

May 2007, the patient had another cervical LN biopsy with a diagnosis of follicular lymphoma, grade 2.

July, 2009, a neck mass excision was diagnosed as follicular lymphoma, grade 3.

June 2011, another neck lymph node was excised and diagnosed as follicular lymphoma, grade 2.

According to the MP calculator, FL grade 3 [9698/3] is a separate primary from FL grade 2 [9691/3]. Is the June 2011 diagnosis of FL grade 2 a new primary?

For cases diagnosed 2010 and forward, access the Hematopoietic Database at http://seer.cancer.gov/seertools/hemelymph.

This case should be accessioned as a single primary per Rule M15. The histology is coded to 9698/3 [follicular lymphoma, grade 3] diagnosed in 2006. The 2011 diagnosis of follicular lymphoma, grade 2 [9691/3] is not a new primary.

Follicular lymphoma, grade 2 [9691/3] is listed under the Same Primaries section of the Heme DB for 9698/3 [follicular lymphoma, grade 3]. To confirm this, Rule M15 indicates we are to use the Heme DB Multiple Primaries Calculator to determine the number of primaries because none of the rules from 1-14 apply. Per the calculator, these histologies represent the same primary.

SEER*Educate provides training on how to use the Heme Manual and DB. If you are unsure how to arrive at the answer in this SINQ question, refer to SEER*Educate to practice coding hematopoietic and lymphoid neoplasms. Review the step-by-step instructions provided for each case scenario to learn how to use the application and manual to arrive at the answer provided. https://educate.fhcrc.org/LandingPage.aspx.

2012